Planning a Hitler in WWI self-insert, who should he take over?

raharris1973

Well-known member
I am planning an ASB scenario that inserts Hitler’s consciousness into the mind & body of German WWI leadership.

I am wondering who he should “parachute” into to have the best “command” of the war and government policy situation. I am thinking it probably would not be the Kaiser, nor a civilian Chancellor.

He would probably have the most influence “demonically possessing” and pulling the puppet strings of one of the leaders of the wartime “silent dictatorship”, Ludendorff or Hindenburg.

Which of the two would be better? WWI Germans would be more used to Ludendorff giving the day to day orders, but Hindenburg possessed more of the authority and legitimacy.

Also, what date in the war can we say the “silent dictatorship” began?

Also, I have not decided what time period to import Hitler’s consciousness from. It could be a 1920s Hitter, right after authoring Mein Kampf, or his second book.

Or it could be 1933 or 1934 Hitler, with more seasoning and experience.

Or early wartime Hitler, 1940-1942, with even more.

Whichever would be more fun.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: ATP

raharris1973

Well-known member
Kemal Pasha of course.
Cute - he doesn't count as WWI *German* leadership though.

I am thinking I want to set Hitler's "difficulty level" at "High" but also set his command experience level similarly at High, and I have no particular commitment to helping his side win, or making the world a better place by making his side lose faster.

So let's say that it Hitler's consciousness from February 15th, 1943 that comes back in time. He's run the Third Reich state for almost ten years, a war with some stunning early successes for about three years, but he currently smarting and bitter over the recent defeat and surrender of "Field Marshal" Von Paulus to the Soviet Untermenschen at Stalingrad.

He goes back in time to the Germany of November 15th, 1917. In this timeframe, Germany's west front has just survived the BEF's battering campaign of Passchendaele in Flanders, ended on November 10th. The French, by contrast have been out of action offensively for most of the year since the failed Nivelle offensive. America has been in a state of war with Germany officially since the spring, but American soldiers have made basically no impact on the ground, with American troop battle casualties by this date amounting to three individuals. The American Navy has made a greater contribution to convoys and the blockade at sea and the counter-submarine fight, which the Allies are defanging after the worst times of the summer of 1917. About a week prior to Hitler's arrival, the British announced their support for a Jewish National Home in Palestine with the release Balfour Declaration in the international press. And about a week earlier the Bolsheviks seized power in Petrograd from the feeble Provisional Government, followed soon after by Russia's other cities. Italy is reeling from its defeat at Caporetto in October.

To exercise maximum control over Germany's wartime administration, strategy, and military plans and operations from this point, who should Hitler drop into, Hindenburg, Ludendorff, the Kaiser? I would suggest almost certainly not Catholic Centre Party Chancellor Georg Von Hertling en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georg_von_Hertling.

Hitler-in-charge's scope of action and options are limited, but real, at this point. He can direct the the scope scope and focus of the spring 1918 offensive(s), govern home front resource allocation and rationing policy, the military policing, dissent monitoring, restraint, and punishment system, and take what he considers preemptive action against those he considers "the November Criminals" and internal enemies. He can also guide policies toward occupied peoples, minorities like Jews and Gypsies, political groups like Socialists, policies towards the other Central Powers, the secondary fronts like Italy, the Balkans and Middle East, and whether and what kind of peace to make with the Bolsheviks and what stance to take toward the Russian Civil War.
 

ATP

Well-known member
Cute - he doesn't count as WWI *German* leadership though.

I am thinking I want to set Hitler's "difficulty level" at "High" but also set his command experience level similarly at High, and I have no particular commitment to helping his side win, or making the world a better place by making his side lose faster.

So let's say that it Hitler's consciousness from February 15th, 1943 that comes back in time. He's run the Third Reich state for almost ten years, a war with some stunning early successes for about three years, but he currently smarting and bitter over the recent defeat and surrender of "Field Marshal" Von Paulus to the Soviet Untermenschen at Stalingrad.

