Board Thread:Questions and Answers/@comment-2067355-20131201033001/@comment-32656-20131203142710

On their own, the Ottomans - really, Egyptians by this point, as the Ottos had lost control of Egypt by that time - did not have the resources or finances to build it. Nor did they have all that much interest in the idea, especially after a railroad was built linking the two seas. For that matter, the Brits actually preferred the railway over the concept of a canal. Had it not been for the French wanting it and paying for it, it would not have happened.

The B-B railroad was mostly done, in fact. Was just really poor quality.

Henry probably would have been a better emperor. However, at most that delays war a few years.

Had Evert done that, Russia would have had it worse. Brusilov's offensive worked well because of surprise, and the opponent. After it, German forces were present all over the lines, making a successful offensive of that nature nearly impossible.

Yes, had Brusilov not done it, the Germans would have done better on that front. Earlier defeat, no way.

As Cal and Imp have noted, it had just been fought over, causing a fair amount of damage (though nothing like in WW2) and loss of life. Many of the farmers were off to war, and the locals were not all that "with" the concept of German rule. They did like it more than in the next war, however, and would probably have tolerated it.

German troops were also not in number enough on the ground to actually take it, either.

The famine that hit Central Europe really didn't get the eastern parts so badly. Note, too, that this famine was a combination of climate and lack of workers. No way to avoid it.

A factor most miss, however, is the question of transport. Unlike in North America, Eurasia has several different railroad gauges. Basically, what that means is that you need to transfer goods between the two networks by hand where they meet. Rather inefficient, and unavoidable. Still a problem today, in fact, though it has gotten better.

What this means is that they would have had to load up the grain to the Russian network, and near Germany itself, unload and then reload it onto the German network. There's only so fast this can be done. Doable? Yes. Slow? Unquestionably.

Heck, this problem, only in the other direction, is part of why the Germans went as slow as they did.

In WW2, you see the same dilemma - but motor transport had improved enough that they used a lot of that instead. You could still see the supply troubles because of it, however.

Time was also a problem. Germany only controlled the area for a short time, overall. Remember, almost all of the Ukraine was only occupied in March of 1918, following Operation Faustschlag. Their connection with the area by land was also tenuous in general, owing to them pissing the Poles of on an extreme level, very needlessly.

Really though, Germany barely controlled the area at all anyway. Heck, I'd say they actually did not, considering the number of armed groups fighting themselves for control.

The Germans had no choice but to launch that 1918 offensive in the west. The writing on the wall if they did not was plainly obvious, and they knew full well that odds were not in their favor even then. Germany was running extremely low on food, supplies, raw materials, and manpower - it would have been Americans cutting them down, rather than the other way around.

No way that the Germans could either get linked up with the Ottomans or resources from them. The Ottos were using all of their own ones, and their transport system was not really up to it. They also had land access already via railroad, so the Germans did in fact get some small number from them already. It's impossible to get anything from them even remotely near what the Germans needed.

Imperial Germany treated the Ukrainians very well, actually, and supported their moves towards independence.