That plan of yours assumes TWO things: 1) That Britain WOULDN'T do anything when the two are at war, and 2) The Germans didn't do anything that would trigger the British into action. The first one is premised on the idea that Britain still follows the "Balance of Power" concept of international politics. Throughout the 19th Century, Britain has been flipflopping on temporary alliances as to maintain the "balance of power" on the continent and keep Britain secure. This "Splendid Isolation" policy that started in the 1810's is becoming problematic upon the start of the 20th Century due to Bismarck getting the boot. Britain is already alarmed that a unified Germany existed and is challenging British economic supremacy in 1871, what stopped them is Bismarck's assurance they would not step on what is Britain's "turf" (ie empire building and being the world's workshop). That changed with Wilhelm II and his change of direction as to foreign politics (establishing German colonies in the empty spaces left in Africa and Asia and meddling in British colonial affairs such as in Morocco), reigniting British fears of being outdone by the Germans. Such far flung colonies require a more blue water navy, leading to a snowballing effect of the British increasing spending on the navy then the Germans expanding their navy to match Britains vice versa, all fueled by those who wanted to challenge British naval supremacy other than the Kaiser. Not to mention the British public's opinion of the Germans before and during the war (which isn't high given how Germany is an antithesis of the British way of life, read without any of the liberty and democracy they enjoyed). Much of the initial animosity of the British public towards the Germans is due to stories of atrocities that happened in Belgium; with or without Belgium, the stories of atrocities that would happen in France - whether real or imagined - would not put Germany in any favorable position as far as the British public is concerned. Even if Germany didn't invade Belgium to try to encircle the French in a pincer movement (how that strategy came about is a whole different story which involves European militaries being obsessed to reenact the Carthaginian victory of Cannae over the Romans), Britain wouldn't be comfortable letting a victorious Germany dictate the Continent on its own terms so it would do what the US OTL did prior to its entry in WW1: help France with everything short of sending troops. If it means escorting the supply ships using the Royal Navy, they would do it. This statement leads me to my second point... Britain would only remain de jure neutral for as long as Germany didn't do anything that would give them a reason to join the war. If Germany still does submarine warfare, unrestricted or otherwise, at some point some overzealous KM captain would raid or sink a supply ship flying the British merchant marine to stop it from reaching France. That act wouldn't go unnoticed by those who already are not fans of the Germans. The whole situation of a neutral Britain to this alternate WW1 is basically something like OTL US prior to its entry to WW1: despite being neutral, it has some clear bias as to who to favor and will do un-neutral things to keep their biased choice afloat...

P.S. Forgot to mention the Ottoman Empire. The only reason the Ottomans joined the Germans in this war is due to British and French threats to its territorial integrity. If the Ottoman Empire decides to join in the war to defend its territory against the French and British, the Germans are compelled to declare war on Britain and Britain in turn would be compelled to declare war on Germany. If not Belgium then Egypt or the Gulf States may be the Casus belli...

The Falklands bit isn't even surprising. Due to international laws on war (neutrals can't trade with nations at war), neither Argentina or Britain declared any state of war between them. In such a legal atmosphere, they are free to get supplies from the same countries and situations that you mention may have happened...

"some french guy" 🤣

Answer: they didn't. They just delay the inevitable. All that land between the Oder and the Volga? Plundered everything they can get...

I have never used ai in my videos

@@JohnnyJohnsonEsq what is that voice then?

@@houdinini It's my voice. I'm just a bit droll I'll admit. I physically appear frequently on my other channel as I've had many accuse me of being a robot so I get it.

@@JohnnyJohnsonEsq damn, well that requires a lot of intensive work u could really harm yourself, man