RE: Who started World War I?

RE: Who started World War I? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [General] >> General Discussion

Message

SLAAKMAN -> RE: Who started World War I? (2/8/2014 4:04:11 PM)
quote: I am game although I am not challenged. But the distance, unfortunately, makes it difficult for us to play a boardgame. Distance is only a delay. We'll catch up to it eventually after I destroy the Evil Warspite2-Newblette Conspiracy of course. [:D] [:'(]

Alchenar -> RE: Who started World War I? (2/8/2014 4:31:34 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 I would urge you to post Orm. There is no right or wrong answer because, quite simply, none of us will ever know for certain. I hope the debate will continue in the manner in which it has begun. I cannot see that politics has anything to do with it - this is a historical discussion. So as people have already honed in on, the answer depends on what sense you are asking the question. (simplified answer coming) If you are asking "Why did war start in July 1914?" the the answer is because elements of the German high command deliberately sought to bring on a general European war because they thought it would be in their interests. Why did they want to do that? Because they felt that Germany was under threat by hostile powers and that 1914 was essentially the last chance (because of upgrades to rail infrastructure across Russia making the Schlieffen plan untenable) to do something about that. Why did they feel that? Because Germany was under threat by hostile powers who'd constructed alliances to contain it for various imperialistic reasons (Britain because of the threat of the High Seas Fleet and a desire to keep Germany shut out of the colony game, France to get Alsace-Lorraine back, Russia because it wanted Poland/the Balkans firmly in it's Sphere of Influence). Why was this the case? Because for a hundred years European powers had been playing the Great Game of Imperialism and the stakes were getting higher and higher due to increasing economic interdependence (note that beneath the incredible arms manufacture during the war everyone's civilian economy implodes because trade is completely disrupted). I'm not sure that entangling Alliances were a particularly novel problem in WW1 (the Napoleonic wars were a thing, obviously) - although the extent to which everyone committed to them probably was. Mass industrialised mobilisation was the problem that made it the war it was. So I'd say that Germany was the causal actor that started WW1. But I don't think there's really a moral blame to attach to that - I don't see any reason to believe that any other nation that had found itself in Germany's strategic position would not have acted in precisely the same way, and to that extend I would say that all of the Great Powers were collectively to blame for participating and colluding in a system that did not reward diplomacy and instead encouraged the use of force to protect your interests.

Otto von Blotto -> RE: Who started World War I? (2/8/2014 4:40:28 PM)
Think I will let Richard Curtis and Ben Elton go for me on this. [;)] Private Baldrick: No, the thing is: The way I see it, these days there's a war on, right? and, ages ago, there wasn't a war on, right? So, there must have been a moment when there not being a war on went away, right? and there being a war on came along. So, what I want to know is: How did we get from the one case of affairs to the other case of affairs? Captain Blackadder: Do you mean "How did the war start?" Lieutenant George: The war started because of the vile Hun and his villainous empire- building. Captain Blackadder: George, the British Empire at present covers a quarter of the globe, while the German Empire consists of a small sausage factory in Tanganiki. I hardly think that we can be entirely absolved of blame on the imperialistic front. Lieutenant George: Oh, no, sir, absolutely not. [aside, to Baldrick] Lieutenant George: Mad as a bicycle! Private Baldrick: I heard that it started when a bloke called Archie Duke shot an ostrich 'cause he was hungry. Captain Blackadder: I think you mean it started when the Archduke of Austro-Hungary got shot. Private Baldrick: Nah, there was definitely an ostrich involved, sir. Captain Blackadder: Well, possibly. But the real reason for the whole thing was that it was too much effort not to have a war. Lieutenant George: By Gum, this is interesting. I always loved history. The Battle of Hastings, Henry VIII and his six knives, all that. Captain Blackadder: You see, Baldrick, in order to prevent war in Europe, two superblocs developed: us, the French and the Russians on one side, and the Germans and Austro-Hungary on the other. The idea was to have two vast opposing armies, each acting as the other's deterrent. That way there could never be a war. Private Baldrick: But, this is a sort of a war, isn't it, sir? Captain Blackadder: Yes, that's right. You see, there was a tiny flaw in the plan. Private Baldrick: What was that, sir? Captain Blackadder: It was bollocks. Private Baldrick: So the poor old ostrich died for nothing then.

Orm -> RE: Who started World War I? (2/8/2014 4:45:27 PM)
That was indeed a tiny flaw. [:D]

chemkid -> RE: Who started World War I? (2/8/2014 4:55:41 PM)
.

