20th Century What if Princep's shot missed Archduke Ferdinand? What would the world be like?

[HairyO]

Europe was itching for a war. If not this then it would have been something else.

 

[cannot]

+2 Inevitable. The Cousins War was going to happen whether Princip got involved or not. .

family disagreement

 

[sydney eagle]

crazy conspiracy theory stuff. do not believe everything you read.

liners were generally pretty safe from u-boats, speed sig zag course and your chances of being sunk rely onto u-boat been perfectly positioned before time. the captain made some poor choices. the Queen Mary and Queen Elizabeth were used to move large numbers of troops in ww2 and were unescorted, they relied on their speed. what could have an escort done? nothing.

carrying munitions did not make the ship fair game. the cruiser rules of warfare applied.

One of the escorts for the "Queen Mary", the light cruiser " Curacao", managed to get itself run down by the liner during world war 2.

 

[sherbrook]

The world would be incredibly overpopulated if the world wars had not happened

 

[Benny78]

It might've ricocheted and hit Churchill

 

[Eastern Rangers]

World War One was still a war of aggression largely waged by Germans and in that respect the death of Ferdinand had more to do with the timing of the war than anything else.

I think a better "what if" would be what if Germany didn't invade Belgium and Britain was kept out of a continental war that they didn't really want a part of to begin with.

 

[magpies42]

Was WW1 avoidable or inevitable?

If it didn't happen, would we still have seen the rise of the Nazis, the Russian Revolution and many other consequences of WW1?

No change really, the war would have happened one way or another. Perhaps the Serbs wouldn’t have lost a quarter of their population, aside from that I think it would have been all in either way.

 

[Caesar]

Was the First World War avoidable or inevitable is a hard question and depends on your interpretation of events leading up to the First World War, as Princep's shooting of the Archduke was a trigger point that set off a series of long and short factors and issues. Nationalism, an arms race, Imperialism, a naval race, racial tensions in Eastern Europe (AH Empire, Russia and Serbia, as well as Greece (British ties) and the Ottoman Empire), colonial rivalries, the two Balkan Wars, the decline of the Ottoman Empire and how it should be divided, and Russian designs on the Dardanelles was pushing all nations towards war. All these factors influenced the decisions made by all leaders in the July crisis of 1914 that led to war, they just needed that spark, which was Princep.

Personally I blame Charlemagne

Damn Franks, they ruined Francia

 

[Kram]

I don't know a heap about WW1 but I was always under the impression that it was something that was going to happen at the time with the buildup.

 

[iluvparis]

I don't know a heap about WW1 but I was always under the impression that it was something that was going to happen at the time with the buildup.

I believe the historically accurate Blackadder provides the real reason:

Edmund: Well, possibly. But the real reason for the whole thing was that it was too much effort not to have a war.

George: By Golly, this is interesting; I always loved history...

Edmund: You see, Baldrick, in order to prevent war in Europe, two superblocs developed: us, the French and the Russians on one side, and the Germans and Austro-Hungary on the other. The idea was to have two vast opposing armies, each acting as the other's deterrent. That way there could never be a war.

Baldrick: But this is a sort of a war, isn't it, sir?

Edmund: Yes, that's right. You see, there was a tiny flaw in the plan.

George: What was that, sir?

Edmund: It was bollocks.

 

[ChampRevesby]

For the thread title, it was more dependent on whether he was captured after taking a shot (doesn't matter if he hit the Archduke or not). A Bosnian trained by Serbian nationalists with links to the Serbian military and government tried to shoot at one of the main leaders of the A-H Empire, the Austrians would have been pushing for the war and assuming that Germany would take the same actions with a supposed blank cheque, everything would more than likely happened the same, though we are dealing with what if's?


Was the First World War avoidable or inevitable is a hard question and depends on your interpretation of events leading up to the First World War, as Princep's shooting of the Archduke was a trigger point that set off a series of long and short factors and issues. Nationalism, an arms race, Imperialism, a naval race, racial tensions in Eastern Europe (AH Empire, Russia and Serbia, as well as Greece (British ties) and the Ottoman Empire), colonial rivalries, the two Balkan Wars, the decline of the Ottoman Empire and how it should be divided, and Russian designs on the Dardanelles was pushing all nations towards war. All these factors influenced the decisions made by all leaders in the July crisis of 1914 that led to war, they just needed that spark, which was Princep.

Whilst there were many groups in Europe supporting racial superiority and social darwinism, the Nazi movement, at its very early core appealed to ex-soldiers like Hitler and disfranchised middle class citizens (with the traditional nationalist morals and value) that have suffered during the First World War. Starvation, poor economic conditions, rise of extremist elements, distrust of democracy pushed many people towards the Nazi Party. So it is not unthinkable that there would have been a Nazi style party if the First World War didn't occur, it just would not have been as strong, well funded or popular.


