99 years ago today history was being made on a small river in France...

[Eurodriver]

Germany's goal in World War I was to invade France through Belgium (The Schlieffen plan) and encircle Paris within a month. This would lead to a quick western front victory and thus Germany could focus all of its efforts on the Eastern front.

Fortunately for the French, they discovered a vulnerable German flank and decided to attack. On September 5th, 1914 after hussling French troops that were reserved for guarding Paris into battle with the aid of 600 taxi cabs the battle erupted along the Marne River in France. If the Allies lost this battle France would have been lost and it would have been a repeat of 1871. If Germany lost...you get 4 years of trench warfare followed by harsh reparations and World War II.

A great piece on the entire outbreak of World War I is "The Guns of August" by Barbara Tuchman. It should be required reading in schools. I'm sure most of you have read it. This is the ending few paragraphs.

Entering the Operations Room to confirm a decision already taken, Joffre said to the assembled offcers, "Gentlemen, we will fight on the Marne."

He signed the order that would be read to the troops when the bugles blew the next morning. Ordinarily the French language, especially in public pronouncements, requires an effort if it is not to sound splendid, but this time the words were flat, almost tired; the message hard and uncompromising: " Now, as the battle is joined on which the safety of the country depends, everyone must be reminded that this is no longer the time for looking back. Every effort must be made to attack and throw back the enemy. A unit which finds it impossible to advance must, regardless of cost, hold its ground and be killed on the spot rather than fall back. In the present cirumstances no failure will be tolerated."

That was all; the time for splender was past. It did not shout "Forward!" or summon men to glory. After the first thirty days of war in 1914, there was a premonition that little glory lay ahead.

It's pretty amazing to think that this seems so far removed from our consciousness but it was less than a century ago. Sometimes I wonder if Germany had won this battle and defeated the French how history would have changed. We certainly would not have got World War II. We might not have even gotten the Soviet Union. Were it not for Joffre's attack at that pivotal moment could the U.S.A. still be a relatively agricultural nobody?

[Safetyhit]

It's pretty amazing to think that this seems so far removed from our consciousness but it was less than a century ago.

We tend to think that the world has changed so much since then and perhaps it has, but fundamentally it's just as volatile and dysfunctional as ever. Only real difference is the technology.

[Ick]

Wait one minute, is France an actual country? I thought it was the name of a fake place they use in the movies like Sloravia or a reference like "The Dutch Capes."

Do or did they actually have a military that fought in wars and stuff?

I can't see where the USA would be an agricultural nobody as a result of a failure of that attack. The wheels of industry were already turning in that direction, perhaps unstoppable at that point. Certainly so much industry effort wouldn't have been used to create machines of war through the entire century... but production would have increased naturally. I don't think a turn in WWI would have changed that to leave the USA an un-industrialized agricultural society.

[SteyrAUG]

Sometimes I wonder if Germany had won this battle and defeated the French how history would have changed. We certainly would not have got World War II. We might not have even gotten the Soviet Union. Were it not for Joffre's attack at that pivotal moment could the U.S.A. still be a relatively agricultural nobody?

While we may have been spared a few specific horrors of WWII, rest assured that something almost equally as appalling would have happened. With a German victory in 1914 the UK and US fascination with socialism and eugenics could have spread like a plague across the world resulting on socialist super states the like of which Orwell couldn't have imagined as early as 1950.

What I have learned from history is while changing small variable would likely prevent this or that specific event, humanity will still find itself right back on the road to some new disaster despite the minor detour.

[Pork Chop]

Being a WWII enthusiast, I don't think it would've changed much. The seeds of WWII in the pacific were sewn already when WWI was taking place.
There is the argument that nazi-ism was born in the armistice of WWI, but German aggression would've eventually been dealt with, regardless.

It may have looked a little differently on maps and in books today, but the gist of it wouldn't have changed much i don't think.

It is an interesting question though, for sure.

[Gutshot John]

Tuchman has always been one of my favorite historians. I actually got a chance to meet her briefly a few months before she died. I was only in HS but she was a big reason that I pursued academic history as an adult.

Do or did they actually have a military that fought in wars and stuff?

Don't believe the American mythology about saving France twice. Having known quite a few French Marines and Legionnaires I can tell you without hesitation that they are some very tough bastards, known for making valorous last stands.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Monongahela (for something close to your neck of the woods)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Camar%C3%B3n
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Dien_Bien_Phu

They revolutionized warfare many times over before there even was a USA, more to the point, there wouldn't be a USA without the French military. Going back to the Gauls and Francs were well known as extremely effective guerrilla and conventional fighters, likewise the Maquis eviscerated the Germans during the Occupation and were it not for their help D-Day would have likely been a failure.

[SteyrAUG]

Being a WWII enthusiast, I don't think it would've changed much. The seeds of WWII in the pacific were sewn already when WWI was taking place.

Japan expected colonial rewards for participating on the allied side of that war. If Japan had been given sources of raw materials the Pacific War would not have happened.

If there was no WWI, it is almost a certainty that Imperial Japan would have sought raw materials one way or another.

[Gutshot John]

Japan expected colonial rewards for participating on the allied side of that war. If Japan had been given sources of raw materials the Pacific War would not have happened.

Not really, WWII (Pacific) would have happened, what is more likely is that America would not have gotten involved. Japan was already in China, and certainly had ambitions to intrude upon British, French and American possessions. They wanted the Eastern hemisphere as their own empire.

FDR instigated Pearl Harbor as an excuse to go after Germany by embargoing oil and other natural resources..

[Army Chief]

I suppose it is interesting, if near-impossible, to consider how a Imperial German rule of the Continent would have played-out differently to the Third Reich rule that followed. It is tempting to over-simplify things, but I'm not sure that a win by Germany would have left much impetus for the discontent that led to National Socialism -- and all that came with it.

What I'm missing here is an answer to the rather fundamental question of what Germany's aims were in the Great War to begin with. I don't recall any overt expansionist aims. They did have a point, didn't they?

AC

[SteyrAUG]

Not really, WWII would have happened, what is more likely is that America would not have gotten involved.

FDR instigated Pearl Harbor as an excuse to go after Germany by embargoing oil and other natural resources..

The Pacific War would have still happened, most likely without us. But if Germany defeated France in 1914 I don't think there would have been another European war for us to get into.