Well…That’s what my turkey freakin head thinks all the time: “Considering someone as just useful? Something quite evil in mind.”
There’d be mass resistance by the same right-wing Freikorps that caused so much trouble for the Weimar Republic in our world as well - and chances are, they’d be the guys in charge once the Soviet logistical backbone finally broke.
So not a better world in the least.
There’s nothing “just” about useful. Useful means that the power in question actually might consider policies favorable to the “useful” country worth something, because there’s actually some reason to bother.
Useful countries gets subsidies (for a Napoleonic Wars example).
Life is like that buddy, i bet their was some Frenchies who wanted Germany to be broken apart like Ottoman but Britian decided it be better to keep Germany intact and a buffer to the commies
You mean the Lesser German States and the Italian Kingdoms?
I’m pretty sure “Or Austria, Prussia, and Russia.”
Austria was an extremely useful country in the Napoleonic Wars, after all.
Or get to pay less than 2.0% of their GDP into their defence budgets (to use a modern one).
“The British will fight Napoleon until the last drop of Russian, Prussian, and Austrian blood.”
There are of course downsides from what you’ve said, but it beats being someone an imperial power doesn’t value as “useful”.
Ask Studwick whether or not Denmark having a decent navy was considered “useful” enough to be worth being friendly to.
Denmark suffered from “poor strategic location syndrome” and had no friends to help them.
Or more useful as an appendage as opposed to merely an ally.
Or some kind of geopolitical karmic revenge for all the money they made off the Øresund tolls.
A bad as those guys are at least none of them were as mad or crazy as Hitler in terms of lets kill a whole race or try to. But I not sure, Weimar republic era not really my favorite era.
Well thank Brave Poland for kicking ass and saving the day.
The Right-wing paramilitaries formed the backbone of the SA and then SS.
So they were pretty bad.
“What’s the difference?”
“If your leaders can say that about the Empire without being replaced by the Empire, it probably doesn’t consider you a mere appendage.”
IIRC, Bonaparte actually wanted to use the Danish Royal Navy to oppose the Royal Navy’s supremacy in Europe, as part of the means of part of his plans of invading the British isles.
The difference is one is a valued friend and ally while the other is a lesser partner who dies in Gallipoli.
I actually have a pretty soft spot for the Weimar Republic. If it weren’t for the Depression, and a chronic lack of left unity, it could have probably managed to fully recover as a Great Power - not to mention one whose social policies and mores were far ahead of its time (disgust with government tolerance for “deviants” among German conservatives was one of the reasons why they gave the Nazis so much support).
But wasn’t it mostly Hitler who decided lets murder all the jews and ordered those camps.
Sadly that could had all been avoid if he was just accepted into art school or killed in that gass attacked
Agreed! A Monarchical Federal solution á la the German Empire might be a good political blueprint moving forward. Of course we have to invent a source of inherent “Northerness” as cultural cohesion, and Aetoria is not Prussia and might therefore be in danger of being eclipsed if we accept larger centralized neighbours.
I would love to believe that, if only for it to mean that the British really have it coming.
I think so.
It was not in Britain’s interests for Denmark to have a decent navy.