Wilhelm II dies in 1913

[mullauna]

Wilhelm falls down some stairs and dies in 1913. What happens to Germany? That powder keg isn't going away...

[lordroel]

Aug 18, 2018 14:11:54 GMT mullauna said:

Wilhelm falls down some stairs and dies in 1913. What happens to Germany? That powder keg isn't going away...

Long live Kaiser Wilhelm III then, do not know what he will do different than his father a year from now.

[stevep]

Aug 18, 2018 14:11:54 GMT mullauna said:

Wilhelm falls down some stairs and dies in 1913. What happens to Germany? That powder keg isn't going away...

  It would depend on the character of the new Kaiser and also what changes occur.  Its big enough and early enough to butterfly the OTL FF assassination which could delay any conflict a bit allowing more changes to develop.

  By 1913 a lot of things are in place, with deep mistrust between both alliances and established patterns so if a trigger for a major conflict occurs it would involve pretty much the same powers and the same broad patterns of conflict.  I.e. Russia v Germany and Austria in the east, Germany invading through Belgium in the west prompting British intervention.  It would take time for those patterns to change, or at least loosen.

  If war isn't triggered as OTL and FF lives then there are chances of big changes when FJ dies and Austria gets a new emperor.  Or how stable Russia turns out to be, although without the shock of the OTL Great War its likely to last quite a while.

[lordroel]

Aug 18, 2018 19:41:20 GMT stevep said:

Aug 18, 2018 14:11:54 GMT mullauna said:

Wilhelm falls down some stairs and dies in 1913. What happens to Germany? That powder keg isn't going away...

  It would depend on the character of the new Kaiser and also what changes occur.  Its big enough and early enough to butterfly the OTL FF assassination which could delay any conflict a bit allowing more changes to develop.

  By 1913 a lot of things are in place, with deep mistrust between both alliances and established patterns so if a trigger for a major conflict occurs it would involve pretty much the same powers and the same broad patterns of conflict.  I.e. Russia v Germany and Austria in the east, Germany invading through Belgium in the west prompting British intervention.  It would take time for those patterns to change, or at least loosen.

  If war isn't triggered as OTL and FF lives then there are chances of big changes when FJ dies and Austria gets a new emperor.  Or how stable Russia turns out to be, although without the shock of the OTL Great War its likely to last quite a while.

So Wilhelm III of Germany and a Charles I of Austria on their thrones will make it better for peace then if the old mans are sitting on the throne.

[stevep]

Aug 18, 2018 19:53:22 GMT lordroel said:

Aug 18, 2018 19:41:20 GMT stevep said:

  It would depend on the character of the new Kaiser and also what changes occur.  Its big enough and early enough to butterfly the OTL FF assassination which could delay any conflict a bit allowing more changes to develop.

  By 1913 a lot of things are in place, with deep mistrust between both alliances and established patterns so if a trigger for a major conflict occurs it would involve pretty much the same powers and the same broad patterns of conflict.  I.e. Russia v Germany and Austria in the east, Germany invading through Belgium in the west prompting British intervention.  It would take time for those patterns to change, or at least loosen.

  If war isn't triggered as OTL and FF lives then there are chances of big changes when FJ dies and Austria gets a new emperor.  Or how stable Russia turns out to be, although without the shock of the OTL Great War its likely to last quite a while.

So Wilhelm III of Germany and a Charles I of Austria on their thrones will make it better for peace then if the old mans are sitting on the throne.

  If its Charles.  It could still easily be Franz Ferdinand.  Either way Austria will be different and could see a lot of internal tension with the Hungarians as well as other reforms.  Although this might occur somewhat later if without the pressure of the war Franz Joseph lasts a few years more.

  With Wilhelm III I don't know enough about what he might be like as a ruler, especially with the sudden death of his father which could affect his character.

[perkeo]

If Wikipedia is correct about the crown prince, Wilhelm II‘s Death could well bring us from the frying pan into the fire: It will appear he was even less willing to stand up against the warmongers in the general staff.

[stevep]

Sept 9, 2018 13:43:59 GMT perkeo said:

If Wikipedia is correct about the crown prince, Wilhelm II‘s Death could well bring us from the frying pan into the fire: It will appear he was even less willing to stand up against the warmongers in the general staff.

  That could be bad.  Possibly he might be so militaristic that he alienates Austria, which would make war for Germany pretty much impossible, but sounds more likely it just needs a spark to trigger a conflagration like OTL.

