Entente landing in Belgium in WW1?

[I WUB PUGS]

We got this.

[DarthShizNit]

So you expect them to land 300,000 men completely unopposed in a hostile territory and then somehow out maneuver the Germans when the Germans would have had every logistical advantage?

[Condottiere 40K]

Law of intended consequences: the Germans won't be able to use the Channel coast as staging areas for submarines.

[TWWolfe]

Gallipoli nearly destroyed CHurchill's Career, and that battle was in a (relatively) fr way theater. you try something like that and get it pinned down and destroyed so close to home, things are going to go very badly for whoever decided it would be a good idea.

[Love Mountain]

An army that has next to zero experience in amphibious warfare is just as bad as actual zero experience. I mean what the hell are you gonna do if Germans pin you? There's no way to extract hundred thousands of men quickly. Such a proposal would be utterly insane during that time period and rightly so.

[I WUB PUGS]

So you expect them to land 300,000 men completely unopposed in a hostile territory and then somehow out maneuver the Germans when the Germans would have had every logistical advantage?

Meh, I would feint. 300,000 on Ships and land maybe 100k and get the Germans to bite hard. As soon as I see the Germans forming up I withdraw my 100k in the night under the cover of my superior naval guns and I would have already steamed south with the other 200k who would be a reserve for the new offensive in France.

And that whooooooooooooooooooooooooosh sound you hear is...





























​IRONY

[TWWolfe]

and where are you getting these "superior" naval guns? WWI era germany actually had a very capable navy. Fighting them by the coast would let the germans use thier land guns in support, precisely the type of scenario the germans wanted as it would have allowed them to nullify the numerical superiority of the RN. and they'll be a very short distance from the HSF's main base at Kiel. Gallipoli they could at least justify with trying to get supplies to russia. this idea, on the other hand...

[✠Ikaroqx✠]

300,000 troops was just an example. I didn't mean it literally.
However, would a landing have been possible and successful after March 1918 when the German armies were demoralising and American troops were arriving in Europe in increasing numbers?

[Erebus Pasha]

Moved to Alternate History.

[TWWolfe]

possible, yes. but it still would have been a nightmare, since unlike the German army, the HSF hadn't suffered massive cassualties for years and was still in excelent fighting condition. Since the war could be won without a risky landing, there wouldn't be much point in it.

[✠Ikaroqx✠]

No, I suppose not now.

[I WUB PUGS]

and where are you getting these "superior" naval guns? WWI era germany actually had a very capable navy. Fighting them by the coast would let the germans use thier land guns in support, precisely the type of scenario the germans wanted as it would have allowed them to nullify the numerical superiority of the RN. and they'll be a very short distance from the HSF's main base at Kiel. Gallipoli they could at least justify with trying to get supplies to russia. this idea, on the other hand...

Superior in number...

And they wouldn't be able to nullify the British numerical superiority. Your mixing the HSF's dream of whittling down the RN with limited sorties, mines and torpedo boats with what this scenario actually would be:

300,000 Allied troops landing on the Dutch Coast. Somewhere, which is a very long coast. The Germans would have no better means of logistics than the British, possibly worse if the British were able to take a major port like Rotterdam (may as well just sail into Rotterdam and drop them off at the docks). And if the Dutch flood their lands, it wouldn't be just the British that suffer. Besides, I didn't say they would stay, but they probably could if enough German troops were taken off line and the offensive in France could gain enough ground. The closeness of the Royal Navy would give the troops on the ground substantially more firepower than a reacting German force that would have no comparable firepower unless the HSF sortied.......

If the HSF did sortie then all the better, that would be exactly what the British wanted. It wasn't the RN sitting out the war in port now was it?

This is called causing a panic on one front to create numerical parity or superiority on another. It saved France in 1914 and it was actually a prime goal of the Entente since they actively sought new fronts to spread the Germans thin the entire war!

A feint at the Dutch coast that brings the HSF to battle and takes several divisions out of Belgium/France? You say its stupid, the Allied Command had dreamed of that scenario from the day the trenches started to appear.

Further reading: Politically the Dutch were already in the German corner as they weren't happy with British handling of the Boers. The British also held the country in their grip via tightly regulated trade. The Dutch could only survive on imported food and they had no means to defend themselves from an invasion by either alliance, just flooding themselves. There wasn't a whole lot in the way of British transports sailing into Rotterdam and unloading troops which is a far cry from trying a landing when the proper tools for the job hadn't been invented yet. The British have far more advantage in this scenario than the Germans and the Germans would have to react to their flank being turned, and potentially open roads in Holland would mean a potential stroke at German industrial centers.

[Condottiere 40K]

We know from Jutland that the German Navy escaped by the skin of it's teeth total annihilation, and they knew it too, which was why they never came out again looking for trouble. If a landing would lure them out to where the Grand Fleet could get at them long enough, the landing would have been worth it, as the RN could then divert resources from corking up the Germans to other areas more productive.

[hellheaven1987]

If a landing would lure them out to where the Grand Fleet could get at them long enough, the landing would have been worth it, as the RN could then divert resources from corking up the Germans to other areas more productive.

Ya, probably spend another two hundreds thousands lives to achieve that.

[Condottiere 40K]

Who said they would? Having control of the Channel, the British could supply their troops, while the Germans would fear being outflanked, with their positions in northern France being squeezed out like a pimple.

[I WUB PUGS]

squeezed out like a pimple.

Come on man, I don't need that visual.

[hellheaven1987]

Who said they would? Having control of the Channel, the British could supply their troops, while the Germans would fear being outflanked, with their positions in northern France being squeezed out like a pimple.

And? What made it different than what already happened in France, where British could also supply their troops and tried to squeeze German by throwing hundreds thousands men to German gun point?

German could simply build a new trench on that front with the newly relief force from eastern theatre and British were checked.

[Dromikaites]

As many people have already explained, the option of landing a large enough force (one which would really create serious problems to the Germans) was judged impossible given the circumstances.

What I want to add is the technologies of WW1 were another serious obstacle to any rapid advance, starting right at the beaches. Even in case of a cooperating Dutch government, it would have been very difficult to unload and transport a large expeditionary force (the size would have needed to be comparable with the Normandy landings on D-Day) plus the supplies faster than the Germans could react.

I'll list several important obstacles:

1) The capacity of the Duch rail. Did they have enough capacity to service the Entente while in the same time keeping their economy running and their own population fed? Given the Dutch rail was designed for...Dutch needs, a massive Entente landing might have choked it.

2) The network of roads and railways. Was it complex enough to confuse the Germans with multiple possible exit points? Turns out the answer is a resounding NO. The Germans knew where to expect the expeditionary force exiting the Netherlands (only a handful major roads and railroads connecting the Dutch territory with Belgium and Germany).

On the other hand the Germans had both roads and railroads running from one potential exit point to another, so as soon as they could figure out which were the real attacks coming out of Dutch territory and which were diversions, they could quickly shift troops and ammo where needed.

So the battle would have looked like the Entente convoys stringing along a road or railroad Market-Garden-style while the Germans would be converging on the exit point from all directions. Market-Garden failed in face of a way less stronger German force than what could have been fielded by WW1 Germany.

[Condottiere 40K]

I'd go for it: if the Netherlands joined the Axis, the British would then have an excuse to take over the remaining Dutch colonies.