He goes back in time to the Germany of November 15th, 1917. In this timeframe, Germany's west front has just survived the BEF's battering campaign of Passchendaele in Flanders, ended on November 10th. The French, by contrast have been out of action offensively for most of the year since the failed Nivelle offensive. America has been in a state of war with Germany officially since the spring, but American soldiers have made basically no impact on the ground, with American troop battle casualties by this date amounting to three individuals. The American Navy has made a greater contribution to convoys and the blockade at sea and the counter-submarine fight, which the Allies are defanging after the worst times of the summer of 1917. About a week prior to Hitler's arrival, the British announced their support for a Jewish National Home in Palestine with the release Balfour Declaration in the international press. And about a week earlier the Bolsheviks seized power in Petrograd from the feeble Provisional Government, followed soon after by Russia's other cities. Italy is reeling from its defeat at Caporetto in October.

To exercise maximum control over Germany's wartime administration, strategy, and military plans and operations from this point, who should Hitler drop into, Hindenburg, Ludendorff, the Kaiser? I would suggest almost certainly not Catholic Centre Party Chancellor Georg Von Hertling en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georg_von_Hertling.

Hitler-in-charge's scope of action and options are limited, but real, at this point. He can direct the the scope scope and focus of the spring 1918 offensive(s), govern home front resource allocation and rationing policy, the military policing, dissent monitoring, restraint, and punishment system, and take what he considers preemptive action against those he considers "the November Criminals" and internal enemies. He can also guide policies toward occupied peoples, minorities like Jews and Gypsies, political groups like Socialists, policies towards the other Central Powers, the secondary fronts like Italy, the Balkans and Middle East, and whether and what kind of peace to make with the Bolsheviks and what stance to take toward the Russian Civil War.
Kaiser claimed that he was no real power at that point,so - Hindenburg.

What beautiful disaster it would be - but,paradoxally,better for world.Becouse Germany here would keep attacking till being too exhausted to defend,like during WW2,and Hitler would not allow capitulation - so we would have revolution in army and allies capturing Berlin.

No place here for WW2,becouse germans would be too crushed for that.England would do everything they could to sabe germans,but they would fail here.

Another possible good thing - he could kill Lenin here just after he take power,and assume direct control throught german troops.
Till 1918 german prisoners served as soviet shock troops ,and was only reason why whites do not destroyed them.If Hitler order them to kill Lenin and take power in the name of Germany,they would do so.
 

Husky_Khan

The Dog Whistler... I mean Whisperer.
Founder
Also, I have not decided what time period to import Hitler’s consciousness from. It could be a 1920s Hitter, right after authoring Mein Kampf, or his second book.

Or it could be 1933 or 1934 Hitler, with more seasoning and experience.

Or early wartime Hitler, 1940-1942, with even more.

Whichever would be more fun.

I think early wartime Hitler from 1942-43 would likely be the best IMHO. His behavior will be more and more erratic towards the final years of his life but there has to be a solid middle ground where he has the experience that can offer him foresight into the future (despite his obvious bias) without the growing mental issues he was experiencing that was just growing worse and worse.

To exercise maximum control over Germany's wartime administration, strategy, and military plans and operations from this point, who should Hitler drop into, Hindenburg, Ludendorff, the Kaiser? I would suggest almost certainly not Catholic Centre Party Chancellor Georg Von Hertling en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georg_von_Hertling.

Hitler-in-charge's scope of action and options are limited, but real, at this point. He can direct the the scope scope and focus of the spring 1918 offensive(s), govern home front resource allocation and rationing policy, the military policing, dissent monitoring, restraint, and punishment system, and take what he considers preemptive action against those he considers "the November Criminals" and internal enemies. He can also guide policies toward occupied peoples, minorities like Jews and Gypsies, political groups like Socialists, policies towards the other Central Powers, the secondary fronts like Italy, the Balkans and Middle East, and whether and what kind of peace to make with the Bolsheviks and what stance to take toward the Russian Civil War.