[mullauna]

How does the Crown Prince/Wilhelm III react to a revolution? He might try to hold on with any loyal forces he can find... so a German civil war, with the Entente at the Rhine!

[lordroel]

Sept 9, 2018 23:55:36 GMT mullauna said:

How does the Crown Prince/Wilhelm III react to a revolution? He might try to hold on with any loyal forces he can find... so a German civil war, with the Entente at the Rhine!

You mean a civil war in 1913 ore in 1918.

[mullauna]

Sept 10, 2018 6:43:56 GMT lordroel said:

Sept 9, 2018 23:55:36 GMT mullauna said:

How does the Crown Prince/Wilhelm III react to a revolution? He might try to hold on with any loyal forces he can find... so a German civil war, with the Entente at the Rhine!

You mean a civil war in 1913 ore in 1918.

the alt-1918.

[futurist]

Sept 9, 2018 18:41:45 GMT stevep said:

Sept 9, 2018 13:43:59 GMT perkeo said:

If Wikipedia is correct about the crown prince, Wilhelm II‘s Death could well bring us from the frying pan into the fire: It will appear he was even less willing to stand up against the warmongers in the general staff.

  That could be bad.  Possibly he might be so militaristic that he alienates Austria, which would make war for Germany pretty much impossible, but sounds more likely it just needs a spark to trigger a conflagration like OTL.

I think that, if his dad managed to avoid alienating Austria, so would he.

Now, the crucial question is whether Franz Ferdinand still gets killed at Sarajevo in 1914. If he is, WWI still breaks out and things probably end up the same as they were in our TL--though probably with some butterflies since some troops who got killed in our TL's WWI might survive in this TL while some troops who survived WWI in our TL might get killed in this TL. If we're lucky, Adolf Hitler gets killed without anyone who is even worse surviving. Also, in the farther future, this could possibly have an effect on the World's Oldest Living Man data. After all, it's not out of the question that one or more men who had the potential to become the World's Oldest Living Man got killed in World War I; indeed, various male World War I veterans lived to age 110+--such as John George Painter, who died at age 112 and lived from 1888 to 2001.

Anyway, back to my overall point here--if World War I doesn't break out in 1914 as a result of Franz Ferdinand surviving, then World War I might very well break out in 1917 in this TL if Franz Joseph still dies and if Hungary tries to secede from Austria-Hungary in response to Franz Ferdinand's plans for reform. Of course, the crucial question is France's and Russia's attitude towards this; would they actually be willing to militarily support a Hungarian bid for independence in 1917?

[stevep]

Sept 20, 2018 1:34:27 GMT futurist said:

Sept 9, 2018 18:41:45 GMT stevep said:

  That could be bad.  Possibly he might be so militaristic that he alienates Austria, which would make war for Germany pretty much impossible, but sounds more likely it just needs a spark to trigger a conflagration like OTL.

I think that, if his dad managed to avoid alienating Austria, so would he.

Now, the crucial question is whether Franz Ferdinand still gets killed at Sarajevo in 1914. If he is, WWI still breaks out and things probably end up the same as they were in our TL--though probably with some butterflies since some troops who got killed in our TL's WWI might survive in this TL while some troops who survived WWI in our TL might get killed in this TL. If we're lucky, Adolf Hitler gets killed without anyone who is even worse surviving. Also, in the farther future, this could possibly have an effect on the World's Oldest Living Man data. After all, it's not out of the question that one or more men who had the potential to become the World's Oldest Living Man got killed in World War I; indeed, various male World War I veterans lived to age 110+--such as John George Painter, who died at age 112 and lived from 1888 to 2001.

Anyway, back to my overall point here--if World War I doesn't break out in 1914 as a result of Franz Ferdinand surviving, then World War I might very well break out in 1917 in this TL if Franz Joseph still dies and if Hungary tries to secede from Austria-Hungary in response to Franz Ferdinand's plans for reform. Of course, the crucial question is France's and Russia's attitude towards this; would they actually be willing to militarily support a Hungarian bid for independence in 1917?

