No war on Netherlands?

[USSLockwood]

I'm probably missing it, but it seems that the CP cannot declare war on the Netherlands? Is this correct? Rotterdam is worth 10 vp and there are resources available there which make it a tempting target.

[hjaco]

No, CP can declare war on the Netherlands but it really pisses off other neutrals. Bad enough with repercussions from Belgium but if you are really unlucky Italy could be in the war against you in no time.

Besides initially it will only draw away valuable assets from your assault on France and you need everything in your arsenal to stand a chance of taking them down.

If you really are the aggressive type then consider taking out Romania in 1915 when Bulgaria enters in order to outflank a possible strong Russian line. You will have to fight them eventually and they will more or less solve your food problem.

[Ironclad]

Its a useful corrective for all the Schlieffen fanboys to recall that it was the much criticised Von Moltke who tidied up the plan for the Western offensive (and retained an essential neutral conduit) by abandoning his predecessor's intention to attack France through Holland as well as Belgium. Just one of the many improvements that Von Moltke introduced that made the plan more achievable - even if his later execution of it failed in part through his lack of operational control/focus and loss of nerve.

[hjaco]

Not to say that the Schlieffen plan - also the original one, demanded a number of troops which German never was near to possess. To be fair though Moltke shifted troop strength from the already understrength right wing to the west wing which didn't help.

But the point being that Germany didn't even possess enough troops to execute the Schlieffen plan properly even with not violating dutch neutrality.

[Ironclad]

I can never understand how Schlieffen could plan a war with more units than would be available to him or indeed his successor until some nine years after he retired. It does raise the thought that he treated it more like a theoretical exercise in perfection than something that might have to be put into effect immediately. Although even a half plan would have done for 1906 if war had occurred when Russia was impotent after losing to Japan.

Its a fair point about Moltke's failure to concentrate forces on the critical right, although whether they could have been supplied is another matter. A more critical dispersal may have been the despatch of unnecessary reonforcements to the east (his first loss of nerve?)and use of regular units to besiege Antwerp.

[hjaco]

I agree with you about the supply issue. On that matter the plan was ahead of its time as logistics beyond own borders was simply not been that developed yet.

[Ironclad]

I was very impressed with Van Crevald's analysis on the logistics of the plan in his book Supplying War. In it he points out that Schlieffen didn't reveal how his invading forces could be supplied (other than taking out Belgium/part Holland and their railways), that Molke did try and address the issue but in the event the advancing troops just lived off the land like the German forces forty years earlier. Meanwhile the speed of the advance left them exhausted by the time the Marne battle commenced.

Edit: Apologies doktor for hijacking your thread.

[hjaco]

ORIGINAL: Ironclad

I can never understand how Schlieffen could plan a war with more units than would be available to him or indeed his successor until some nine years after he retired. It does raise the thought that he treated it more like a theoretical exercise in perfection than something that might have to be put into effect immediately. Although even a half plan would have done for 1906 if war had occurred when Russia was impotent after losing to Japan.

The original plan as it was which were designed after the crushing victory against France in 1870 was more yet another table top plan in a hypothetical war although against the most probable and dangerous foe. The consensus at that time was that a French rematch was a very futuristic matter so i sense you are right in your estimate that it was more theoretical biased than realistic in design.

From a German point of view there was no doubt that they should have taken the war in 1906 - wasn't it the Morocco incident at that time ? The Dreyfuss affair happened around the same time but my memory is a bit rusty right now [;)]

[USSLockwood]

Oops. It's called Holland, my bad. I was thinking of Denmark. Hey! Why can't I declare war on Denmark?

[hjaco]

Hey - i am a Dane !

Well what do you as the Kaiser want in Denmark anyway - you took half of Jutland in 1864 [;)]