Balancing In WW1?

Question

So I am aware that American involvement in WW1 clearly shaped the outcome of the war. But what strategic decisions did Germany make in balancing the Russian front against the prospect of American intervention in the west?

no i mean ww1

Answer 1

They sent Lenin there.
However, since the first US troop did not arrive on the front until July 1918, after the Russian revolution, they did not have to worry about that.

Answer 2

As far as strategic decisions Germany made in balancing the eastern front against the prospect of American intervention in the west, none really had to do with the Americans at all but were part of a consistent plan early on by the German high ranking staff.

Von Falkenhayn, unlike the Allies, had a pretty good understanding of the difference between a goal and an objective. Early on he concluded along with Von Moltke the Elder that the war would be long and no big hammer would be enough to crush the opposite side. What was important then was to minimize as much as possible the civilian tole in Germany. This meant low casualty rates, keeping Alsace, and keeping East Prussia.
While some thought the war would be won in the East, such as Hindenburg and Ludendorf, and a quick plan to destroy the Allies in the west ( Schlieffen Plan) was needed in accordance to taking the war eastward eventually into Russia, Van Falkenhayn thought however to sap the moral out of the French army by taking significant objectives one at a time, such as the Verdun fortifications. To Hindenburg and Ludendorfs dismay, attacking Russia was never a priority. Since Von Falkenhayn had the support of the Kaiser early on, and the kaiser hated both of those men, Von Falkenhayn's strategy was followed.

The German plan had been to allow the French to bleed themselves against German defensive positions for no real objective value while they would slowly but surely seize important objective targets and take out the French's civilian leadership's will to fight ( This is what exactly did happen in WW2). This strategy worked the entire war, until American Marines stopped the German advance and retook the Belleau Wood in the Marne that the Germans were now faced with an entire new army of men to have to wait to bleed out. It could no longer dare to take small offensive operations to demoralize the French since now the Americans were the ones who were going to do most of the hard labour.

The Russian front was never assigned strategic importance as far as overall plan to win the war. The east was limited to holding East Prussia. The western staretgy for the Germans remained the same through out for the most part, and like you mentioned, without American boots on the ground would have certainly outright won the war by the end of 1918. Coincidentally, early on at the Battle of Tennenberg in East Prussia, Von Falkenhayn had sent 4 cavalry divisions to support the Eastern defensive, at ironically Ludendorfs protest (for once that guy wanted those troops to remain in the west for the Shlieffen plan). The divisions didnt make it in time anyways, and had he actually left them in the west, Schlieffen's plan might have actually knock the Allies out before 1915.

Answer 3

The american involvement came towards the end. When the russians surrendered the germans transferred troops to the west for a final push, not realizing that the Spanish Flu was also being transferred. The entire german army was so decimated by the Spanish Flu that they could no longer fight so the surrender came about; the troops from all the various nations engaged in the conflict returned home worldwide and carried the flu virus with them; thus the Spanish Flu spread world wide and killed in excess of forty million people, probably more; the total is unknown due to poor communications and yada. Mother Nature killed more people in six months than mankind did in four years of fighting; it isn't nice to fool with Mother Nature.

Answer 4

None that I am aware of. By the time the USA seemed likely to become a combatant, Russia was to all intents and purposes out of the war.

Answer 5

I'm no great historian - but do you mean WW2??