Because your question is indeed opinion-based
Ok, that didn't help much, so I'll try to explain your case in detail :p. Asking what historical changes should be made to allow something is most likely to lead to discussions, which is ill-fit in a Question and Answer format.
The question is why it's so prone to discussions? It's because it's already hard to predict election results (even with preliminary opinion polls) of the next year or the outcome of a war in the next two or three years, it's even harder to predict what will lead to an alternative history where air technology has matured enough to include paratroopers in the militaries's arsenal. It's because the slightest change to reach your objectives can alter the whole timeline down the line, even possibly preventing the WWI or changing their main actors in the first place!
These predictions are too wild, as shown with the assumptions you made (taking on the French Parlement and end the war in 1 week, for instance). I don't tell they're necessary wrong; I tell the level of chaos is so high that we can't know which timeline we should take to reach the outcome you're aiming for.
This brings us to mostly conjectures and an inability to scale how minimal a change is to ensures no other thing gets wiped out in the hi-storyline. This inability to tell which answer is better and the high presence of conjectures (which almost always give birth to discussions) means it's most likely based on opinions :).