He's a good choice but he passes away in 1919. Hindenburg at least wheezed along until 1934.
 

raharris1973

Well-known member
He's a good choice but he passes away in 1919. Hindenburg at least wheezed along until 1934.
What good choice passes away in 1919? Not the Kaiser, he lived until 1940. Not Ludendorff, he lived until 1937.

Not Hertling, I was saying he was a crappy choice who was too easily replaceable and could be too easily ignored by everyone for his whole tenure in office from the beginning.

I think early wartime Hitler from 1942-43 would likely be the best IMHO. His behavior will be more and more erratic towards the final years of his life but there has to be a solid middle ground where he has the experience that can offer him foresight into the future (despite his obvious bias) without the growing mental issues he was experiencing that was just growing worse and worse.
I agree.

I think putting him into body of Kaiser would be the most interesting option, as Hitler would have to wrest away power that Kaiser lost to Hindenburg and Ludendorff.
Yes, although possibly Hitler-as-Kaiser and Ludendorff 1917-18 may be able to find a lot of strategic and ideological common ground given Ludendorff's postwar political directions and willingness to work with Hitler after the war.
 

ATP

Well-known member
What good choice passes away in 1919? Not the Kaiser, he lived until 1940. Not Ludendorff, he lived until 1937.

Not Hertling, I was saying he was a crappy choice who was too easily replaceable and could be too easily ignored by everyone for his whole tenure in office from the beginning.


I agree.


Yes, although possibly Hitler-as-Kaiser and Ludendorff 1917-18 may be able to find a lot of strategic and ideological common ground given Ludendorff's postwar political directions and willingness to work with Hitler after the war.
Ludendorf was barking mad neo pagan,and even Hitler considered him as mad.

Hitler win elections,becouse he was less radical then Ludendorf,who never win anything in elections - becouse he openly said about replacing Chrystianity with pagan religion.

So,If Hitler take over Ludendorf,he would be actually more sane.
 

ATP

Well-known member
....why?

What did Imperial Germany do to you?
Beating polish children to death for praing in polish.Stealing polish lands.
Although,they never genocided us like herero.

Besides,Hitler was still more sane then Ludendorf,so probably nothing worst then OTL would happen.With exception of Hiter in Ludendorf body dying heroic death,becouse,unlike Ludendorf,Hitler was no coward.
 

raharris1973

Well-known member
Let's do this:

I think early wartime Hitler from 1942-43 would likely be the best IMHO. His behavior will be more and more erratic towards the final years of his life but there has to be a solid middle ground where he has the experience that can offer him foresight into the future (despite his obvious bias) without the growing mental issues he was experiencing that was just growing worse and worse.
...but take the late part of "early", right as Stalingrad is starting to go bad. Hitler is already bitter and has the Holocaust going, but he's not truly pickled on drugs and delusion yet.

So let's say that it Hitler's consciousness from February 15th, 1943 that comes back in time. He's run the Third Reich state for almost ten years, a war with some stunning early successes for about three years, but he currently smarting and bitter over the recent defeat and surrender of "Field Marshal" Von Paulus to the Soviet Untermenschen at Stalingrad.

He goes back in time to the Germany of November 15th, 1917.

We can consider both versions:

I. He "parachutes" into the Kaiser, and is formally the sovereign "boss" of Hindy and Ludy, although they are not used to taking daily input from him. They find the Kaiser is suddenly heavily involved, supportive of all their militant instincts and hardline wishes, and anti-peacenik. He seems a much more serious man. They mostly like the changes, even if they don't always like the individual ideas of the Kaiser, and they notice a greater relentlessness and spine from the Kaiser against civilian politicians definitely, but also bureaucrats and military commanders who do not do what he wants.

