10 interpretations of who started WW1

[Ed Anger]

Japan had no one to attack historically. In this situation she has the Russian Far East and their Manchurian sphere of influence in her sights.

Wow that would have been a disaster for Japan.  Attacking across hundreds of miles in desolate conditions with a tenuous supply line?  I think the Russians know to handle that one.

you forget that in Tim's scenario japan has steam powered mechas.

Schoolgirl steam powered mechas

[Razgovory]

I wonder if it would have been possible to create a demilitarized zone in the Alsace-Lorraine, make it an autonomous self governing part of the German empire and get a bunch of the great powers to sign a treaty that claims if someone invades the area with an army, that all the signatories would declare war on the aggressor power.

Remember when they did that with Belgium?  Worked great.  But yeah Germany screwed up again here but not making Alsace-Lorraine an equal member of the German Empire.  Instead it was...some bizarre category 'Reichsland'.  They would have been better served playing up a separate Alsace-Lorraine identity.

It worked quite well with Belgium.  When Belgium was invaded Brittan came to her aid.  The German military could not get it through their thick skulls that people would in fact honor treaties.

[Eddie Teach]

Everybody thought the war would be short though.

Japan had no one to attack historically. In this situation she has the Russian Far East and their Manchurian sphere of influence in her sights.

Say Japan conquers Manchuria, or even Vladivostok. How does that affect Russia's ability to wage war in the west?

[jimmy olsen]

Japan had no one to attack historically. In this situation she has the Russian Far East and their Manchurian sphere of influence in her sights.

Wow that would have been a disaster for Japan.  Attacking across hundreds of miles in desolate conditions with a tenuous supply line?  I think the Russians know to handle that one.

They did okay just ten years ago, and this time Russia would be fighting the Austrians and probably the Ottomans as well.

[Solmyr]

Japan had no one to attack historically. In this situation she has the Russian Far East and their Manchurian sphere of influence in her sights.

Wow that would have been a disaster for Japan.  Attacking across hundreds of miles in desolate conditions with a tenuous supply line?  I think the Russians know to handle that one.

They did okay just ten years ago, and this time Russia would be fighting the Austrians and probably the Ottomans as well.

They were getting horribly overextended in Manchuria, and Russia still had lots of reserves to bring to the war. The only reason Japan won was the 1905 revolution.

[Neil]

Japan had no one to attack historically. In this situation she has the Russian Far East and their Manchurian sphere of influence in her sights.

Wow that would have been a disaster for Japan.  Attacking across hundreds of miles in desolate conditions with a tenuous supply line?  I think the Russians know to handle that one.

They did okay just ten years ago, and this time Russia would be fighting the Austrians and probably the Ottomans as well.

They were getting horribly overextended in Manchuria, and Russia still had lots of reserves to bring to the war. The only reason Japan won was the 1905 revolution.

Well, Russia had suffered a series of huge defeats, and they were being encouraged to seek terms.  This wasn't a total war, after all, and Tsushima really ended the Russian ability to put pressure on Japan.  But Japan would have been bankrupt had the war continued, and it doesn't seem likely that they could contribute meaningfully other than annihilating the Russian Pacific Squadron and seizing Vladivostok and environs.  And even that wouldn't be a big deal, since while Vladivostok would be the Russian port that would be most difficult for the Allies (sans Japan) to blockade, it is also the port that would be the least useful in supplying Russia's needs.