  Given that Franz Ferdinard was apparently less confident of the link with Germany I suspect that France might not be as eager for a war.  Not sure about the Russian reaction.  The German leadership was highly concerned about the advances in Russian railways, which would greatly speed up their ability to mobilise and the end of 1916 is normally noted as the point by which the Germans were thinking their plans for a quick victory in the west would no longer be practical.  [Of course it wasn't anyway, even with all that the French did to help them OTL but the Germans didn't realised that. ]  Hence Russia might be willing to stay out or thinking of intervening.  However since the Hungarian leadership wanted more power for the Magyar minority [and very much the small aristocratic element that still held much of the power] over the Slavic majority an independent Hungarian kingdom wouldn't be a nature or comfortable ally for Russia.

[futurist]

Sept 20, 2018 15:57:12 GMT stevep said:

Sept 20, 2018 1:34:27 GMT futurist said:

I think that, if his dad managed to avoid alienating Austria, so would he.

Now, the crucial question is whether Franz Ferdinand still gets killed at Sarajevo in 1914. If he is, WWI still breaks out and things probably end up the same as they were in our TL--though probably with some butterflies since some troops who got killed in our TL's WWI might survive in this TL while some troops who survived WWI in our TL might get killed in this TL. If we're lucky, Adolf Hitler gets killed without anyone who is even worse surviving. Also, in the farther future, this could possibly have an effect on the World's Oldest Living Man data. After all, it's not out of the question that one or more men who had the potential to become the World's Oldest Living Man got killed in World War I; indeed, various male World War I veterans lived to age 110+--such as John George Painter, who died at age 112 and lived from 1888 to 2001.

Anyway, back to my overall point here--if World War I doesn't break out in 1914 as a result of Franz Ferdinand surviving, then World War I might very well break out in 1917 in this TL if Franz Joseph still dies and if Hungary tries to secede from Austria-Hungary in response to Franz Ferdinand's plans for reform. Of course, the crucial question is France's and Russia's attitude towards this; would they actually be willing to militarily support a Hungarian bid for independence in 1917?

  Given that Franz Ferdinard was apparently less confident of the link with Germany I suspect that France might not be as eager for a war.  Not sure about the Russian reaction.  The German leadership was highly concerned about the advances in Russian railways, which would greatly speed up their ability to mobilise and the end of 1916 is normally noted as the point by which the Germans were thinking their plans for a quick victory in the west would no longer be practical.  [Of course it wasn't anyway, even with all that the French did to help them OTL but the Germans didn't realised that. ]  Hence Russia might be willing to stay out or thinking of intervening.  However since the Hungarian leadership wanted more power for the Magyar minority [and very much the small aristocratic element that still held much of the power] over the Slavic majority an independent Hungarian kingdom wouldn't be a nature or comfortable ally for Russia.

AFAIK, Franz Ferdinand was committed to A-H's alliance with Germany but wanted to avoid having A-H become a German satellite. Thus, France could go both ways on this; on the one hand, it could support war since it would want Alsace-Lorraine back from Germany. On the other hand, though, it could realize that, with the loss of Hungary, Franz Ferdinand is probably going to have little choice but to become a German puppet. Ultimately, though, I think that France's feelings for Alsace-Lorraine would be decisive here and thus France would support war in this scenario. After all, if France, Russia, Hungary, and their allies win this war, they could create a broad security system in Europe which would be able to control Germany even if Germany is allowed to expand by annexing Austria.

As for German plans, Yes, Germany would probably have to switch to an East-first plan in this scenario. That would mean that there is no hope for a quick victory and that Germany must instead be prepared to fight a long war. Still, Germany would probably feel that it would have to fight if its ally Austria-Hungary is at risk of being dismembered. I just don't see how Germany could avoid the risk of war in this scenario if France and Russia both insist on fighting. Of course, what might hold France and/or Russia back in this scenario would be the very real possibility that Britain would remain neutral. However, if France and Russia believe that they can win a quick victory due to the completion of Russia's Great Military Program, British neutrality might not be enough to scare them off of the war-path. After all, it's certainly not like Britain would be willing to fight on Germany's and Austria-Hungary's behalf in 1917--the memories of the Anglo-German naval arms race would simply be too recent for Britain to agree to this.

As for Hungary not being a natural Russian ally, this is certainly very true but the same also applies to France. France and Russia allied in spite of the fact that one was a republic and the other was an absolute monarchy. Thus, if France and Russia could ally, so could Russia and Hungary. After all, Russia could help Hungary win its independence only to dismember it later on if Hungary refuses to behave and to treat its Slavic minorities well. Indeed, this threat would be a good way to keep Hungary in line in the event that France, Russia, and Hungary actually win this war.

