HistoryNet.com RSS
ArmchairGeneral.com RSS

HistoryNet.com Articles
America's Civil War
American History
Aviation History
Civil War Times
MHQ
Military History
Vietnam
Wild West
World War II

ACG Online
ACG Magazine
Stuff We Like
War College
History News
Tactics 101
Carlo D'Este
Books

ACG Gaming
Boardgames
PC Game Reviews

ACG Network
Contact Us
Our Newsletter
Meet Our Staff
Advertise With Us

Sites We Support
HistoryNet.com
StreamHistory.com
Once A Marine
The Art of Battle
Game Squad
Mil. History Podcast
Russian Army - WW2
Achtung Panzer!
Mil History Online

Go Back   Armchair General and HistoryNet >> The Best Forums in History > Military/History Related Hobbies > Alternate Timelines > Xtreme Alternate History

Notices and Announcements

Xtreme Alternate History Alternatives to History with No Holds Barred!

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old 06 Jul 15, 12:28
Draco's Avatar
Draco Draco is offline
Lieutenant General
Mexico
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Morelia, Mexico
Posts: 3,327
Draco is on the path to success [1-99] Draco is on the path to success [1-99] Draco is on the path to success [1-99]
Europeans in general are separatists, perhaps a form of racism. Whether in Spain, where Basques, Catalans, etc, consider themselves far superior to the other Spaniards. Bavarians will shout Prussian pig at the driver of a car from N Germany (not only Prussia) who does anything to upset them. Croatians who consider themselves completely different from Serbs (despite using very similar languages and being Christians), Czechs who look down of Slovaks, Parisians who look down on all other Frenchmen (and the rest of the world). Milanese and Bolognese regard Neapolitans and Sicilians as Africans, Scots have their own national football team, despite their nationally being British, etc, Thus a Walloon is proud of being a Belgian, but deep inside identifies more with Frenchmen than with the Flemmish Belgians.
Perhaps Talleyrand's proposal of partition along language lines made some sense, but certainly Belgium remaining Dutch would have greatly benefitted both countries, as well as the rest or Europe, Asia and Africa.

Last edited by Draco; 06 Jul 15 at 12:36..
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 07 Jul 15, 01:50
Snowygerry's Avatar
Snowygerry Snowygerry is offline
General of the Forums
Belgium
5 Year Service Ribbon 
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Gent
Posts: 11,274
Snowygerry has set a fine example for others to follow [1000] Snowygerry has set a fine example for others to follow [1000]
Snowygerry has set a fine example for others to follow [1000] Snowygerry has set a fine example for others to follow [1000] Snowygerry has set a fine example for others to follow [1000] Snowygerry has set a fine example for others to follow [1000] Snowygerry has set a fine example for others to follow [1000] Snowygerry has set a fine example for others to follow [1000] Snowygerry has set a fine example for others to follow [1000] Snowygerry has set a fine example for others to follow [1000] Snowygerry has set a fine example for others to follow [1000] Snowygerry has set a fine example for others to follow [1000]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Draco View Post
(...) , but certainly Belgium remaining Dutch would have greatly benefitted both countries, as well as the rest or Europe, Asia and Africa.
Perhaps.

It would not have benefitted individual citizens living in Belgium though, which in the end is all that matters in these parts.

Even so - how on earth do you imagine Holland as it existed in 1830 would maintained control over a territory almost equal in size, with a larger population, a hostile religion and a different language, without active military support from one the majors ?

The Belgian's revolution against the Habsburgs actually predated that of the French against the Bourbons, you seriously think William the Orange would be tolerated as a despot in a by then mostly liberal Belgium, except for being held at gunpoint ?
__________________
High The Admiral Snowy, Commander In Chief of the Naval Forces of The Phoenix Confederation.
Francis II, Holy Roman Emperor - The Napoleonic Wars Campaign.

Captain Atticus Finch - ACW Rainbow Co.

Last edited by Snowygerry; 07 Jul 15 at 02:21..
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 07 Jul 15, 12:45
Draco's Avatar
Draco Draco is offline
Lieutenant General
Mexico
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Morelia, Mexico
Posts: 3,327
Draco is on the path to success [1-99] Draco is on the path to success [1-99] Draco is on the path to success [1-99]
William had no problem controlling Belgium, until French troops intervened and bolstered the Belgians, causing desertion of Belgian troops in the Dutch army.
The Revolution was not successful because of the Belgians, but because of the French, British, Austrians and Russians who wanted to split the Netherlands. It is much easier to become independent from distant Austria with Friendly France and Switzerland in between than from the Netherlands over a long border and a short coast.