It is important to note the importance of the Great Depression in driving voters and followers to the extremist elements in German politics, namely the Communists and the more popular nationalist Nationalist Socialist Workers Party with a charismatic leader, which eventually led to political pressure on President Hindenburg (one of the leading German generals of the First World War, that effectively rule Germany with Ludendorff during the war) that led to Hitler becoming chancellor. The Great Depression may not have occurred due to no First World War, we don't truly know, however we've always have recessions and economic/social crisis' that pushed people towards the political fringes in the past and even currently, look at Greece atm with their fascist party getting a lot of votes. I'll argue that the Great Depression in unison with the First World War provided the perfect conditions for the Nazi's and Hitler to thrive in, and once he was in power, war with someone was inevitable, but probably against Russia and poor old Poland.


As for the Russian Revolution and its links to the First World is a harder question to answer from my perspective as they are directly linked. If there was no First World, the Germans would not have had to send Lenin back to Russia on a train from Switzerland and without Lenin, the Bolsheviks would not have been able to pick their opportunities to sieze power against the Russian provisional government or even if they did, they may have not won the Russian civil war without Lenin's charismatic leadership style. If we go back to before Lenin and whether the First World War caused the revolution itself, the Tsarist government was having its fair share of difficulties with domestic unrest, but I would argue that the royal family would have slowly released some executive power to the Duma (Russian Parliament) to retain their power and turn themselves into a constitutional monarchy, to retain some power and keep the people happy. The First World War created very good conditions for the communists to come to power, the Tsarina's links to Rasputin (though that started pre-war) and the German imperial family, even more food and other shortages, high manpower losses that were loyal to the Tsarist cause and German occupation of large portions of Tsarist Poland and parts of Russian destablised the Tsarist regime massively.

This is great.
Austrian military leaders saw the assassination as a good excuse to invade and annex Serbia like they did to Bosnia in 1908. The AH Empire got the full backing of Germany for the invasion and Serbia accepted all demands from Austria except one, an Austria investigation into the assassination, which sparked the mobilization. The AHs knew that any war with Serbia would drag Russia into the conflict and ignite a world war given the alliances established through the triple entente. Considering the AHs wanted the entire Balkans region regardless of circumstance, which Russia swore to protect (as they were Slavic nations), WW1 was inevitable.

Interesting note, when Austria was in the process of invading Serbia, Kaiser Wilhelm of Germany and Tsar Nicholas of Russia, who were first cousins, made a last-ditch effort to contain the conflict through an exchange of telegrams.

Read here: First World War.com - Primary Documents - The "Willy-Nicky" Telegrams


It eventually broke down and Germany declared war on Russia. Two days later, France, declared war on Germany. Britain joined the war when Germany crossed into Belgium.

 

[sdfc]

This is great.
Austrian military leaders saw the assassination as a good excuse to invade and annex Serbia like they did to Bosnia in 1908. The AH Empire got the full backing of Germany for the invasion and Serbia accepted all demands from Austria except one, an Austria investigation into the assassination, which sparked the mobilization. The AHs knew that any war with Serbia would drag Russia into the conflict and ignite a world war given the alliances established through the triple entente. Considering the AHs wanted the entire Balkans region regardless of circumstance, which Russia swore to protect (as they were Slavic nations), WW1 was inevitable.

Interesting note, when Austria was in the process of invading Serbia, Kaiser Wilhelm of Germany and Tsar Nicholas of Russia, who were first cousins, made a last-ditch effort to contain the conflict through an exchange of telegrams.

Read here: First World War.com - Primary Documents - The "Willy-Nicky" Telegrams

View attachment 1478367
It eventually broke down and Germany declared war on Russia. Two days later, France, declared war on Germany. Britain joined the war when Germany crossed into Belgium.

The assassination was orchestrated by elements in the Serbian government and army. What do you think the US or the UK would have done in the same situation? Not to mention what Russia would have done if elements in AH government and military had orchestrated the assassination of the Russian crown prince.

Russia's mobilisation drew Germany into it.

As for the invasion of Belgium it was a calculated effort to quickly knock France out of the war. If you're menaced by two thugs in an alley your only chance it is to quickly take one of them out of it.

WWI was a team effort.

 

[Steele13]

To answer the original question, I think there is no doubt the world would be vastly different. Whether Europe was itching for war on not was irrelevant, under different circumstances the war could and would have taken a completely different course. In my opinion, the assassination was THE defining moment of the 20th century. Fascinating question though.