Ultimately, though, I am not very optimistic on France's and Russia's chances in this conflict. I mean, sure, they'll have Hungary, Romania (which can be bought off with Bukovina), and probably Italy as allies, but they won't have either Britain or the U.S. as allies in this TL's WWI. Indeed, I would think that (Britain's + the U.S.'s military power) would more than outweigh any military gains that Russia would have made between 1914 and 1917 in this TL. Plus, it certainly doesn't help Russia that it is prone to revolution as well as to defeatism even when it is winning.

[stevep]

Sept 21, 2018 1:26:44 GMT futurist said:

Sept 20, 2018 15:57:12 GMT stevep said:

  Given that Franz Ferdinard was apparently less confident of the link with Germany I suspect that France might not be as eager for a war.  Not sure about the Russian reaction.  The German leadership was highly concerned about the advances in Russian railways, which would greatly speed up their ability to mobilise and the end of 1916 is normally noted as the point by which the Germans were thinking their plans for a quick victory in the west would no longer be practical.  [Of course it wasn't anyway, even with all that the French did to help them OTL but the Germans didn't realised that. ]  Hence Russia might be willing to stay out or thinking of intervening.  However since the Hungarian leadership wanted more power for the Magyar minority [and very much the small aristocratic element that still held much of the power] over the Slavic majority an independent Hungarian kingdom wouldn't be a nature or comfortable ally for Russia.

AFAIK, Franz Ferdinand was committed to A-H's alliance with Germany but wanted to avoid having A-H become a German satellite. Thus, France could go both ways on this; on the one hand, it could support war since it would want Alsace-Lorraine back from Germany. On the other hand, though, it could realize that, with the loss of Hungary, Franz Ferdinand is probably going to have little choice but to become a German puppet. Ultimately, though, I think that France's feelings for Alsace-Lorraine would be decisive here and thus France would support war in this scenario. After all, if France, Russia, Hungary, and their allies win this war, they could create a broad security system in Europe which would be able to control Germany even if Germany is allowed to expand by annexing Austria.

As for German plans, Yes, Germany would probably have to switch to an East-first plan in this scenario. That would mean that there is no hope for a quick victory and that Germany must instead be prepared to fight a long war. Still, Germany would probably feel that it would have to fight if its ally Austria-Hungary is at risk of being dismembered. I just don't see how Germany could avoid the risk of war in this scenario if France and Russia both insist on fighting. Of course, what might hold France and/or Russia back in this scenario would be the very real possibility that Britain would remain neutral. However, if France and Russia believe that they can win a quick victory due to the completion of Russia's Great Military Program, British neutrality might not be enough to scare them off of the war-path. After all, it's certainly not like Britain would be willing to fight on Germany's and Austria-Hungary's behalf in 1917--the memories of the Anglo-German naval arms race would simply be too recent for Britain to agree to this.

As for Hungary not being a natural Russian ally, this is certainly very true but the same also applies to France. France and Russia allied in spite of the fact that one was a republic and the other was an absolute monarchy. Thus, if France and Russia could ally, so could Russia and Hungary. After all, Russia could help Hungary win its independence only to dismember it later on if Hungary refuses to behave and to treat its Slavic minorities well. Indeed, this threat would be a good way to keep Hungary in line in the event that France, Russia, and Hungary actually win this war.

Ultimately, though, I am not very optimistic on France's and Russia's chances in this conflict. I mean, sure, they'll have Hungary, Romania (which can be bought off with Bukovina), and probably Italy as allies, but they won't have either Britain or the U.S. as allies in this TL's WWI. Indeed, I would think that (Britain's + the U.S.'s military power) would more than outweigh any military gains that Russia would have made between 1914 and 1917 in this TL. Plus, it certainly doesn't help Russia that it is prone to revolution as well as to defeatism even when it is winning.

  Interesting idea and in general agreement.  Probably in the event of instability in Austria Alsace-Lorraine would be too attractive to France, especially if their still got the delusion about a successful offensive into the provinces relying on elan!  In those circumstances and if Germany sits on the defensive in the west Britain is likely to stay neutral and if it does get involved is likely to be far less committed.  Without Britain, while the German fleet doesn't have the range to do much damage its going to dominate the N Sea so the French won't be able to impose any effective blockade, especially since Germany could trade with Britain and other nearby states.  Also it would be able to send raiders out to harry French communications. 

