If the Whites win the Russian Civil War and Russia subsequently slides into authoritarianism at some point in time between 1919 and 1938, as every Central, Eastern, and Southern European country other than Czechoslovakia did in real life, and also decides to wage war against Turkey both to acquire Constantinople and to seek revenge for the Armenian and Greek Genocides during World War I, just how successful would Russia actually be in such a new Russo-Turkish War? Also, would anyone--such as the British, French, and/or Italians--actually be willing to militarily intervene in this war on the Turkish side? I presume that the Germans and Americans won't, the latter due to their relatively recent World War I defeat and the latter due to their isolationism. Is this correct?

Specifically, I was thinking of Russia's goals in such a war being the annexation of all of eastern Anatolia as well as all of northern Anatolia, including Constantinople and the Straits but excluding Ankara. Greece can get western Anatolia south of Constantinople and the Straits if it will enter this war on the Russian side. But central and southern Anatolia will remain Turkish and the new Turkey will have roughly similar borders to those of the Sultanate of Rum in the Middle Ages. At least, this will be Russia's goal in this war.

Anyway, thoughts on this?

On Fri, 18 Jun 2021 17:22:02 -0700 (PDT), WolfBear <m4josh@gmail.com>
wrote:

>Specifically, I was thinking of Russia's goals in such a war being the anne=
>xation of all of eastern Anatolia as well as all of northern Anatolia, incl=
>uding Constantinople and the Straits but excluding Ankara. Greece can get w=
>estern Anatolia south of Constantinople and the Straits if it will enter th=
>is war on the Russian side. But central and southern Anatolia will remain T=
>urkish and the new Turkey will have roughly similar borders to those of the=
> Sultanate of Rum in the Middle Ages. At least, this will be Russia's goal =
>in this war.
>
>Anyway, thoughts on this?

A lot depends on whether Hitler reaches the same conclusions of Russia
that he did of Communist Russia. Because there's no question that
rebuilding Germany into what it was on June 22 1941 was Hitler's #1
objective once he took power. He went several steps beyond merely
"Make Germany Great again!"

WolfBear <m4josh@gmail.com> on Fri, 18 Jun 2021 17:22:02 -0700 (PDT)
typed in alt.history.what-if the following:
>If the Whites win the Russian Civil War and Russia subsequently slides into authoritarianism at some point in time between 1919 and 1938, as every Central, Eastern, and Southern European country other than Czechoslovakia did in real life, and also decides to wage war against Turkey both to acquire Constantinople and to seek revenge for the Armenian and Greek Genocides during World War I, just how successful would Russia actually be in such a new Russo-Turkish War? Also, would anyone--such as the British, French, and/or Italians--actually be willing to militarily intervene in this war on the Turkish side? I presume that the Germans and Americans won't, the latter due to their relatively recent World War I defeat and the latter due to their isolationism. Is this correct?
>
>Specifically, I was thinking of Russia's goals in such a war being the annexation of all of eastern Anatolia as well as all of northern Anatolia, including Constantinople and the Straits but excluding Ankara. Greece can get western Anatolia south of Constantinople and the Straits if it will enter this war on the Russian side. But central and southern Anatolia will remain Turkish and the new Turkey will have roughly similar borders to those of the Sultanate of Rum in the Middle Ages. At least, this will be Russia's goal in this war.
>
>Anyway, thoughts on this?

Russia in 1922 is going to be so broken after eight years of war,
that the idea of starting another war is a non-starter. Even against
the Turks, who will have won their own war of independence. These
aren't your grandfather's Ottomans.

War aims of an expansionist New Tsardom will be as always: restore
Constantinople, and hold the straits.
--
pyotr filipivich
"History rarely repeats herself" is the cliche. In reality she just
lets fly with a frying pan yelling "Why weren't you listening the first time!?"

