Originally posted by Pongo:
Yes.
I asked you how Kaiser Wilhelm would have acted if he won.
If he won we would've won a partial victory. THere was no way to win a complete victory with Britain in the game. Your question is out of context, and not applicable to the 1914 war.
But if you ask me if a miracle had happened and Germany had won a complete victory in 1918 over France and UK I am sure that a very close error would've happened,but in the German's side ,not on the allied. So?. Same story, nothing learned. And I'd blame Willy just as I blame people who instigated Versalles.
Who knows maybe today we'd be discussing about if the conditions put by Germany were too hard for France, and...
Instead of awnsering me you detailed what shape Germany was in in 1918 and how the war might have ended and quantified what I meant by victory. I meant victory, Like the allied Victory.
As I said, that scenario is out of possibility. But you asked for an answer, you got it avobe.
You detail the problems Germany had. Yet you make no account for the problems her enemies had. The Russians in civil war, Both western powers bankrupt and in the midst of social strife.
[/b]
Ahem...I said:
"Ever if Paris had fallen ,France may had kept the fight... A negociated peace would have followed because there was no will to fight from any side. "
That accounts for both sides. France Army played only minor part on land battles after the great revolts in 1916-17. And yes ,they had internal problems. But no, nothing near Germany and Austria's problems (lack of food, lack of resources due to the commerce blockade, Austria near disintegration, active antikaiser groups in Germany...)
internal disorder was way more profound in the Central Powers than in Allied side.And so I noted it. I was putting a what-if Germany had won the war, and explaining why wasnt possible to make the war longer than it was,from the German side.
Of course, Russia is a complete different thing, too. I left it at a side because I dont know enough about the Russian Civil War to make my opinion on how would have affected a victorious Germany in 1918.
But I am sure about one thing. A pacted victory for the central powers in 1918 like the one I describe (the only possible for Germany in WWI), would've had the same effect like in Versalles regarding the East situation.(I.E. Devolution of all conquered zones to russia, new Polish state-but of course with no Danzig corridor-, and creation of the Baltic states).
I point out to you that Versalles was not in effect at the invasion of Poland and you basicaly state that it doenst matter.
Because it doesnt.
It is this simple: my reasons to argue so hard against Versalles treaty are, EXACTLY, Hitler and nazism. After Versalles, Germany was an open field for extremist ideologies. Communism was violently repressed, because it was feared. Nazism was a new concept and of course not so feared. Had Versalles happened in a more fair way, Nazism wont have had such incendiary effect on the early 30's Germany. IMHO it wont have happened at all.
So in 1938 it doesnt matter if Versalles is in effect or not, because the evil is done. Hitler is in power and nazism on full action.
Once Hitler was in power the war was on. But the German people had 6? years to stop the war then.
Here is where its clear you always lived on a free country. Lucky you.
And thier guilt is greater not lesser for letting it happen in spite of the appeasment that they recieved. The truth is they wanted war.
You are nothing but confirming my points. After 1870 France wanted revenge on Germany. After 1919 Germany wanted revenge on the allies just because the same reasons as France had in 1870. That was my point from the start, you are doing nothing but give me the reason here: vengeance treaties are only the embryon to another conflict of bigger and worse dimensions.
Had versalles been a fair treaty,there'd been no desire for a revenge war in Germany. I hate Versalles because It wasnt a fair treaty, and so made things like nazism and a revenge war possible.
As I said, you are giving me the reason.
They wanted revenge not for Versalles but for their defeat. They got everything they wanted.
If you want to debate who is to blame for a war. Pick a different war.
They wanted revenge on a shameful peace treaty, they wanted revenge on the countries that put so monstruous conditions for a peace.
If they wanted revenge for the defeat not the treaty, how come that now France and Germany are friend governments? how come German people are so friendly?...because Germany was defeated in WWII, too...if there is a revenge desire for losing a war and not because the abuse of a abusive peace treaty, tell me why is Germany now so well integrated with France and UK?
If after WWII a Versalles'2 treaty had happened I am sure we would had seen another raged and revenge-wanting Germany raising.
Because noone likes to live under another country's shoe because they lost a war.
[edit]I'm not Germanophyle. I am objective. I always looked at those things from an outher perspective (for sure way less in WWII than in WWI).
I have no reason to symphatyze with germany, I have no german relatives I've never been in Germany.
I look all from the outside. I look it all the objective I can.
Thats why I sometimes may seem Germanophyle...because I think that history doesnt tell all the truth as commonly told.[edit]
[This message has been edited by RAM (edited 08-03-2000).]