II. He "parachutes" into Ludendorff and is managing the day-to-day war and administration, entrusted by the Kaiser and Hindenburg. He is used to strategic wartime management, along with making operational and even tactical interventions. He needs to adjust his thinking to avoid demanding weapons that are not available in 1917 or possible in with the technology and engineering of 1917. To a certain extent for more detailed operational, tactical, and logistical management to implement his strategic guidance, he can rely on Max Hoffmann and other key members of the German General Staff. He can also cooperate with right-wing politicians and manipulate Hindenburg and the Kaiser to a significant extent and Chancellor Hertling to minimize and sideline unwelcome Reichstag interference. He can keep his nerve until the end, so it can outlast that of the real-life Ludendorff.

I figure Hitler's priorities would be to:
1) Somehow get the spring 1918 offensive "right" and "win" there before the Allied tide becomes invincible. I do not know how he does that. Perhaps, in line with his racial rankings and estimations as much as with seeing operational opportunities differently, he might choose to throw the whole weight of German forces against the longer French sectors of the line to open up a broad front into the French interior, take Paris, or basically irrevocably crush the French Army, rather than focus on the British in Flanders. Any of these military plans could fail.
2) Set up an internal military, naval and state policing system to prevent major German mutiny or revolution like in November 1918, and to the extent possible, spread this to cover the other Central Powers as well. So setting up some sort of proto-SS and Gestapo organizations to make socialist and pacifist agitators disappear and shoot deserters, and crack down on the black market.
3) Get as good a start as possible on racial politics, propaganda, discrimination, looting, expropriation and murder of racial "undesirables". Get this started in November 1917. The Balfour Declaration can be used to begin portraying at least some segments of Jewish populace as agents who made a deal with the British in German, Austrian and Ottoman lands in particular, the prominence of Jews among Bolsheviks could support a theory of Judeo-Bolshevism or Communism as a mainly Jewish conspiracy, and cases of Jewish individuals involvement in black market scandals can be blown out of proportion to further stoke things. Since plenty of Jews are serving honorably in the armed forces, many distinctions will have to be publicly made pointing to exceptions and people exempt from persecution...for now...to reduce complaints or pushback. But people in "bad" categories can be robbed, imprisoned for hard labor or expelled to remote areas or Allied lines. If the Hitler as the Kaiser or Ludendorff has sufficient influence over Austria-Hungary he could launch preemptive repression and expropriation against Slavic minorities he knows will become disloyal to the Habsburgs. He could take similar action against the Poles and Lithuanians, or refrain for now, using them as tools against the Russians, as a fan of Pilsudski, but encouraging Polish and Lithuanian outrages against Jews in their midst.
4) Possibly over the course of the winter of 1917-18, or spring 1918, try to head off the Balkan offensive he knows will come in the fall by an overwhelming assault on the Allies boxed in to Salonica, possibly with heavy use of poison gas on the forces and civil population of the town?
5) Possibly acting differently toward the Bolsheviks. On the one hand, strategically there is just as much reason as in OTL to make the Brest-Litovsk peace, but Hitler as puppet master hates Communists. So he may just want to kill off Bolshevik leaders, and may tactically cooperate with some Russian Empire minority people or White Russians to do it, even if he has no intention of keeping any bargains with Slavic interlocutors.

The racial stuff can be a distracting waste, but to some extent, deciding that a segment of the urban and town non-farming population, either in German, or more likely in occupied areas, does not need to treated like human beings and fed as such and can be robbed or murdered by the state or their neighbors at will, could produce some minor "savings" in the face of blockade hardships.

If Hitler as puppetmaster, of either Ludendorff or the Kaiser, uses all his energy or influence to push something like this five-point program, how long can Germany last in this war? Can it last to 11 November, 1918? Would it collapse sooner? Could it last several months longer? Could it fight the Allies to a standstill?

How much murdering and displacement of targeted minorities - Jews, Gypsies, Slavs, could this regime accomplish in the year, more or less, it has to exist?

If the totals of regime racist crimes are high and a notable feature to the Allied powers disgust, does this have a notable impact on worldwide attitudes towards anti-semitism, genocide, and racism, from the 1920s and beyond, and the League of Nations's responsibility to deal with.
 

ATP

Well-known member
Let's do this:


...but take the late part of "early", right as Stalingrad is starting to go bad. Hitler is already bitter and has the Holocaust going, but he's not truly pickled on drugs and delusion yet.