On Saturday, June 19, 2021 at 8:07:26 AM UTC-7, pyotr filipivich wrote:
> WolfBear <m4j...@gmail.com> on Fri, 18 Jun 2021 17:22:02 -0700 (PDT)
> typed in alt.history.what-if the following:
> >If the Whites win the Russian Civil War and Russia subsequently slides into authoritarianism at some point in time between 1919 and 1938, as every Central, Eastern, and Southern European country other than Czechoslovakia did in real life, and also decides to wage war against Turkey both to acquire Constantinople and to seek revenge for the Armenian and Greek Genocides during World War I, just how successful would Russia actually be in such a new Russo-Turkish War? Also, would anyone--such as the British, French, and/or Italians--actually be willing to militarily intervene in this war on the Turkish side? I presume that the Germans and Americans won't, the latter due to their relatively recent World War I defeat and the latter due to their isolationism. Is this correct?
> >
> >Specifically, I was thinking of Russia's goals in such a war being the annexation of all of eastern Anatolia as well as all of northern Anatolia, including Constantinople and the Straits but excluding Ankara. Greece can get western Anatolia south of Constantinople and the Straits if it will enter this war on the Russian side. But central and southern Anatolia will remain Turkish and the new Turkey will have roughly similar borders to those of the Sultanate of Rum in the Middle Ages. At least, this will be Russia's goal in this war.
> >
> >Anyway, thoughts on this?
> Russia in 1922 is going to be so broken after eight years of war,
> that the idea of starting another war is a non-starter. Even against
> the Turks, who will have won their own war of independence. These
> aren't your grandfather's Ottomans.
>
> War aims of an expansionist New Tsardom will be as always: restore
> Constantinople, and hold the straits.
> --
> pyotr filipivich
> "History rarely repeats herself" is the cliche. In reality she just
> lets fly with a frying pan yelling "Why weren't you listening the first time!?"

That's why this war should take place around 1942 rather than in 1922. That's 20 years for Russia to rebuild.

On 6/18/21 7:22 PM, WolfBear wrote:

> just how successful would Russia actually be in such a new Russo-Turkish War?

When does it happen? And how long was the Russian Civil War?

Does *Russia hold Ukraine, Georgia, or Armenia?

If the war is in 1935, IMO Russia can overwhelm Turkey.

But then everyone thought Italy could overwhelm Greece.
--
Nous sommes dans une pot de chambre, et nous y serons emmerdés.
--- General Auguste-Alexandre Ducrot at Sedan, 1870.

On Sat, 19 Jun 2021 10:54:01 -0700 (PDT), WolfBear <m4josh@gmail.com>
wrote:

>That's why this war should take place around 1942 rather than in 1922. That=
>'s 20 years for Russia to rebuild.

Hitler would be ecstatic if this happened say in 1940 BEFORE the
German invasion of Russia. It would ensure Russia got to face Hitler
without allies and that Turkey would join the Axis.

Those German mountain climbers who climbed Elbrus? They'd be climbing
from the SOUTH....

On Saturday, June 19, 2021 at 2:53:07 PM UTC-7, Rich Rostrom wrote:
> On 6/18/21 7:22 PM, WolfBear wrote:
>
> > just how successful would Russia actually be in such a new Russo-Turkish War?
> When does it happen?

Sometime between 1935 and 1950?

> And how long was the Russian Civil War?
>

About the same length as in real life?

> Does *Russia hold Ukraine, Georgia, or Armenia?
>

Yes.

> If the war is in 1935, IMO Russia can overwhelm Turkey.
>

And in 1950, even more so? Assuming that nukes aren't developed yet, of course.

> But then everyone thought Italy could overwhelm Greece.

Yep.

> --
> Nous sommes dans une pot de chambre, et nous y serons emmerdés.
> --- General Auguste-Alexandre Ducrot at Sedan, 1870.

The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca> on Sat, 19 Jun 2021 18:28:45 -0700
typed in alt.history.what-if the following:
>On Sat, 19 Jun 2021 10:54:01 -0700 (PDT), WolfBear <m4josh@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>That's why this war should take place around 1942 rather than in 1922. That=
>>'s 20 years for Russia to rebuild.
>
>Hitler would be ecstatic if this happened say in 1940 BEFORE the
>German invasion of Russia. It would ensure Russia got to face Hitler
>without allies and that Turkey would join the Axis.

That is assuming, of course, that Hitler is able to come to power
without the threat posed by Jewish Bolshevism.
>
>Those German mountain climbers who climbed Elbrus? They'd be climbing
>from the SOUTH....
--
pyotr filipivich
"History rarely repeats herself" is the cliche. In reality she just
lets fly with a frying pan yelling "Why weren't you listening the first time!?"