Lieste -> RE: Who started World War I? (2/8/2014 4:56:50 PM)
Having read the "official papers", I came to my own conclusion that the blame for all out war lies squarely with Britain. We did nothing to dissuade France or Russia from aggressive posturing (and eventual mobilisation), while simultaneously faffing with the Germans, giving an impression that we would choose not to become involved. Earlier our diplomacy in the dispute in the Balkans was feeble in the extreme. An interesting series of books: tSO uncovered editions, published from the official archive of the Stationary Office London. The title of interest - "War 1914 : Punishing the Serbs"; The Stationary Office, London. 1999 (ISBN 0-11-702410-4)

Zorch -> RE: Who started World War I? (2/8/2014 5:15:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Zorch Speaking of the 'P' word, I'm surprised Slaak hasn't jumped in...not that I want him to. Good old Slaak! Knew I could count on you to rise to the occasion.

Alpha77 -> RE: Who started World War I? (2/8/2014 5:38:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Otto von Blotto Think I will let Richard Curtis and Ben Elton go for me on this. [;)] Very cool episode, I thought it is even on youtube...but its not. However here is another splendid outtake: General Melchett visits the troops:[&o] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ejc1wwRGjFk

Lieste -> RE: Who started World War I? (2/8/2014 5:49:09 PM)
It is here: http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xz8pyd_blackadder-how-did-the-war-start_shortfilms

Alpha77 -> RE: Who started World War I? (2/8/2014 5:52:27 PM)
Here is another view regarding WW1 (which is btw. simmilar to the one that is stated in "A Century Of War"): Tragedy and Hope: A History of the World in Our Time Carroll Quigley (1966 MacMillan) The most disturbing section of Tragedy and Hope describes how international bankers engineered World War I and what Quigley calls the Banker-Engendered Deflationary Crisis of 1927-40 (aka the Great Depression). The parallels are unmistakeable between the current �austerity cuts� being forced on us and the harsh economic measures the banks imposed on all western governments between 1918 and 1927. The supposed justification was to repay �debts� for a four year war the bankers themselves initiated. According to Quigley, 19th century capitalism saw a gradual transition from finance capitalism (in which bank loans fund economic growth) and monopoly capitalism (in which the profits generated by corporate monopolies fund growth). Although some private banking families invested in a few monopolies, such as oil companies and railroads. However for the most part, they preferred not to tie up their wealth in industrial stocks, less this deprive them of short term gains from loans and currency speculation. The Threat Posed by German Industrialization In fact, many bankers saw the growth of monopoly capitalism as a serious threat to their own economic interests. Following the 1870 unification under Bismarck, Germany experienced a rapid burst of industrialization, generating sufficient profit that they ceased to rely on investment banks to finance either business or government. A second way German industrialization threatened global bankers was by competing with England and other European countries for export markets. Russia also posed a significant threat, owing to claims it made on the Balkans and the Middle East (and Middle East oil) following the break-up of the Ottoman (Turkish) Empire. Thus between 1870 and 1914, the world banking oligarchy pressured western governments (by controlling their money supply and foreign exchange) to agree to a series of complicated alliances that had the ability to escalate local conflicts in unstable regions formerly controlled by Turkey into a full scale war (on Austria and Germany). The one that ultimately triggered World War I was a false flag incident (blamed on Serbia) involving the assassination of the heir to the Austrian throne. During the same period, the world banking cabal simultaneously hatched a scheme to destabilize Russia by secretly funding the Bolsheviks and other Russian revolutionaries. Turning a Profit from World War I The European central banks had it all worked out beforehand how they would turn the 1914 conflict that began in Sarajevo (which they believed would only last four to six months) to their own profit. Quigley describes a secret meeting in July 1914 (war was declared August 4, 1914) in which the major European bankers agreed to allow the British Treasury to print treasury notes to pay outstanding government bank debts. However this would only be with the understanding that this �fiat� money would be redeemed with gold certificates (via increased taxation) at the war�s end. They ultimately forced similar agreements on France and the US. Financing Hitler and the Nazis When the war ended in 1918, public debt in Western Europe and the US had increased by 1000%. The austerity measures global investment banks forced on the US, England, France and other European countries led to a massive bankruptcies and unemployment and the virtual collapse of foreign trade. Except in Germany. The global banking elite used the wealth generated from debt repayment to finance rapid German re-industrialization and militarization, along with the Nazi movement created by Hitler and the increasingly powerful German corporations, such as IG Farben, Siemens (renamed Bayer), Daimler Benz, Porsche/Volksvagen and Krupp. Quigley identifies American banks and corporations who helped finance the Nazi movement, which included Kodak, Ford, Coca-Cola, DuPont, Standard Oil, IBM, Random House and Chase Bank. The bankers justified funding Hitler and re-militarizing Germany by talking of the need to contain a growing world communist movement � which they themselves had created. http://stuartbramhall.aegauthorblogs.com/2011/10/20/how-bankers-engineered-world-war-i-bolshevism-nazism-and-the-great-depression/