If at least Britain, Russia, etc, had accepted Talleyrand's proposal for France to take over Walloonia and the Netherlands to keep the Flemmish territory, then no very vulnerable states would have resulted.

The Netherlands was one of the most tollerant states regarding religion. Which is why the Puritains lived there before moving to the US. They left only because there was too much religious freedom and culture and they wanted to be isolated in a remote colony without religous freedom and plenty of ignorance, so they could much better control the flock.

It was precisely the Belgians who suffered most from separation, otherwise they would have much cheaper petrol, would not have fought in WW I and II and would be able to choose between living in very prosperous colonies in Europe, Asia, Africa or America.

A united Netherlands would have thrived in S Africa, the DEI, etc, during the Crimean and Franco-Prussian wars and would have secured European control of Africa and Asia. With strong armed forces, it would probably have greatly stabilized Europe by signing alliances with Russia and France in 1912, avoiding WW I.

If Germany attacked despite the NL in 1914, it would have lost the war much sooner (facing a stronger army than the Belgian army it faced and not being able to buy Dutch and smuggled goods) and the NL would have gained some of the German colonies in the Pacific and China and some German territory.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 07 Jul 15, 14:12
T. A. Gardner's Avatar
T. A. Gardner T. A. Gardner is offline
General of the Forums
United_States
5 Year Service Ribbon Most Significant/Influential Tank Campaign Most Significant/Influential Fighter Campaign Most Significant/Influential Multi-Role Aircraft C 
Greatest/Best Tank of WW2 Campaign 
 
Real Name: T. A. Gardner
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 34,375
T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+]
T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Draco View Post
A united Netherlands would have thrived in S Africa, the DEI, etc, during the Crimean and Franco-Prussian wars and would have secured European control of Africa and Asia. With strong armed forces, it would probably have greatly stabilized Europe by signing alliances with Russia and France in 1912, avoiding WW I.

If Germany attacked despite the NL in 1914, it would have lost the war much sooner (facing a stronger army than the Belgian army it faced and not being able to buy Dutch and smuggled goods) and the NL would have gained some of the German colonies in the Pacific and China and some German territory.
This ignores historical precedent totally. Assuming the Netherlands retains Belgium it has a choice militarily: It can be a sea power OR it can be a land power.

If it choses sea power then it's primary rival is Britain and it could vie for colonial possessions overseas. The risk in this choice is that it has two very powerful land powers sitting on its borders, Germany and France.
The Netherlands becomes a doormat for the two. It would have to choose one or the other to closely ally with or even give up much of its independence to to remain a nation as a sea power.
In the end, it would lose its independence, or at minimum be reduced to a minor player by the invasions it suffers.

Britain wins and the Netherlands loses as a sea power.

If it chooses to be a land power then it has to focus on building and maintaining a powerful army. That would make it secure against Germany and France, but it also means the eventual loss of colonial possessions to sea powers like Britain.
Whether the Netherlands could actually win versus Germany or France is open to debate. In this scenario the Netherlands could become the target of either in a war separate from the third party.
That is, Germany and the Netherlands go to war while France stays on the sidelines, or France and the Netherlands go to war while Germany stays on the sidelines.
Two could ally against the other one too but I see that as a remote possibility.

As a land power the Netherlands retains its territory and remains independent, but it possesses nothing of note elsewhere.

It's one or the other. The Netherlands doesn't possess the resource base to be both.

There are only two nations that have managed to possess both sea power and land power and of those only one has managed to do it continuously.

China did it for a short while and could have continued to have both but gave up sea power.
The United States is the only nation to possess both and maintain both for any extended period of time.

Rome might have done it following the Carthaginian wars but chose not to focusing instead on being a land power. It is doubtful Rome could have maintained a large navy with little use too.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 07 Jul 15, 21:44
Draco's Avatar
Draco Draco is offline
Lieutenant General
Mexico
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Morelia, Mexico
Posts: 3,327
Draco is on the path to success [1-99] Draco is on the path to success [1-99] Draco is on the path to success [1-99]
There is no imperative to be either a sea power or a land power. France, Turkey and Spain had both a good army and a good navy in the 18th century, despite France and Turkey having few natural resources. Athens, Rome, Constantinople and the Vandals in N Africa had a good navy and army.