 

[Power Raid]

imagine the world without the technological advancement achieved during WW2 and without WW1 there would have been no ww2

jet engines, nuclear (the power), penicillin, radar, sonar, computers, etc

sure these things would have eventually been developed but how far behind we would be

 

[Steele13]

imagine the world without the technological advancement achieved during WW2 and without WW1 there would have been no ww2

jet engines, nuclear (the power), penicillin, radar, sonar, computers, etc

sure these things would have eventually been developed but how far behind we would be

It kind of makes you wonder what technology could be developed with another world war, how advanced could we be? Or, would it go the other way?

 

[Caesar]

imagine the world without the technological advancement achieved during WW2 and without WW1 there would have been no ww2

jet engines, nuclear (the power), penicillin, radar, sonar, computers, etc

sure these things would have eventually been developed but how far behind we would be

Almost all of this stuff was developed before WW2

• First working jet engine: 1937
• Discovery of nuclear fission: 1938
• Fleming's paper on penicillin: 1929
• Radar's Daventry Experiment: 1935
• Turing's paper on the modern computer: 1936 (admittedly the real thing wasn't up and running until post-war)

Sonar is probably the only one I'd call a genuine war invention, and even that was pretty heavily based on work that was done in the 1920s & 30s.

WW2 certainly sped up refinement and adoption of these ideas, but on the other side of the ledger you have all the possible technological advances that didn't happen because of the unimaginable economic destruction and loss of life.

Hard to think we ended up ahead - when you kill 50 million people, chances are you lose a few Alan Turings and Albert Einsteins.

 

[Power Raid]

It kind of makes you wonder what technology could be developed with another world war, how advanced could we be? Or, would it go the other way?

that's a question like going to the casino

but what is certain is, it would lead to unbelievable change

 

[Baldur]

A major war between the great powers was going to happen, but it did not have to be the long drawn out bloodbath that occured. to me the real turning point was the german decision to invade Belgium. This bought the British Empire into the conflict and ensured that a quick central power victory was impossable. Without Britian, France is most likely defeated in 1915 & Russia shortly thereafter.

You end up with a dominant Germany in a semi united europe, a weakened Russia and Britian as an outsider. With a couple of very important differences it resembles europe now.

First, Imperial Germany had very nasty political attitudes, the gap between Nazi germany and Imperial Germany was not as great as many assume. Second, the Imperial powers not having been weakened would be more able to hold onto their colonial subjects.

The EU would be a facist empire & the British empire might still exist, but in a state like that of the Ottoman Empire in 1914.

 

[Caesar]

First, Imperial Germany had very nasty political attitudes, the gap between Nazi germany and Imperial Germany was not as great as many assume.

I am not sure I agree with this - the SPD was the ascendant party in Germany prior to WWI and there is a good argument to be made that the country was on track towards representative democracy

 

[sdfc]

A major war between the great powers was going to happen, but it did not have to be the long drawn out bloodbath that occured. to me the real turning point was the german decision to invade Belgium. This bought the British Empire into the conflict and ensured that a quick central power victory was impossable. Without Britian, France is most likely defeated in 1915 & Russia shortly thereafter.

You end up with a dominant Germany in a semi united europe, a weakened Russia and Britian as an outsider. With a couple of very important differences it resembles europe now.

First, Imperial Germany had very nasty political attitudes, the gap between Nazi germany and Imperial Germany was not as great as many assume. Second, the Imperial powers not having been weakened would be more able to hold onto their colonial subjects.

The EU would be a facist empire & the British empire might still exist, but in a state like that of the Ottoman Empire in 1914.

Britain was always going to get involved. But yeah maybe without the invasion of Belgium it would have taken the pro-war crowd longer to get Britain in.

Imperial Germany was no worse than any of the other great powers.

 

[Baldur]

Britain was always going to get involved. But yeah maybe without the invasion of Belgium it would have taken the pro-war crowd longer to get Britain in.

Imperial Germany was no worse than any of the other great powers.

I am not sure I agree with this - the SPD was the ascendant party in Germany prior to WWI and there is a good argument to be made that the country was on track towards representative democracy

I thought this once as well, but a line in the Guns of August made me think again.

Barbara Tuchman mentioned that there are graveyards in Belgium where in one section there is a group of graves with the following on the headstones "killed by the boche 1914" and another group of graves with the following "killed by the boche 1944".

I was aware that the brainwashed nazi SS had killed lots of people as they retreated 1944, I was not aware until than that ordinary german soldiers had done the same in 1914 as they advanced. I was to learn that the Prussians were known for their brutality in the Franco-Prussian war. Indeed the modern east Prussian state had been founded on the genocide of the original non christian inhabitants by the teutonic knights and german colonists.

