Hey guys,

This is something that has been puzzling me. When the Schlieffen plan was concieved, it was intended that there be an army group of about 15-20% of the german army on the lower part of Germany, to hold back any French asault after the other 85-80% of the army drove in a quick jab through Belgium to conquer Paris, thus crippling France in one decisive attack. However, this plan when it was concieved sometime in the 1880's (I think) was changed from it's original form in 1914, when WWI actually began. The army group on the lower part was raised to about 45% of the german army, and the attacking portion suffered by losing much of it's proposed amounts. However, the German army, when it attacked still got only miles from Paris by the time it was halted by the French. What has been puzzling me, is that if the Schlieffen plan was used as intended, could it have worked and secured a victory for Germany?


I hope I've gotten my history right here....

ive studied this in world history. According to what i saw it failed because one of the armies was led the wrong way and looped around paris by accident.

You have to remember most of the man power was passing by neutral belgium to surround paris, but the problem was germany though they would have an easy time in belgium, who led a stronger oposition than planned.

So if the belg would have let germany walk in and the planned pulled off perfectly, it would have stood a chance, but i am highly convinced good French intellligance on germany and coomunication between france and brittain could have easily destroyed the german armies. Suppose the germans get to destination and have the BEF in back the the french in front ( suppose the bef was bigger than hte few hundred thousand troops they were) then they would have infliceted considerable dammage to the germans.

Frank

But You don't take into account that the attacking force was 30% smaller than originally planned. An amount that large surely would have made a difference. They still got to miles away from Paris at only part strength, so maybe those 30% could have made a big enough difference to give the Germans enough punch to get to Paris? And you say they actually looped around Paris, so with better map reading, could they have taken the city withouth the 30%?

However another variation of the Schlieffen plan was used in 1940 and we know what happened there.

The main reason the Schliefen Plan failed was the fact that WW1 armies were still tied to the pace of a marching infantryman. Although most armies had some motor transport, long distance movement was by train, & tactical movement was on foot. In fact the original plan had intended that the German army looped WEST of Paris, & enveloped it, Von Moltke chose, with his smaller force to go EAST of Paris, & was stopped at the Marne. By then his marching infantry were virtually exhausted, as were their opposing forces. The others are correct in saying that the Germans totally underestimated the abilities of both the Belgians & the BEF.
The extra 30% of his troops were in the East, where the Russians had mobilised & moved on Germany much quicker than expected also.
Given the situation, it was unlikely it could succeed. If they had had the extra 30% in the West, East Prussia would have been overrun - I could not see the Junkers standing for that.
The German plan for 1940 was originally based on the Schliefen, but was changed to Manstein's notion of an advance through the Ardennes, with the right wing being a feint after a staff officer carrying the original plan was forced to crash land in Belgian territory.