On 6/19/21 8:28 PM, The Horny Goat wrote:
> Hitler would be ecstatic if this happened say in 1940 BEFORE the
> German invasion of Russia.

If Russia is White, then Hitler almost certainly never comes to power.

--
Nous sommes dans une pot de chambre, et nous y serons emmerdés.
--- General Auguste-Alexandre Ducrot at Sedan, 1870.

On Monday, June 21, 2021 at 4:08:24 PM UTC-7, Rich Rostrom wrote:
> On 6/19/21 8:28 PM, The Horny Goat wrote:
> > Hitler would be ecstatic if this happened say in 1940 BEFORE the
> > German invasion of Russia.
> If Russia is White, then Hitler almost certainly never comes to power.
> --
> Nous sommes dans une pot de chambre, et nous y serons emmerdés.
> --- General Auguste-Alexandre Ducrot at Sedan, 1870.

The Great Depression will still be there, but the Communist fear won't be anywhere near as severe. I do wonder what the German Communists are going to do without Communists being in power in Russia. Are they going to rejoin the German Social Democrats? Because if so, then the German Social Democrats will find it significantly easier to form an anti-Nazi coalition even at the height/peak of the Great Depression in this TL.

In real life, an anti-Nazi coalition in 1932-1933 was impossible because Nazis plus Communists literally controlled a majority of the German parliament.

On Mon, 21 Jun 2021 18:08:22 -0500, Rich Rostrom
<rrostrom@comcast.net> wrote:

>On 6/19/21 8:28 PM, The Horny Goat wrote:
>> Hitler would be ecstatic if this happened say in 1940 BEFORE the
>> German invasion of Russia.
>
>If Russia is White, then Hitler almost certainly never comes to power.

I suppose that's going to depend on what the KPD (Kommunist Partei
Deutschland) does. Burning down the Reichstag with a good party
comrade NOT certifiably insane would definitely help the Brown cause
vs the Red Cause.

I suppose you are thinking something like the DBTL (Dead Baby
Timeline) which in my opinion was a DNVP (Deutsche National
Volkspartei - Hitler's main rival on the right) fantasy and if I
recall correctly led to a war in the 1940s with Germany as the chief
protagonist.

On Mon, 21 Jun 2021 16:12:07 -0700 (PDT), WolfBear <m4josh@gmail.com>
wrote:

>In real life, an anti-Nazi coalition in 1932-1933 was impossible because Na=
>zis plus Communists literally controlled a majority of the German parliamen=
>t.

Well more to the point that the ONLY way to get an anti-Nazi coalition
would require the support of nearly every party BUT the Nazis but if
you can plausibly arrange a KPD / DNVP coalition (and I don't know how
you get an anti-Nazi majority coalition without both of those) - well
then you're a better man than I Gunga Din!!!

If anything the DNVP hated the KPD even more than Hitler.

On 6/21/21 6:12 PM, WolfBear wrote:
> The Great Depression will still be there, but the Communist fear
> won't be anywhere near as severe. I do wonder what the German
> Communists are going to do without Communists being in power in
> Russia.
"Communism" as we know it will never exist. There will be no
"Third International".

Also,the Great Depression may be considerably altered if
Russia remains part of the global capitalist economy.

--
Nous sommes dans une pot de chambre, et nous y serons emmerdés.
--- General Auguste-Alexandre Ducrot at Sedan, 1870.

On Wednesday, June 23, 2021 at 12:17:44 PM UTC-7, Rich Rostrom wrote:
> On 6/21/21 6:12 PM, WolfBear wrote:
> > The Great Depression will still be there, but the Communist fear
> > won't be anywhere near as severe. I do wonder what the German
> > Communists are going to do without Communists being in power in
> > Russia.
> "Communism" as we know it will never exist. There will be no
> "Third International".
>

Would radical socialists still view Lenin's failed attempt as an inspiration, though?

> Also,the Great Depression may be considerably altered if
> Russia remains part of the global capitalist economy.

Any specific effects in regards to this? Greater amounts of food and raw materials being produced? What else?

> --
> Nous sommes dans une pot de chambre, et nous y serons emmerdés.
> --- General Auguste-Alexandre Ducrot at Sedan, 1870.