  For Britain a lot, in a 1917 war start would depend on the state of government as the Liberals were a minority government depending on Irish Nationalist support so what's happened in Ireland with Home Rule and if there's been another election who's won.  Britain could be distracted by civil war in Ireland or have a Tory government that was distinctly more militaristic.

  Another factor is what would Italy do.  OTL it didn't join the CPs because its alliance with them was defensive and it was Austria and Germany doing the initial attacks [plus of course it wanted lands ruled by Austria. ]  TTL does it stay loyal to the CPs, especially since if Britain is neutral its naval position is a lot more secure, join the EPs because of the same desires for land or stay neutral throughout?  Doubt the latter but could go either way as it also desired land from France.

  Similarly what happens with the Ottomans and the smaller Balkan powers.  The Ottomans are likely to be hostile to Russia so that would seriously hinder Russia as OTL.

  Any alliance between the EPs and Hungary is likely to be very short term and unstable because they will have too many differences with the Russians and they might also clash with a EP Italy.  The alliance between France and Russia was a lot more stable because of the common threat posed by a powerful German empire allied with Austria.  Of course this might change if Germany is heavily defeated but in this scenario I think this is unlikely.

  Britain is likely to offer its services as a mediator to try and bring the war to an early end and seek to establish a stable balance of power in Europe as it wouldn't want either side to win big which would threaten every other power in Europe including Britain.  Its possible that this might lead to military intervention, or the threat of, to minimise the size of the 'win' by whichever bloc comes out on top.

[futurist]

Sept 21, 2018 10:23:02 GMT stevep said:

Sept 21, 2018 1:26:44 GMT futurist said:

AFAIK, Franz Ferdinand was committed to A-H's alliance with Germany but wanted to avoid having A-H become a German satellite. Thus, France could go both ways on this; on the one hand, it could support war since it would want Alsace-Lorraine back from Germany. On the other hand, though, it could realize that, with the loss of Hungary, Franz Ferdinand is probably going to have little choice but to become a German puppet. Ultimately, though, I think that France's feelings for Alsace-Lorraine would be decisive here and thus France would support war in this scenario. After all, if France, Russia, Hungary, and their allies win this war, they could create a broad security system in Europe which would be able to control Germany even if Germany is allowed to expand by annexing Austria.

As for German plans, Yes, Germany would probably have to switch to an East-first plan in this scenario. That would mean that there is no hope for a quick victory and that Germany must instead be prepared to fight a long war. Still, Germany would probably feel that it would have to fight if its ally Austria-Hungary is at risk of being dismembered. I just don't see how Germany could avoid the risk of war in this scenario if France and Russia both insist on fighting. Of course, what might hold France and/or Russia back in this scenario would be the very real possibility that Britain would remain neutral. However, if France and Russia believe that they can win a quick victory due to the completion of Russia's Great Military Program, British neutrality might not be enough to scare them off of the war-path. After all, it's certainly not like Britain would be willing to fight on Germany's and Austria-Hungary's behalf in 1917--the memories of the Anglo-German naval arms race would simply be too recent for Britain to agree to this.

As for Hungary not being a natural Russian ally, this is certainly very true but the same also applies to France. France and Russia allied in spite of the fact that one was a republic and the other was an absolute monarchy. Thus, if France and Russia could ally, so could Russia and Hungary. After all, Russia could help Hungary win its independence only to dismember it later on if Hungary refuses to behave and to treat its Slavic minorities well. Indeed, this threat would be a good way to keep Hungary in line in the event that France, Russia, and Hungary actually win this war.

Ultimately, though, I am not very optimistic on France's and Russia's chances in this conflict. I mean, sure, they'll have Hungary, Romania (which can be bought off with Bukovina), and probably Italy as allies, but they won't have either Britain or the U.S. as allies in this TL's WWI. Indeed, I would think that (Britain's + the U.S.'s military power) would more than outweigh any military gains that Russia would have made between 1914 and 1917 in this TL. Plus, it certainly doesn't help Russia that it is prone to revolution as well as to defeatism even when it is winning.