Rich colonies (the spices, etc, in the DEI, gold, diamonds, etc, in Africa) can finance both a strong army and navy and provide sailors and soldiers.
Britain was a naval power and could raise a huge army for WW I among the commonwealth (despite having lost the US, perhaps the colony where it had invested the most and sent the most settlers).
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 07 Jul 15, 22:03
holly6's Avatar
holly6 holly6 is offline
Lieutenant General
United_States
5 Year Service Ribbon Most Significant/Influential Tank Campaign Most Significant/Influential Fighter Campaign 
 
Real Name: Hal
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: washington
Posts: 3,056
holly6 is a jewel in the rough [500]
holly6 is a jewel in the rough [500] holly6 is a jewel in the rough [500] holly6 is a jewel in the rough [500] holly6 is a jewel in the rough [500] holly6 is a jewel in the rough [500] holly6 is a jewel in the rough [500] holly6 is a jewel in the rough [500] holly6 is a jewel in the rough [500] holly6 is a jewel in the rough [500] holly6 is a jewel in the rough [500]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Draco View Post
There is no imperative to be either a sea power or a land power. France, Turkey and Spain had both a good army and a good navy in the 18th century, despite France and Turkey having few natural resources. Athens, Rome, Constantinople and the Vandals in N Africa had a good navy and army.

Rich colonies (the spices, etc, in the DEI, gold, diamonds, etc, in Africa) can finance both a strong army and navy and provide sailors and soldiers.
Britain was a naval power and could raise a huge army for WW I among the commonwealth (despite having lost the US, perhaps the colony where it had invested the most and sent the most settlers).
I promised I wouldn't get involved in any more of these.
Draco, I still don't know where you came from, or your purpose here.
Mr. Naive asks you to quit posting everything in absolute terms. You have the ability to access wiki information and condense it into a thought.
Little of this matters here, because there are major history players on the site.

One question: what are you trying to learn here?
__________________
My Avatar: Ivan W. Henderson Gunner/navigator B-25-26. 117 combat missions. Both Theaters. 11 confirmed kills. DSC.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 07 Jul 15, 22:42
T. A. Gardner's Avatar
T. A. Gardner T. A. Gardner is offline
General of the Forums
United_States
5 Year Service Ribbon Most Significant/Influential Tank Campaign Most Significant/Influential Fighter Campaign Most Significant/Influential Multi-Role Aircraft C 
Greatest/Best Tank of WW2 Campaign 
 
Real Name: T. A. Gardner
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 34,375
T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+]
T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Draco View Post
There is no imperative to be either a sea power or a land power. France, Turkey and Spain had both a good army and a good navy in the 18th century, despite France and Turkey having few natural resources. Athens, Rome, Constantinople and the Vandals in N Africa had a good navy and army.
France and Spain were land powers and both were defeated at sea repeatedly by a sea power (Britain).
Athens in ancient Greece was a sea power. They were never highly successful on land and relied on land power allies.
Turkey (the Ottoman Empire) was a land power and the few times they tried to push a navy for power projection they were defeated.
Carthage likewise was a sea power. They hired a mercenary general (Hannibal) to defeat Rome with a hired army. They failed. At sea, Rome built sea power that eventually defeated Carthage then disposed of the fleet almost entirely to reduce spending. They relied on legions and land power for conquests afterwards.


Quote:
Rich colonies (the spices, etc, in the DEI, gold, diamonds, etc, in Africa) can finance both a strong army and navy and provide sailors and soldiers.
Britain was a naval power and could raise a huge army for WW I among the commonwealth (despite having lost the US, perhaps the colony where it had invested the most and sent the most settlers).
This is drivel.

