Hi Jacob Snyder; Re: "By the time the U.S. entered the war in 1917, the French were on the verge of collapse. ..."
Humans have a very strong tendency to make prosaic events dramatic by reinterpreting the facts in such a way as to make the issue seem in doubt. That they do this with history where every fool knows what the ending is (as opposed to just in fiction), is partial proof of the tendency. But there is another tendency, and that is to build up the strength or abilities of the enemy, after he is defeated. This makes the victory that more impressive. Despite the fact that the Indians in the US were regularly slaughtered by desperately outnumbered US forces, it is still widely believed that the Indians were the world's best light cavalry. Total BS.
Given these tendencies, we should look carefully at historical analyses that suggest that Germany almost won WW1, or would have won without the US intervention.
(1) The French mutiny. The mutinies were in May of 1917. The US did not enter the war until April of that year. The first US troops did not arrive until June 26th 1917, and the numbers were small until June 1918. US troops first saw combat on April 25, 1918, not 1917. Therefore, it is clear that the French forces survived their mutiny for nearly 12 months before US troops were fighting. Here's a cool chart showing the percentage of the front that was manned by Americans, note that the US never manned more than 7% of the front until mid June, 1918:
lib.byu.edu
Also see:
lib.byu.edu
lib.byu.edu
lib.byu.edu
lib.byu.edu
lib.byu.edu
lib.byu.edu
The above data are from this historical source:
lib.byu.edu
(2) On the subject of German advances in 1918. First of all, note that those advances were primarily not against the French, but instead were against the British. And it was the French, primarily, who pushed the Germans back out of the Marne. This is somewhat in contradiction to your point about the French mutiny. Second, if you count up the total allied forces in Europe at that time, the US contingent was not significant.
Yes, the 2 million troops that the US had in Europe by 11/11/1918 was decisive (US plans were to send 5 million troops over), but no, the French were already winning when the US showed up to play, as will be clear when you carefully analyze the manpower and logistical situation.
By late 1917, the German economy was dead and people were beginning to starve. In short, France kept the civilians happy, and their soldiers rebellious, and Germany made the opposite choice. And while you can critique the result, it's as easy to believe that the Germans would have revolution problems in 1919-1920 if not in 1918 if the war had continued that long. It wasn't just the French that rebelled, the Germans did too:
zum.de
-- Carl |