We can consider both versions:

I. He "parachutes" into the Kaiser, and is formally the sovereign "boss" of Hindy and Ludy, although they are not used to taking daily input from him. They find the Kaiser is suddenly heavily involved, supportive of all their militant instincts and hardline wishes, and anti-peacenik. He seems a much more serious man. They mostly like the changes, even if they don't always like the individual ideas of the Kaiser, and they notice a greater relentlessness and spine from the Kaiser against civilian politicians definitely, but also bureaucrats and military commanders who do not do what he wants.

II. He "parachutes" into Ludendorff and is managing the day-to-day war and administration, entrusted by the Kaiser and Hindenburg. He is used to strategic wartime management, along with making operational and even tactical interventions. He needs to adjust his thinking to avoid demanding weapons that are not available in 1917 or possible in with the technology and engineering of 1917. To a certain extent for more detailed operational, tactical, and logistical management to implement his strategic guidance, he can rely on Max Hoffmann and other key members of the German General Staff. He can also cooperate with right-wing politicians and manipulate Hindenburg and the Kaiser to a significant extent and Chancellor Hertling to minimize and sideline unwelcome Reichstag interference. He can keep his nerve until the end, so it can outlast that of the real-life Ludendorff.

I figure Hitler's priorities would be to:
1) Somehow get the spring 1918 offensive "right" and "win" there before the Allied tide becomes invincible. I do not know how he does that. Perhaps, in line with his racial rankings and estimations as much as with seeing operational opportunities differently, he might choose to throw the whole weight of German forces against the longer French sectors of the line to open up a broad front into the French interior, take Paris, or basically irrevocably crush the French Army, rather than focus on the British in Flanders. Any of these military plans could fail.
2) Set up an internal military, naval and state policing system to prevent major German mutiny or revolution like in November 1918, and to the extent possible, spread this to cover the other Central Powers as well. So setting up some sort of proto-SS and Gestapo organizations to make socialist and pacifist agitators disappear and shoot deserters, and crack down on the black market.
3) Get as good a start as possible on racial politics, propaganda, discrimination, looting, expropriation and murder of racial "undesirables". Get this started in November 1917. The Balfour Declaration can be used to begin portraying at least some segments of Jewish populace as agents who made a deal with the British in German, Austrian and Ottoman lands in particular, the prominence of Jews among Bolsheviks could support a theory of Judeo-Bolshevism or Communism as a mainly Jewish conspiracy, and cases of Jewish individuals involvement in black market scandals can be blown out of proportion to further stoke things. Since plenty of Jews are serving honorably in the armed forces, many distinctions will have to be publicly made pointing to exceptions and people exempt from persecution...for now...to reduce complaints or pushback. But people in "bad" categories can be robbed, imprisoned for hard labor or expelled to remote areas or Allied lines. If the Hitler as the Kaiser or Ludendorff has sufficient influence over Austria-Hungary he could launch preemptive repression and expropriation against Slavic minorities he knows will become disloyal to the Habsburgs. He could take similar action against the Poles and Lithuanians, or refrain for now, using them as tools against the Russians, as a fan of Pilsudski, but encouraging Polish and Lithuanian outrages against Jews in their midst.
4) Possibly over the course of the winter of 1917-18, or spring 1918, try to head off the Balkan offensive he knows will come in the fall by an overwhelming assault on the Allies boxed in to Salonica, possibly with heavy use of poison gas on the forces and civil population of the town?
5) Possibly acting differently toward the Bolsheviks. On the one hand, strategically there is just as much reason as in OTL to make the Brest-Litovsk peace, but Hitler as puppet master hates Communists. So he may just want to kill off Bolshevik leaders, and may tactically cooperate with some Russian Empire minority people or White Russians to do it, even if he has no intention of keeping any bargains with Slavic interlocutors.

