First to the rest, actual objective reality is that real national militaries fail to learn from history and make mistakes all the freaking time, with way better intel and more modern warfare and professional institutions then they had at the start of WW1. Look at America and the Iraq war, or Afghanistan. No, there really wasn't any parallel to a
modern military evacuating to colonies and continuing a modern war, because you need a huge industrial base and skilled workforce for that. And indeed it
wouldn't have worked alone. If that's all that had happened Francois would lose. What the Empire missed wasn't precedent there, but geopolitics. They didn't see how it'd be a rallying point for other countries. That notRussia would get involved after the Empire had already won literally was crazy, and that all these countries that loathe the commies and their horrors would do so as well also made no sense to the rationalists who were running the Empire successfully. Russia and notUSA had no security interests threatened. It was an out of context problem that would be hard to anticipate without knowledge of how thing actually went in the future.
Even all the rest aside.
@rrolo1
the lack of any visible effort to capture or atleast limit the movements of the higher-ups of not-France is baffling. After all, capturing the higher-ups of the enemy is Strategy 101
No, capturing the higher-ups of the enemy is almost never Strategy 101. And I honestly am not clear what you'd be expecting here. A handful of higher ups could be hiding anywhere across 150,000-200,000 square miles, or have already left by aircraft. What "effort to capture or limit the movements" would you do at that point? The Empire hasn't actually taken over the country yet, they're only just barely moving in. They don't have high resolution real time spy satellites or drones or whatever. They're directly applying the lessons they've been learning the previous years, actual Strategy 101: individuals aren't important vs strategic locations or human and industrial resources. No enemy commander no matter how brilliant can beat an overwhelming logistical disadvantage.
The Francois tried the same thing in fact, the UK saw it, and Empire High Command saw the same threat and bait potential: the Empire's own industrial region. The Francois weren't worried about capturing the Empire leadership as Step 1, they were focused on industrial output. If that had fallen, it'd have been over. The Empire made their big bet using that as bait, but it worked because it was indeed really important.
Basically the Empire would have had to get everything nearly perfect here to stop it. They'd have had to have the kind of perfect intelligence which almost never happens, and may not even be possible in a scenario like that when the enemy is making fast plans on the fly in their own territory with a very, very limited selection of their military/government. They'd have had to have been setting up diplomacy with the US and/or UK, which may have been impossible by that point anyway too. They'd have had to have had their navy or army at all the right places, but may well have lacked the resources by that stage to do that. If they ever had them at all, because the UK Navy is vastly superior and was actively interfering. They'd have had to have been immune to savoring even a bit of a stunning military victory and related public sentiment. It's not just a matter of "learning from the 1800s" (which had all sorts of "lessons" that would be actively harmful anyway too), it's what they could even manage to do after years of total war and through the fog of war.