warspite1 -> RE: Who started World War I? (2/8/2014 5:57:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lieste Having read the "official papers", I came to my own conclusion that the blame for all out war lies squarely with Britain. We did nothing to dissuade France or Russia from aggressive posturing (and eventual mobilisation), while simultaneously faffing with the Germans, giving an impression that we would choose not to become involved. Earlier our diplomacy in the dispute in the Balkans was feeble in the extreme. An interesting series of books: tSO uncovered editions, published from the official archive of the Stationary Office London. The title of interest - "War 1914 : Punishing the Serbs"; The Stationary Office, London. 1999 (ISBN 0-11-702410-4) warspite1 I'd be interested to hear further on the Balkan diplomacy shortcomings.

SLAAKMAN -> RE: Who started World War I? (2/8/2014 6:24:21 PM)
quote: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reinsurance_Treaty Reinsurance Treaty The Reinsurance Treaty of June 18, 1887 was an attempt by German Chancellor Otto von Bismarck to continue to ally with Russia after the League of the Three Emperors had broken down in the aftermath of the 1885 Serbo-Bulgarian War. Facing the competition between Russia and Austria�Hungary on the Balkans, Bismarck felt that this agreement was essential to prevent a Russian convergence toward France and to continue the diplomatic isolation of the French so ensuring German security against a threatening two-front war. He thereby hazarded the expansion of the Russian sphere of influence toward the Mediterranean and diplomatic tensions with Vienna. The secret treaty signed by Bismarck and the Russian Foreign Minister Nikolay Girs was split in two parts: Germany and Russia both agreed to observe neutrality should the other be involved in a war with a third country. Neutrality would not apply should Germany attack France or Russia attack Austria-Hungary. In the most secret completion protocol Germany declared herself neutral in the event of a Russian intervention in the Bosphorus and the Dardanelles. As part of Bismarck's system of "periphery diversion" the treaty was highly dependent on his personal reputation. After the dismissal of Bismarck, his successor Leo von Caprivi felt unable to obtain success in keeping this policy, while the German Foreign Office under Friedrich von Holstein had already prepared a renunciation toward the Dual Alliance with Austria�Hungary. When in 1890 Russia asked for a renewal of the treaty, Germany refused persistently. Kaiser Wilhelm II believed his own personal relationship with Tsar Alexander III would be sufficient to ensure further genial diplomatic ties and felt that maintaining a close bond with Russia would act to the detriment of his aims to attract Britain into the German sphere. Like the ongoing Austro-Russian conflict, the Anglo-Russian relations too were strained at this point due to the gaining influence of Russia in the Balkans and their aims to open up the Straits of the Dardanelles which would threaten British colonial interests in the Middle East. However, having become alarmed at its growing isolation, Saint Petersburg, as Bismarck had feared, entered into the Franco-Russian Alliance in 1892 thus bringing to an end the French isolation. According to professor Bury, the dismissal of chancellor Bismarck, the erratic temper of emperor William II, and the uncertain policy of the men who succeeded Bismarck (partly out of consideration for England they failed to renew the Reinsurance Treaty with Russia but did renew the Triple Alliance), were joint causes of the inauguration of a period of fundamental change.[1] In 1896 the treaty was exposed by a German newspaper, the Hamburger Nachrichten, which caused an outcry in Germany and Austria-Hungary. The failure of this treaty is seen as one of the factors contributing to World War I, due to Germany's increasing sense of diplomatic isolation.

TulliusDetritus -> RE: Who started World War I? (2/8/2014 6:30:15 PM)
Alpha, is this Quigley guy for real? quote: When the war ended in 1918 [...] The austerity measures global investment banks forced on the US, England, France and other European countries led to a massive bankruptcies and unemployment and the virtual collapse of foreign trade. Except in Germany. LOL The 20s are synonymous of BOOM, growth! It's Ford's "you can have any colour as long as it's black" Golden Era [:D] Germany was the exception then LOL Quigley also missed the German massive hyperinflation in the early 20s! He got all wrong [:D] quote: The global banking elite used the wealth generated from debt repayment to finance rapid German re-industrialization and militarization, along with the Nazi movement created by Hitler Quigley is here out of his depth. He is confusing and mixing different events. It looks like both rearming Germany AND helping Hitler happened at the same time then... This is totally hilarious and false though [:D] Hitler's career started in the early 20s (the Putsch in 1923). He managed to grab power in 1933. And re-armament only started in 1935 IIRC! Before that date the different German governments (Republic of Weimar) were respecting the Treaty of Versailles (ergo NO rearmament). But according to Quigley Germany was re-arming herself since the early, middle 20s!