The racial stuff can be a distracting waste, but to some extent, deciding that a segment of the urban and town non-farming population, either in German, or more likely in occupied areas, does not need to treated like human beings and fed as such and can be robbed or murdered by the state or their neighbors at will, could produce some minor "savings" in the face of blockade hardships.

If Hitler as puppetmaster, of either Ludendorff or the Kaiser, uses all his energy or influence to push something like this five-point program, how long can Germany last in this war? Can it last to 11 November, 1918? Would it collapse sooner? Could it last several months longer? Could it fight the Allies to a standstill?

How much murdering and displacement of targeted minorities - Jews, Gypsies, Slavs, could this regime accomplish in the year, more or less, it has to exist?

If the totals of regime racist crimes are high and a notable feature to the Allied powers disgust, does this have a notable impact on worldwide attitudes towards anti-semitism, genocide, and racism, from the 1920s and beyond, and the League of Nations's responsibility to deal with.
He would fail to win,but,if he kill soviet leaders,we could have normal Russia here after the war.
Aside from that - he could not genocide entire nations here,so i doubt that there would be more then 100.000 civilian murdered.
As a result,nothing would change - Europe ignored genocide of armenians,why should they care about some political murders?
Well,socialists would use it to show that they were right,and maybewin some elections,but that woud be all.

P.S if he crush soviets,and normal Russia remained,we could have puppet Poland here - but,it would be still better then OTL,so i could live with that.

And,this time MAYBE Allies did right things and let Bavaria and other german states be free from prussians.
 

Tryglaw

Well-known member
Let Hitler insert into Kaiser's eldest son, Wilhelm Hohenzollern. Just as the war starts. That would give him the gravitas to make serious waves, and with his oratory skills and charisma, plus a string of victories to his name, he could probably run in democratic elections after the war and win.

Hitler knows already what worked and what not, and how things played out - avoid unrestricted submarine warfare, shift these resources into the army, invest in Panzers and radios, work out an encryption scheme (hello there, Enigma...). DO NOT strip forces from the French front to fight Russia - deal with the frogs first.
 

ATP

Well-known member
Let Hitler insert into Kaiser's eldest son, Wilhelm Hohenzollern. Just as the war starts. That would give him the gravitas to make serious waves, and with his oratory skills and charisma, plus a string of victories to his name, he could probably run in democratic elections after the war and win.

Hitler knows already what worked and what not, and how things played out - avoid unrestricted submarine warfare, shift these resources into the army, invest in Panzers and radios, work out an encryption scheme (hello there, Enigma...). DO NOT strip forces from the French front to fight Russia - deal with the frogs first.
If they do not fucked Schieffen plan,they would take Paris in 40 days,France in 1914,Russia in 1915 and England in 1916.
 

DarthOne

☦️
Let Hitler insert into Kaiser's eldest son, Wilhelm Hohenzollern. Just as the war starts. That would give him the gravitas to make serious waves, and with his oratory skills and charisma, plus a string of victories to his name, he could probably run in democratic elections after the war and win.

Hitler knows already what worked and what not, and how things played out - avoid unrestricted submarine warfare, shift these resources into the army, invest in Panzers and radios, work out an encryption scheme (hello there, Enigma...). DO NOT strip forces from the French front to fight Russia - deal with the frogs first.
Congratulations. You just lost WW1 even quicker.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ATP

raharris1973

Well-known member
Congratulations. You just lost WW1 even quicker.
Care to explain?

"avoid unrestricted submarine warfare," - how's that making things worse?


"invest in Panzers" - this will only make things worse if the leadership pushes for technically impossible designs demanding components, fuels, and other elements impossible with tech and resources available in WWI, but does more and earlier German emphasis on armored vehicles with caterpillar tracks for surviving trench crossings have to be bad rather than good?

"radios". - seems like these should only help

"work out an encryption scheme (hello there, Enigma" - also should only help

"DO NOT strip forces from the French front to fight Russia - deal with the frogs first." - This concept, if pursued too long and too single-mindedly, could be ruinous if it goes to the point of giving free reign for the Russians, and possibly others like Serbs and Italians, to squash the Austrians well before the French are beaten.
 

