I personally prefer the internal colapse theroy, but am not a rabid fan of it as some are
Is that a major point there? I always shy away from large established TLs becuase I generaly don't want a large read when I go looking for something. Then again, I complain when a TL isn't done because I want an update
.
A long while since I read it but it involved a successful Gallipoli. As a result less fronts for the allies and better communication between the western allies and Russia. Also a very dangerous situation for Austria in the Balkans as very unlikely to get Bulgaria or anyone else join the central powers.
Your mentioned a couple of other possibilities, i.e. internal collapse and problems with nitrate supplies.
Another one I've thought about is if France doesn't switch to Plan XVII. Instead of dashing into the teeth of the German fortresses in A-L they stick with the plan of meeting the main German thrust through Belgium. Especially if at least some of the French realise fairly quickly the advantage of digging in the German army is in for a very, very rough time. Its committed to attacking, not just its own cult of the offensive but simply because of the entire German plan is to win in the west before Russia fully mobilises. As such your likely to see far, far larger German losses for minimal gains in terms of territory and strategic position. The French will take some heavy losses but probably no higher than OTL and maintain much of their territorial integrity and industrial heartland. With the main French armies further north you might also see the BEF go to Antwerp and as a result much of Flanders held, further compounding German problems.
A later possibility might be that after Karl becomes emperor of Austria his approaches for peace lead to a deal with the allies which sees Austria leave the war relatively undamaged territorially. Germany would then be pretty much forced to make peace.
Alternatively have the allied powers just generally perform a bit better and wear the Germans down somewhat faster and you could still get a German collapse without US military involvement.
An alternative to a successful Gallipoli is that the other Young Turks manage to sit on Enhva Pasha and prevent him dragging them into a war that I think few of them wanted. This would mean that the allies would again be able to use the straits for supplies between Russia and the west and avoid fighting on the various fronts with the Turks.
There are plenty of options for an allied victory without US intervention. Barring a lot of look or a flash or two of brilliance somewhere its going to be tough but not impossible.
I think the key reason why most people who look at WWI without the US think of a central powers victory is because they don't realise how desperate the last lunge from Germany was and how near collapse it was in so many ways. Hence they assume that without the US, who's involvement is generally over-estimated, possibly because it was so vastly more important in WWII, the allies will lose.
Steve
