NationStates Jolt Archive

What if Russia was on the side of the central powers in WWI?

I believe this would have changed the entire outcome of the war (Obviously) and with there help the Central powers would have won.

First Off Von Moltke (Younger) wouldnt have pulled men from the west to help at Tannenburg. This would have added a bit more punch to the schleiffen plan. It still wouldnt have worked totally. Since the Germans and Austrians didnt have to fight Russia those troops would have been free to hold the west.

I was wondering what you all thought would happen.

There wouldn't have been a war in the first place.

Well I think it would be much more likely for Italy to have joined the central powers, it certainly would have meant a harder push into France and a more propped up Ottoman army. Of course the Italians were promised imperial possessions like Anatolia and the like if they joined the Allies, so that got the better of them. No offense intended of course, but in both wars the Italians were up for grabs as for which side they would take.

Russia is another question, and we know eventually left the war and become neutral after the Revolution, but I don't really see Imperial Russia ever being in a position in a WWI position to help Germany/Austria/Hungry against the Western Front. Russia initially wanted to help Russo/Slavs that might be subjected to genocide etc when the Austro/Hungarians invaded Serbia to avenge FF. Of course their was also the fact secret deals with France/Britain revealed the Tsar has been offered Constantinople and Ottoman territory if they joined the Allies. Also it would have meant the Russians would have to send troops through Germany etc to fight a foreign type war, while fighting on their doorstep would probably have been preferable.

And of course we did see the massive effect the Russia from the war had, hundreds of German divisions were now free from the East and later helped in Operation Michael in the West, also in the Alps campaign the Italians certainly felt the massive boost in German reinforcements. And also no one expected the war to come to such a remarkable close after American started to get further involved, and of course the war could have gone on for years and years with Pyhrric success for both sides.

I know about Italy. In fact Italy was in an alliance with Germany & Austria it just changed sides. Im just saying what if Russia was on Germany's side. As far as I know Russia and Germany had no real big bone to pick with each other so I think that trading the Ottoman Empire for Russia would have been great. Dont get me wrong, those Turks did there jobs well. I just think with the millions of men Russia had even with America's help the allies would have been hard pressed to win.

This just got me thinking...What if the Nazi's and Soviets worked together in WWII??? (I know it was virtually impossible, but just think about it. Superior German training added with the mass porduction of the Soviets...)

Well I think it would be much more likely for Italy to have joined the central powers, it certainly would have meant a harder push into France and a more propped up Ottoman army. Of course the Italians were promised imperial possessions like Anatolia and the like if they joined the Allies, so that got the better of them. No offense intended of course, but in both wars the Italians were up for grabs as for which side they would take.


Actually King V.E.III decided to stay clear of the war initially because, while Italy still had some arguing with France back in 1866 when Napoleon III failed to give Italy what he promised (Trento, Trieste and Istria), the Triple Alliance was for defence only, and, since formally Austria started the war, the Italian government had a legal escape out of it. Italy joined the fray on the Entente side because the French and the Brits promised to Italy Trento, Trieste, Istria and Dalmatia (but Italy was given only Trento and Trieste, plus southern Tyrol after the war).
I don't think that Italy was ever promised Anatolia by anyone. Least of all by the Central Powers. Why would the Ottomans fight when, in the case they won, one of their allies would have taken their capital and inland? You must have got it wrong...

And of course, no offence taken as Italian. But who isn't in a war for grabs? Expecially when your territory has been plundered and invaded by all european countries (except Switzerland) in the last 5 centuries and you've just began to reunificate the country...

Actually King V.E.III decided to stay clear of the war initially because, while Italy still had some arguing with France back in 1866 when Napoleon III failed to give Italy what he promised (Trento, Trieste and Istria), the Triple Alliance was for defence only, and, since formally Austria started the war, the Italian government had a legal escape out of it. Italy joined the fray on the Entente side because the French and the Brits promised to Italy Trento, Trieste, Istria and Dalmatia (but Italy was given only Trento and Trieste, plus southern Tyrol after the war).
I don't think that Italy was ever promised Anatolia by anyone. Least of all by the Central Powers. Why would the Ottomans fight when, in the case they won, one of their allies would have taken their capital and inland? You must have got it wrong...

And of course, no offence taken as Italian. But who isn't in a war for grabs? Expecially when your territory has been plundered and invaded by all european countries (except Switzerland) in the last 5 centuries and you've just began to reunificate the country...

Italy was promised Anatolia by Britain/France, not the Central Powers. The dividing up of the ME was done like this too.

There wouldn't have been a war in the first place.

Exactly. If Russia hadn't mobilized after the Austro-Hungarian declaration of war on Serbia, that would have been the end of it.

A 'great war' between the European powers probably would have occured soon enough, but over a different issue and in a different timeframe.

I thought i'd posted in this, and now i see there are 2 threads...

Italy was promised Anatolia by Britain/France, not the Central Powers. The dividing up of the ME was done like this too.

Really?:eek: I have to re-check my history books...

If Russia's with the Central Powers, then we'd have a very long front stretching from the Pacific to the Caucasus. Remember that Alaska was a US possession and that Japan and China are on the Allied side. Also, there are British possessions on the Indian subcontinent. The question on which side Iran/Persia would join would be more critical.

If we assume the War actually begins, I see the War not involving Britain, as the British Government were not that keen on war anyway, and fighting Germany and Russia (all of which had related Royalties) would have been abit much, even with the Empire.

Which leaves France and Italy. I think that Russia would have left the fight as soon as the situation in Serbia was sorted out, meaning it would just be Germany and Austria against France and Italy, and that war would probably not last very long and would not probably not be remebered as that significant in the scheme of things.

Uh..... isn't there a rule about posting the same thread twice, I swear I have seen this same thread about three times, by the same person.