PsihoKekec

Swashbuckling Accountant
First of all, as crown prince Wilhelm, Hitler has no authority to make these decisions, he can only act as good idea fairy and even as Kaiser, if/once he has wrested control of the government, he has to contend with bureaucracy and various vested interests, something he had problems with as much more powerful Führer.

For starters, Hitler is not a technical person, so unless ROB has filled his head with technical blueprints and know how to bring them into reality, he will be only to propose a vague concepts.

Investing in Panzers should get him laughed out of the room in 1914 and there is no way Germany will devote it's scarce resources to such hairbrained scheme until Entente starts using them en masse. Also, production of what will you sacrifice to get the resources and manpower needed for eventual production.

More radios is great for the mobile warfare of WWII, but not particularly needed in static warfare of WWI. Keep in mind that radios of 1914 are bulky, heavy, fragile, finicky and it's not easy to ramp up the production of the tubes they need. Hitler can't just magically create the incremental advances that improved the radios over next two decades. Not to mention that enemy can listen to your radio communications.

Which brings us to encryption scheme. Germans were no fools and all of their radio communications of importance were encrypted, but the British got good at decryption and there is no way there would be no mistakes that would help the cryptoanalysts break the new systems, keep in mind that most of the info about the successes of the British WWI cryptobreaking were still a secret at the time of Hitler's death, so he would only know that diplomatic cyphers are unsafe and that navy lost cypher books at one occasion, but that would be it. Cipher devices are a nice idea in theory and while early version of Enigma was indeed developed towards the end of WWI, there is no way sufficient number could be produced by the war's end, not to mention that these were relatively straightforward to break with sufficient depth.

The idea that France could be defeated if no reinforcements were sent East is foolish, the biggest problem during the offensive against Paris was logistics, due to damaged railways and blown bridges they couldn't sufficiently supply the advancing forces, additional divisions would only make the supply issues worse.
 

DarthOne

☦️
@PsihoKekec has beaten me to it when it comes to several points already. So I'll touch on those he hasn't.


"DO NOT strip forces from the French front to fight Russia - deal with the frogs first." - This concept, if pursued too long and too single-mindedly, could be ruinous if it goes to the point of giving free reign for the Russians, and possibly others like Serbs and Italians, to squash the Austrians well before the French are beaten.

Which it would be- this isn't the Russia of the 1940's. Russia in WW1 was much more backwards in its infrastructure. Plus, this isn't the mechanized Heer of WW2. And given the troubles they went though, it's doubtful that the German army of WW1 would be able to pull off the same job quickly when they're slower moving and are operating in even less of a developed Russia.

Furthermore, the idea that leaving the French off for later would be foolish. While the Sheliefen plan did fail in knocking out Frace from the War, it did ensure that most of the resource rich and industrialized parts of France ended up in German hands throughout the war.

And on a related subject-Belgium. And the British. As of 2014, we have a letter from King George to then Prime Minister Loyde George, basically telling him to find a way to get the Empire involved in the war against Germany. To make a long story short, the British were ALWAYS going to get involved in the war, regardless of if its people wanted to or not. Germany was too much of a challenge to them economically and becoming too powerful for the paranoid British to allow. Belgium was at best a convenient excuse.

On a final point- why are we picking Hitler? No seriously, why Hitler? He hated Imperial Germany and its leadership for not being raging manics like him and being nobility.

Also, the idea that Hitler would be able to blend in and impersonate whoever he's body jacking is laughable. He doesn't have the knowledge when it comes to the sort of environments or person. People would notice something is off and there's a fair bet he ends up in a sanitarium. Which is where he should have been at in the first place in our timeline.

Plus, Hitler had little actual military tactics or planning skills- most of his successes in WW2 came down to dumb luck, audacity and stealing other people's ideas and claiming they were his.

If the objective it to have the Central powers win WW1, there are a lot better choices for the job. Hell, give me a week to prepare and I could a better job.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top