Much of Nazi Germanies evil, the rabid racism, authoritarianism, deaths head symbolism, militarism, murder of civilians etc was already there in Imperial Germany. I may be wrong that they were worse than other great powers of the time, than again maybe not.

As for Britain, there where pro-war and anti-war fractions. I consider it likely that Britain would have made lots of money selling arms and lending money, this profit would have kept them out until forced into it. i.e. Just like the USA in both world wars.

 

[Caesar]

I thought this once as well, but a line in the Guns of August made me think again.

Barbara Tuchman mentioned that there are graveyards in Belgium where in one section there is a group of graves with the following on the headstones "killed by the boche 1914" and another group of graves with the following "killed by the boche 1944".

I was aware that the brainwashed nazi SS had killed lots of people as they retreated 1944, I was not aware until than that ordinary german soldiers had done the same in 1914 as they advanced. I was to learn that the Prussians were known for their brutality in the Franco-Prussian war. Indeed the modern east Prussian state had been founded on the genocide of the original non christian inhabitants by the teutonic knights and german colonists.

Much of Nazi Germanies evil, the rabid racism, authoritarianism, deaths head symbolism, militarism, murder of civilians etc was already there in Imperial Germany. I may be wrong that they were worse than other great powers of the time, than again maybe not.

As for Britain, there where pro-war and anti-war fractions. I consider it likely that Britain would have made lots of money selling arms and lending money, this profit would have kept them out until forced into it. i.e. Just like the USA in both world wars.

I think that is a bit of a simplification in that Imperial Germany was more than just a Prussian state.

In fact putting the country on a war footing was arguably a way for right wing Prussian imperial elements to reassert themselves against the social democratic majority, which had taken power in several regional governments and was gaining power in the Reichstag

There is a very good argument that had WWI not occurred, Germany would have likely transitioned relatively peacefully to a liberal constitutional monarchy

 

[sdfc]

I thought this once as well, but a line in the Guns of August made me think again.

Barbara Tuchman mentioned that there are graveyards in Belgium where in one section there is a group of graves with the following on the headstones "killed by the boche 1914" and another group of graves with the following "killed by the boche 1944".

I was aware that the brainwashed nazi SS had killed lots of people as they retreated 1944, I was not aware until than that ordinary german soldiers had done the same in 1914 as they advanced. I was to learn that the Prussians were known for their brutality in the Franco-Prussian war. Indeed the modern east Prussian state had been founded on the genocide of the original non christian inhabitants by the teutonic knights and german colonists.

Much of Nazi Germanies evil, the rabid racism, authoritarianism, deaths head symbolism, militarism, murder of civilians etc was already there in Imperial Germany. I may be wrong that they were worse than other great powers of the time, than again maybe not.

As for Britain, there where pro-war and anti-war fractions. I consider it likely that Britain would have made lots of money selling arms and lending money, this profit would have kept them out until forced into it. i.e. Just like the USA in both world wars.

There's no argument that the Germans committed atrocities, but they were no orphans. It's one of the many s**t things about war, it tends to breed that stuff.

The Nazis were able to do what they did because of WWI, simply the most stupid and ultimately destructive war in history.

The Poms were paranoid about Germany well before 1914. The chances of them accepting German hegemony over Europe was pretty low.

 

[Galaxie77]

I thought this once as well, but a line in the Guns of August made me think again.

Barbara Tuchman mentioned that there are graveyards in Belgium where in one section there is a group of graves with the following on the headstones "killed by the boche 1914" and another group of graves with the following "killed by the boche 1944".

I was aware that the brainwashed nazi SS had killed lots of people as they retreated 1944, I was not aware until than that ordinary german soldiers had done the same in 1914 as they advanced. I was to learn that the Prussians were known for their brutality in the Franco-Prussian war. Indeed the modern east Prussian state had been founded on the genocide of the original non christian inhabitants by the teutonic knights and german colonists.

Much of Nazi Germanies evil, the rabid racism, authoritarianism, deaths head symbolism, militarism, murder of civilians etc was already there in Imperial Germany. I may be wrong that they were worse than other great powers of the time, than again maybe not.

As for Britain, there where pro-war and anti-war fractions. I consider it likely that Britain would have made lots of money selling arms and lending money, this profit would have kept them out until forced into it. i.e. Just like the USA in both world wars.

The Deaths head was used by some of the Kaisers toughest troops in WW1, Stormtroopers and flamethrower troops.
but the symbol goes back further to Prussia and other German states.
Of course it was a pirate symbol too.

Other nations also used it. A Brit unit still does.