First World War officially ends

[opposum]

The First World War will officially end on Sunday, 92 years after the guns fell silent, when Germany pays off the last chunk of reparations imposed on it by the Allies.



- so I was told by my history professor....



opposum

[StokesAk]

My history teacher said the same exact thing.

[Blooz]

Serbia started it!

Did not!
Did too!
Did not!
Did too!

[RoGenT]

Better late than never.


  to all who were in that war, regardless of what uniform they wore.

[SEseph]

Serbia started it!

Did not!
Did too!
Did not!
Did too!

Britian started it. While Austria-Hungary made a few demands that were over the top, they were not wrong in their desire to want restitution. At that time, the German, Austria-Hungary alliance was tipping the balance of power. Had Britian stepped in and said the demands were a bit out of line, but not exactly wrong, the war never would have begun. Yet Britian threw her weight behind Serbia and the Allies, forcing a balance of power, there by inciting the war.

This is a highly debated topic and you can find more and more students of history throwing their weight behind such an idea. Serbia fired the first shot, but Britian condoned the shot and encouraged it.

[Treize69]

Britian started it. While Austria-Hungary made a few demands that were over the top, they were not wrong in their desire to want restitution. At that time, the German, Austria-Hungary alliance was tipping the balance of power. Had Britian stepped in and said the demands were a bit out of line, but not exactly wrong, the war never would have begun. Yet Britian threw her weight behind Serbia and the Allies, forcing a balance of power, there by inciting the war.

This is a highly debated topic and you can find more and more students of history throwing their weight behind such an idea. Serbia fired the first shot, but Britian condoned the shot and encouraged it.

Yet another example of how England ruined the modern world. 

[Oldman731]

Britian started it. While Austria-Hungary made a few demands that were over the top, they were not wrong in their desire to want restitution. At that time, the German, Austria-Hungary alliance was tipping the balance of power. Had Britian stepped in and said the demands were a bit out of line, but not exactly wrong, the war never would have begun. Yet Britian threw her weight behind Serbia and the Allies, forcing a balance of power, there by inciting the war.

This is a highly debated topic and you can find more and more students of history throwing their weight behind such an idea. Serbia fired the first shot, but Britian condoned the shot and encouraged it.

Ah.  I would like a pint of what you've been drinking.

I mean...seriously....?

- oldman

[Digr1]

I always thought that WWI ended on November 11 at 11 pm. at least thats what the history books say

[oakranger]

I always thought that WWI ended on November 11 at 11 pm. at least thats what the history books say

It did, but i think there where some countries that were still at war with each other.  Kind like the Korea War, still going on but no fighting. 

[Treize69]

I always thought that WWI ended on November 11 at 11 pm. at least thats what the history books say

That was just the armistice that ended the fighting (Hence November 11 originally being 'Armistice Day' in many Allied countries). The actual end of the war wasn't until the Treaty of Versailles was ratified on June 28, 1919 (recognized by the League of Nations in 1920).

Incidentally, the US never signed the Treaty. Wilson did as a framer, but it was never ratified by Congress (was rejected by vote on March 19, 1920). The US didn't officially declare the war over until the Knox-Porter resolution was signed into law by Warren G. Harding on July 21, 1921.

[Lusche]

It did, but i think there where some countries that were still at war with each other.  Kind like the Korea War, still going on but no fighting. 

November 11 was the armistice, which actually had to be renewed every 30 days. The treaty of Versaille  (28 June 1919) was the peace treaty that formally ended the war.

The Korean War only saw an armistice, never a peace treaty. So WWI did officially end, Korean War did not.

[Perrine]

Is it bad that I know more about how WW2 than WW1?

All I know with WW1 in my head is that somewhere in what used to be yugoslavia started it, and then top-tiered euro countries such as russia, england, france and germany got into it; and after the war USA became like what China is today - a money lender with huge stock surplus money

[SEseph]

Ah.  I would like a pint of what you've been drinking.

I mean...seriously....?

- oldman

Here are a few exerts from a book review covering Splendid Isolation? Britain, the Balance of Power and the Origins of the First World War by John Charmley. John Charmley (born 1955) is a British diplomatic historian and a professor of modern history at the University of East Anglia, where he is head of the School of History. Charmley's historical work has proved to be controversial. The review in it's entirety can be found at http://www.history.ac.uk/reviews/review/198

"In doing so, Charmley argues, they helped to bring about the decline of this country in the twentieth century. The decision for war in 1914 was, then, the most fatal one in a series of political blunders from the late 1870s to 1939."

...assessment of German diplomacy during the crisis, including also the discussions about the possibility of a preventive war against France. ~ He is right to point that 'the skies had not fallen in and civilization had not ended' following France's defeat in the war of 1870 in which Britain remained neutral (p.2). Perhaps the skies would not have fallen in 1914 either, had Britain remained aloof from the war on the continent.

I first became interested in this when my History Professor started talking about such. It is hard to change ones way of thinking after believe one way for so long, but even if you disagree, keep an open mind to other possible stances.

Remember, the winner writes history.

[R 105]

Woodrow Wilson almost single handled caused the rise of Hitler and WWII with this Treaty of Versailles and his League of Nations. Had Wilson not entered WWI and up set the balance of power. All sides would have ran out of steam and had an armistice by 1919. Everyone would have gone home and history would have went another way. What Woodrow Wilson did in WWI caused not only WWII but the cold war the Korean war the Vietnam war and about any thing else related to the rise of Fascism and Communism world wide including here is the USA. Not just the Germans got screwed by Wilson and his progressive agenda at Versailles France  in 1919, we all did.

[Oldman731]

Woodrow Wilson almost single handled caused the rise of Hitler and WWII with this Treaty of Versailles and his League of Nations.

You guys are beginning to scare me.

SEseph, I have not read Charmley's book.  I did read Otte's review (thank you).  I think you may overstate Charmley's thesis when you say:

Britian started it. While Austria-Hungary made a few demands that were over the top, they were not wrong in their desire to want restitution. At that time, the German, Austria-Hungary alliance was tipping the balance of power. Had Britian stepped in and said the demands were a bit out of line, but not exactly wrong, the war never would have begun. Yet Britian threw her weight behind Serbia and the Allies, forcing a balance of power, there by inciting the war.

This is a highly debated topic and you can find more and more students of history throwing their weight behind such an idea. Serbia fired the first shot, but Britian condoned the shot and encouraged it.

Charmley's contention seems to be that England should simply have stayed out of the war.  No one can ever tell what result that might have had.  But unless there has been some radical discovery, Austria-Hungary wasn't seeking "restitution" from Serbia, nor did the Serbs fire the first shot.  France and Russia were both convinced that they were more than a match for Germany, whether England participated or not.  To the extent that Charmley actually argues that Britain started the war, he follows in the footsteps of people like AJP Taylor, who tried to do the same thing for WWII, thereby losing what had been a reasonably good scholarly reputation.

R105, where in the world did you learn that the war simply would have ended with an armistice had the US not joined in?  As it was the German 1918 offensives very nearly carried the day, and arguably would have done so had we not had our troops and, equally important, our supplies in some critical locations.

- oldman