  1. Interesting idea and in general agreement.  Probably in the event of instability in Austria Alsace-Lorraine would be too attractive to France, especially if their still got the delusion about a successful offensive into the provinces relying on elan!  In those circumstances and if Germany sits on the defensive in the west Britain is likely to stay neutral and if it does get involved is likely to be far less committed.  Without Britain, while the German fleet doesn't have the range to do much damage its going to dominate the N Sea so the French won't be able to impose any effective blockade, especially since Germany could trade with Britain and other nearby states.  Also it would be able to send raiders out to harry French communications. 

  2. For Britain a lot, in a 1917 war start would depend on the state of government as the Liberals were a minority government depending on Irish Nationalist support so what's happened in Ireland with Home Rule and if there's been another election who's won.  Britain could be distracted by civil war in Ireland or have a Tory government that was distinctly more militaristic.

  3. Another factor is what would Italy do.  OTL it didn't join the CPs because its alliance with them was defensive and it was Austria and Germany doing the initial attacks [plus of course it wanted lands ruled by Austria. ]  TTL does it stay loyal to the CPs, especially since if Britain is neutral its naval position is a lot more secure, join the EPs because of the same desires for land or stay neutral throughout?  Doubt the latter but could go either way as it also desired land from France.

  4. Similarly what happens with the Ottomans and the smaller Balkan powers.  The Ottomans are likely to be hostile to Russia so that would seriously hinder Russia as OTL.

  5.  Any alliance between the EPs and Hungary is likely to be very short term and unstable because they will have too many differences with the Russians and they might also clash with a EP Italy.  The alliance between France and Russia was a lot more stable because of the common threat posed by a powerful German empire allied with Austria.  Of course this might change if Germany is heavily defeated but in this scenario I think this is unlikely.

  6. Britain is likely to offer its services as a mediator to try and bring the war to an early end and seek to establish a stable balance of power in Europe as it wouldn't want either side to win big which would threaten every other power in Europe including Britain.  Its possible that this might lead to military intervention, or the threat of, to minimise the size of the 'win' by whichever bloc comes out on top.

1. Agreed with all of this.

2. I expect that Britain would have both a civil war in Ireland (with Britain + the Catholic Irish fighting against the Protestant Irish) and a militaristic Tory government in 1917 in this TL. Still, it's worth noting that it's unclear whether Britain's Entente with Russia from 1907 would have been renewed in 1915 in this TL. If it wouldn't have been renewed, the British Tory government in this TL might be even more lukewarm about fighting on the same side as Russia.

3. If Britain remains neutral, I would expect Italy to sit on its butt and to wait and see which side is on the verge of winning this TL's WWI before it actually commits itself. Italy might demand the Trentino from Austria as the price for its continued neutrality, though (Italy could also demand Trieste, but I certainly don't see Austria handing it over).

4. Serbia and Montenegro probably enter this TL's WWI on the Russian side. After all, Russia could promise Bosnia and perhaps Dalmatia to Serbia while Montenegro, as Serbia's little brother, would likely enter the war together with Serbia. The Ottomans could be tempted to enter the war on the German-Austrian side, but the Germans and Austrians would probably first have to establish a land route to the Ottoman Empire so that they could actually supply them. Ultimately, I think that creating such a land route is very doable for Germany and Austria if Britain remains neutral in this war.

5. Agreed. However, I think that these differences can and will be overlooked during the war. Agreed that the Franco-Russian alliance is much more stable and that Germany is unlikely to be heavily defeated in this TL. Also, I think that the bond of the Franco-Russian alliance would be enough to prevent either of these two countries from making a separate peace.

6. Agreed. Ultimately, I think what would be an acceptable compromise peace would be for Russia's western borders to return to either what they were in 1792 or to what they were in 1794--with the possible addition of Russia losing Riga:



Basically, it would depend on whether Germany would want to create only puppet Polish and Lithuanian states or whether it would also want to create puppet West Ukrainian and Belarusian states. If it doesn't implode 1917-style, Russia would be allowed to keep Kiev and the eastern and southern parts of Ukraine. If Russia does implode 1917-style, though, then you could see Germany impose a Brest-Litovsk-style peace on Russia unless Britain militarily intervenes--and even then, would Britain actually be willing to endure a million casualties to kick Germany out of these territories?

Germany would also want Briey and Longwy in eastern France and might be willing to make some concessions in the East in order to be allowed to keep Briey and Longwy. Ultimately, a lot is going to depend on just how strong Germany, Austria, France, and Russia are after a couple years of fighting.