On 6/23/21 3:43 PM, WolfBear wrote:
>> "Communism" as we know it will never exist. There will be no
>> "Third International".
>>
> Would radical socialists still view Lenin's failed attempt
> as an inspiration, though?

Not particularly; no more than the Paris Commune.

And there would be no organizational split. The Socialist
International was a "big tent", which included moderate,
strictly "parliamentarist" parties such as Britain's Labour
Party, and parties with revolutionist wings, such as Russia's
Social Democrats.

If there was no successful revolutionary socialist state,
the revolutionists would remain a minority faction in the
larger socialist movement.

--
Nous sommes dans une pot de chambre, et nous y serons emmerdés.
--- General Auguste-Alexandre Ducrot at Sedan, 1870.

On Thursday, June 24, 2021 at 3:19:02 PM UTC-7, Rich Rostrom wrote:
> On 6/23/21 3:43 PM, WolfBear wrote:
> >> "Communism" as we know it will never exist. There will be no
> >> "Third International".
> >>
> > Would radical socialists still view Lenin's failed attempt
> > as an inspiration, though?
> Not particularly; no more than the Paris Commune.
>
> And there would be no organizational split. The Socialist
> International was a "big tent", which included moderate,
> strictly "parliamentarist" parties such as Britain's Labour
> Party, and parties with revolutionist wings, such as Russia's
> Social Democrats.
>
> If there was no successful revolutionary socialist state,
> the revolutionists would remain a minority faction in the
> larger socialist movement.
> --
> Nous sommes dans une pot de chambre, et nous y serons emmerdés.
> --- General Auguste-Alexandre Ducrot at Sedan, 1870.

Interesting. So, even if Hitler and the Nazis still become prominent in Germany in this TL, a much more unified left-wing socialist force would block their rose to power in 1933?

Also, as a side question: Just how many Slavs do you think would actually be willing to move to Anatolia in the event that Russia would have successfully conquered all of it (other than the Kurdish parts in the southeast) in the early or mid-20th century?

On Thu, 1 Jul 2021 19:22:51 -0700 (PDT), WolfBear <m4josh@gmail.com>
wrote:

>Interesting. So, even if Hitler and the Nazis still become prominent in Ger=
>many in this TL, a much more unified left-wing socialist force would block =
>their rose to power in 1933?

Barring a massive shift in German politics 1925-33 you DON'T get a
cohesive anti-Nazi coalition without BOTH the KPD and DNVP (German
Communist party and German National Peoples Party which was strongly
nationalist and if anything further right than Hitler but not as well
organized) Given party strengths in 1930-33 you DO need 2 of those 3
parties (Nazi, KPD and DNVP) to make a majority coalition.

In my opinion a coalition involving both those parties is as likely as
an AOC-Trump coalition in the present day.

Also in my opinion the ONLY way you get such a coalition would be a
'government of national salvation' in the immediate aftermath of
Hitler's assassination where things come dramatically apart within the
Nazi party. Anybody with an alternate way is welcome to suggest it.

(But I wasn't kidding about AOC and Trump)

On Saturday, July 3, 2021 at 9:25:47 AM UTC-7, The Horny Goat wrote:
> On Thu, 1 Jul 2021 19:22:51 -0700 (PDT), WolfBear <m4j...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >Interesting. So, even if Hitler and the Nazis still become prominent in Ger=
> >many in this TL, a much more unified left-wing socialist force would block =
> >their rose to power in 1933?
> Barring a massive shift in German politics 1925-33 you DON'T get a
> cohesive anti-Nazi coalition without BOTH the KPD and DNVP (German
> Communist party and German National Peoples Party which was strongly
> nationalist and if anything further right than Hitler but not as well
> organized) Given party strengths in 1930-33 you DO need 2 of those 3
> parties (Nazi, KPD and DNVP) to make a majority coalition.
>
> In my opinion a coalition involving both those parties is as likely as
> an AOC-Trump coalition in the present day.
>
> Also in my opinion the ONLY way you get such a coalition would be a
> 'government of national salvation' in the immediate aftermath of
> Hitler's assassination where things come dramatically apart within the
> Nazi party. Anybody with an alternate way is welcome to suggest it.
>
> (But I wasn't kidding about AOC and Trump)

Could the composition of the German parliament in the 1930s have been somewhat different had Wilhelm Marx won the German Presidency back in 1925, though?