A worrying attitude

[storch]

how can you possibly wade through life being so consistently mistaken.

just so you know simaril, that means that once again you're wrong.

[Simaril]

Originally posted by storch
how can you possibly wade through life being so consistently mistaken.

just so you know simaril, that means that once again you're wrong.

yeah, I expected the response to be on the level of "nyah, nyah." I suppose you have the freedom to believe that England invaded germany and started the conflict if you so desire...but that kind of warped thinking means discussion is useless.

Like I said, shallow.  

[storch]

let's look at the causes of the war.

1. the arms race:  an arms race had existed starting back in the 1880s with the germanic plans to build a high seas fleet. the arms race was accellerated by the english launching the hms dreadnaught in 1906.  the hms dreadnaught represented a quantum leap in naval technology.  the launching of that single ship immediately renders all other capital ships of that time obsolete.  think of the ballistic missles race between the US and the russians.

2. general mistrust: amongst the european powers.  far more mistrust than what is exhibited between the euros today.  germany would have to fight a war on two fronts.  it was a matter of national survival that one opponent would have to be striken preemptively.

3. imperialism: the english had a two hundred plus year history of doing what ever was necessary to prevent any continental power from even remotely challenging their postion as the masters of the seas.  both the english and the germans had bought mahanic theory completely.  the english were looking for an excuse to sink the germans in a major battle in order for great britain to maintain it's command of the commerce lanes.

4. trade wars:  world trade trebled between the years 1880 and 1913 with germany being the principal beneficiary at the expense of the british empire.  though britain maintained an absolute lead in trade it's world total dropped to around 27% from 40%.  meanwhile germany's trade grew a whopping 240% in the same time period, rising from 17% to 22%.  part of the growth was due to the opening of the kiel canal which cut through the base of the jutland peninsula reducing the distance german fleets and merchant had to travel between the baltic and the north sea from 700 nautical miles to 60.

5. the balkans mess:  pretty much as it is today.  the serbs assasinate the ruler elect (as it were) of the austro-hungarian empire.

if memory serves me the austrians declare war and germany backs their ally.

I'm willing to be further educated, point out how this series of events could be considered germany's fault?

[Simaril]

Storchie:

None of those factors remotely forced germany to do anything. They had the enlarging fleet. They had increased trade. They had the huge land army. Their ally declared war on a weak country, but Austria-Hungary didnt HAVE to do even that. When they did, though, they knew their action would trigger mutual defense pacts.

Bluntly, they did it anyway because they wanted to have a war.

Germany did not have to set foot in the neutral territory of Belgium. Germany did not have to attack France. They did it because they wanted to, and because they thought they would Win -- and thereby be treated as a superpower.

It's obvious that Germany's ambitions made england uncomfortable, and its obvious there was an arms race. And your citing of the nuclear arms race MAKES my point for me (thanks by the way)...the nuclear arms race was even more intense and prolonged, but there was no nuclear war. In the same way, there didnt have to be a World War as the last century ioened. Austria-Hungary and Germany chose to make one.

There's just no way to say that the war was England's fault -- at least no way that's rational. England chose political/economic methods; Germany invaded France.

[storch]

ok this is enough. give me your address i'm invading you.

[Simaril]

Just so theres no penetration -- territorial or otherwise!

[Oldman731]

Originally posted by storch
if memory serves me the austrians declare war and germany backs their ally.

I'm willing to be further educated, point out how this series of events could be considered germany's fault?

Generally people think that the single critical event was Germany's "blank check" to Austria, saying "go on ahead and invade Serbia, if Russia attacks you we'll back you up."  Austria, and everyone else, knew that Austria couldn't defeat Russia without German help.

Probably Austria, of all countries, bore the most responsibility for starting the war.  But it wouldn't have become a WORLD war if it wasn't for the interlocking alliances that were the brain child of old Otto von.  

Given the total screw-up that all the most clever diplomats of Europe got themselves into, it's no wonder that the populations of Europe welcomed Woodrow Wilson so enthusiastically in 1919.

- oldman

[uberhun]

Man this thread went south in a hurry lol! Interesting history perspectives here though............Bottom line war is a dirty wet business. All empires fall.
The Capatalist empire is falling and the Zealot Muslim empire is being born.
It is history repeating itself over and over again. All the reasons for war are moot and futile. Now the threat is a mass assimilation to a belief doctrine or perish.....How many time has the world seen this? How many times has the world branded an upstart a terrorist. How many  times has that terrorist seen themselves a freedom fighter. How many times has a government covertly funded a jihad to promote their ideals?? Point......
The reasons are irrellevent. It is all a matter of persepctive all of them right and all of them wrong. It only matters what side of the fence you are standing on at the time, to skew your perspective. War is a intrinsic last response of man to promote his ideals.............How do you change that??

[Laurie]

Originally posted by Oldman731
Generally people think that the single critical event was Germany's "blank check" to Austria, saying "go on ahead and invade Serbia, if Russia attacks you we'll back you up."  Austria, and everyone else, knew that Austria couldn't defeat Russia without German help.

Probably Austria, of all countries, bore the most responsibility for starting the war.  But it wouldn't have become a WORLD war if it wasn't for the interlocking alliances that were the brain child of old Otto von.  

Given the total screw-up that all the most clever diplomats of Europe got themselves into, it's no wonder that the populations of Europe welcomed Woodrow Wilson so enthusiastically in 1919.

- oldman

yes the 'alliance chain' which i stated but storch seem to over look.

[Laurie]

Originally posted by storch
how can you possibly wade through life being so consistently mistaken.

just so you know simaril, that means that once again you're wrong.

storchie stop digging your hole deeper.