WW 1 nearly bankrupted Britain. The country couldn't afford a large navy and large army like it had committed to the continent. They immediately in the post war years got rid of the majority of their army (a large part of which was raised from Commonwealth troops... e.g., "Allies.").
Britain resumed having a large navy but kept only a small, colonial based, army.
The French, a land power continued to maintain a powerful army and let their Navy go to pot.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 08 Jul 15, 04:00
Snowygerry's Avatar
Snowygerry Snowygerry is offline
General of the Forums
Belgium
5 Year Service Ribbon 
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Gent
Posts: 11,274
Snowygerry has set a fine example for others to follow [1000] Snowygerry has set a fine example for others to follow [1000]
Snowygerry has set a fine example for others to follow [1000] Snowygerry has set a fine example for others to follow [1000] Snowygerry has set a fine example for others to follow [1000] Snowygerry has set a fine example for others to follow [1000] Snowygerry has set a fine example for others to follow [1000] Snowygerry has set a fine example for others to follow [1000] Snowygerry has set a fine example for others to follow [1000] Snowygerry has set a fine example for others to follow [1000] Snowygerry has set a fine example for others to follow [1000] Snowygerry has set a fine example for others to follow [1000]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Draco View Post
William had no problem controlling Belgium, until French troops intervened and bolstered the Belgians, causing desertion of Belgian troops in the Dutch army..
Sounds like a problem to me

Quote:
The Revolution was not successful because of the Belgians, but because of the French, British, Austrians and Russians who wanted to split the Netherlands. It is much easier to become independent from distant Austria with Friendly France and Switzerland in between than from the Netherlands over a long border and a short coast.
This refers to the Belgian revolution or the 1830 uprising ? If the first, the Habsburgs defeated it just fine, it was in no way "successful" - I only mentioned it to show that liberalism had fairly deep roots here by 1830, and a permanent return to despotism had become highly unlikely - if not impossible, except - as stated - under armed occupation.


Quote:
If at least Britain, Russia, etc, had accepted Talleyrand's proposal for France to take over Wallonia and the Netherlands to keep the Flemish territory, then no very vulnerable states would have resulted.
"England will never permit the union of Belgium and France. We will make war on France until it returns to its borders of 1789."

Quote:
The Netherlands was one of the most tolerant states regarding religion. Which is why the Puritans lived there before moving to the US. They left only because there was too much religious freedom and culture and they wanted to be isolated in a remote colony without religious freedom and plenty of ignorance, so they could much better control the flock.
Seems hardly relevant.

William was a reformed Christian, which to classic Catholic is just to the left of the devil, and to a liberal the scum of the earth.

He couldn't even get his constitution voted in the South, his language and education policies were widely resented and often ignored.

For one thing he tried to mandate to teaching of the reformed faith, while most established schools in the south were administratively run by Catholic clergy.

Quote:
It was precisely the Belgians who suffered most from separation, otherwise they would have much cheaper petrol, would not have fought in WW I and II and would be able to choose between living in very prosperous colonies in Europe, Asia, Africa or America.
History seems to contradict that - by the early 20th century Belgium was on of the most industrialized countries in the world, while the Dutch trade empire was in decline,

certainly there was no lack of natural resources (Congo) - and I cannot for the life of me imagine how a unified Kingdom of the Netherlands would prevent the great war, let alone the second.

Belgium would still be in between Germany and France.
__________________
High The Admiral Snowy, Commander In Chief of the Naval Forces of The Phoenix Confederation.
Francis II, Holy Roman Emperor - The Napoleonic Wars Campaign.

Captain Atticus Finch - ACW Rainbow Co.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 08 Jul 15, 14:10
T. A. Gardner's Avatar
T. A. Gardner T. A. Gardner is offline
General of the Forums
United_States
5 Year Service Ribbon Most Significant/Influential Tank Campaign Most Significant/Influential Fighter Campaign Most Significant/Influential Multi-Role Aircraft C 
Greatest/Best Tank of WW2 Campaign 
 
Real Name: T. A. Gardner
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 34,375
T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+]
T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowygerry View Post

Belgium would still be in between Germany and France.
And, united, would have become a door mat for both sides in a war. Worse, the British would have had less reason to want to ally with the combined Belgium / Netherlands as it would have been seen as a much more significant rival.

The only way around being a door mat in this scenario is to become a major military land power such that it is now a rival of France and Germany in a three way power struggle. Again, Belgium / the Netherlands loses out in that deal spending its wealth on an army to keep its neighbors at bay.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Please bookmark this thread if you enjoyed it!


Thread Tools
Display Modes



Forum Jump

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:09.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.