Thread 17848433

This seems like a much more natural alliance than what each county went with in WW1

>>17848433 (OP)
frogs got duped
AH was unironically the good guy in WWI

>>17848433 (OP)
>How do we defend against Germany?
>Lets ally with a country weaker than Russia who will likely end up an enemy of Germany and Russia at the same time

>>17848457
>>How do we defend against Germany?
>>Lets ally with a country weaker than Russia who will likely end up an enemy of Germany and Russia at the same time

>>17848467
Yes, little entente was also stupid and trying to contain Germany with Soviet help would have been more successful.

>>17848433 (OP)
The French always ally with Jews, Polacks, or Russians. Their national identity is built on forming anti-Germanic alliances

>>17848433 (OP)
AH diplomatically isolated themselves too hard following the Crimean War such that they could only rely on Germany. That obviously puts them at odds with France. It doesn't make sense for AH to take a hostile stance against Germany either since Germany would clear wipe the floor with them—unless AH stayed buddy buddy with Russia, but again see the Crimean War.

>>17848433 (OP)
>weaker than Germany and Russia
>enemy of Italy
>Germany and Italy hold their borders while carving up Austria before turning and smashing into Lorraine

>>17848496
Germany under Bismarck tried to ally both Austria and Russia.
It collapsed not because of historic resentment over Crimea, but because of conflicting interests in the Balkans.
Austria wanted to gobble up the states to prevent pan-slavism which would cripple Austria, while Russia wanted them independent because she wanted a dominant position over the black sea.

Russian Achilles heel has always been the black sea since its vital to her trade. She doesn't want any large empire to control its immediate surroundings. It's the main reason why the turks and the Tsar has always been mortal enemies: the bosphorus

>>17848433 (OP)
We entered the bad timeline when France didn’t help Austria take out the Prussian pigs in 1866

>>17848504
>Italy hold their borders while carving up Austria
Historically Italy lost to Austria-Hungary, they were next to useless in ww1, and here they'd also be going up against the French and British Navies, who'd dominate the med and be able to threaten Italy with landings anywhere around it's very long coastline, meaning it would have to invest in defenses and wouldn't be able to send as many men to the frontlines.
Germany might be able to do it, but Italy wouldn't be able to do anything. The only reason they'd be useful is they would distract some entente soldiers away from the real war

>>17848472
They were right to distrust the Soviets, as 1945-1948 shows

>>17848920
Italy could 100% hold their borders against AH because in this timeline, AH would be under attack by literally all of their neighbors barring Switzerland.

>>17848467
In 1914 there was an alternative in form of the Russian Empire which was seen as something that could absorb a lot of military pressure from the Germans(hard to argue it didn't).
In the interwar period the alternative to little entente(which by itself was more directed towards containing revanchist Hungary or perhaps Austria-Hungary revived) and Poland was the Soviet Union, which didn't have direct border with Germany meaning it wouldn't divert anything away from France and on top of that due to it's ideology it was a difficult ally(the Empire may have been just as alien for the French Republic, but they also didn't invest in ideological takeover of it) that was seen as potentially unstable and its military as untested(the last show of force against peer opponent was the Polish-Soviet war which the French expected Poles to lose).

The real way the French could've fixed the interwar situation would be to realise the time has changed and their real issue would be Germany deciding to remilitarize with the solution being an army that can be sent on a limited war that would force them to go back on that. That would require a larger professional component and understanding that some units will function without being split in 3 and reinforced with mobilised reservists, but the third republic didn't trust the military so that wasn't going to happen.

>>17848920
Ok Germans fought on two fronts and managed to defeat Russia, do you really think Austria-Hungary would do better? If you go by the logic of the Schlieffen plan instead of reenacting it with different alliance structure, the Austrians as a perceived weaker enemy would be hit first while the war with French would drag on.
Italian navy was no joke by the way, it was far more capable than the Austrian and you didn't see Austrians having issues with naval landings. If anything it means more British and French ships have to be in the Mediterranean leaving less to blockade Germany.

>>17848433 (OP)
>AH gets attacked from literally all sides
genius plan

>>17848433 (OP)
That’s how it used to be, but France (((stopped acting for it’s own interests))) after 1871. I wonder (((why)))?

>>17848569
Because France had just had a war with Austria over Italy, retard. That was one of the major reasons for the Franco-Austrian split in the later 19th century. Historically illiterate predditor faggot. Tranny.

>>17849225
The Italian navy was routed by Austria’s navy in WWI. Fucking idiot redditor. Read a book shithead tranny.

>>17849095
Yeah they probably would, but that doesn't really discount anything I said. Historically their efforts to advance on that front largely went in vain, and here they wouldn't be able to send nearly as many men to the front
>>17849225
>Germans
Was my post about Germany?
>Italian navy was no joke by the way
It was, the Austrians alone were their equal. Even if we were to ignore the British it's obvious they would stand no chance
>>17850464
The Franco-Austrian rivalry was one of the longest lasting in European History

>>17848920
Italy did the right thing (for themselves) when they joined the Entete instead of the central powers. Germany had managed to bring Britain into the conflict, so if Italy had joined the central powers then she would be starved like Germany. At least Germany had Netherlands to kinda circumvent the blockade, and Sweden to sell them basic food ("food" as in turnips), but Germany still starved. Italy would have been far worse since she would have been practically isolated, not just her country but the entire Mediterranean sea would be locked down.

Honestly Italy should probably even have stayed out of the war completely. The Entete kinda screwed her over in the peace negotiations. So much sacrifice for so little. Even Denmark recieved more, and she was completely neutral.

>>17850464
Because France had just had a war with Austria over Italy, retard. That was one of the major reasons for the Franco-Austrian split in the later 19th century. Historically illiterate predditor faggot. Tranny.