Alpha77 -> RE: Who started World War I? (2/8/2014 6:52:02 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TulliusDetritus Alpha, is this Quigley guy for real? quote: When the war ended in 1918 [...] The austerity measures global investment banks forced on the US, England, France and other European countries led to a massive bankruptcies and unemployment and the virtual collapse of foreign trade. Except in Germany. LOL The 20s are synonymous of BOOM, growth! It's Ford's "you can have any colour as long as it's black" Golden Era [:D] Germany was the exception then LOL Quigley also missed the German massive hyperinflation in the early 20s! He got all wrong [:D] quote: The global banking elite used the wealth generated from debt repayment to finance rapid German re-industrialization and militarization, along with the Nazi movement created by Hitler Quigley is here out of his depth. He is confusing and mixing different events. It looks like both rearming Germany AND helping Hitler happened at the same time then... This is totally hilarious and false though [:D] Hitler's career started in the early 20s (the Putsch in 1923). He managed to grab power in 1933. And re-armament only started in 1935 IIRC! Before that date the different German governments (Republic of Weimar) were respecting the Treaty of Versailles (ergo NO rearmament). But according to Quigley Germany was re-arming herself since the early, middle 20s! There are no precise time scales in the article. The re-armament happened in the 30ties. Before that Germany was still bound by the Versailles treaty. The Weimar inflation was caused mostly by the huge debt sums it had to pay as GER was identified as the main culprit starting the war, by the Allied powers at Versailles. The "great depression" wasnt caused by inflation but certainly also had most causes in WW1. The Nazi movement started totally weak, they even lost elections and the Putsch was a disaster (Hitler went to prison for a time where he wrote "Mein Kampf"). Nazi movement got steam as soon it got huge (financial) support from different sources. Some of these sources were surely banks as well big companies. Some of em outside Germany (eg. US ones). But guess too OT the second part.

TulliusDetritus -> RE: Who started World War I? (2/8/2014 7:33:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Alpha77 There are no precise time scales in the article. I'm afraid there is indeed a "precise date". "When the war ended" [;)] What came next? The 20s. And Quigley wants us to think Germany = ok and the US (and others, but most importantly the US) = catastrophe. And yet the 20s were an economic Golden Era. But maybe our Quigley -despite the "when the war ended"- jumped to a post-1929 scenario (and this without even mentioning this crucial event) [;)] Or maybe he is talking about AD 2456... or AD 2847 for that matter. In fact, maybe he is talking about AD 137, when the Roman Emperor of the time was sponsoring local German Chieftains along the Rhine border to stay calm. Eh, no precise dates are a good thing after all [;)] Sorry to say that but the guy is clearly a lunatic.

Alpha77 -> RE: Who started World War I? (2/8/2014 7:42:43 PM)
Well I posted it for the general cosenus, its not very detailed and wrong on some data.......better read "a century of war" - but I guess most are aware of the basic facts anyway (who profits from wars the most - also those who profit will lure nations into wars - cui bono) BTW: The great depression started in the late 20s. So you are not quite right with your data, too [:-] Also for what you praise the 20ties - it was more a kind of a huge bubble, which finally burst in �29. Sending the western world into depression... So this is how ur golden 20ties look: [image]http://blogs.cas.suffolk.edu/history182/files/2013/03/great-depression2soup-line.jpg[/image] Not to forget: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depression_of_1920%E2%80%9321

TulliusDetritus -> RE: Who started World War I? (2/8/2014 8:02:02 PM)
I am absolutely right with my data. The 20s were an economic Golden Era. I gave you a clue: Ford [;)] Then came the crash in 1929. And let people discuss about WWI [:)]

Alpha77 -> RE: Who started World War I? (2/8/2014 8:14:39 PM)
If you call stock market bubbles "golden" then yes [;)] This is the last OT sentence from me: You said, the 20s were "golden" thats sadly not right because we had a depression in the beginning and the end of the 20ties. Or oyou are the opionion that 1921 or 1929 does not belong to the 20ties [&:] So lets hear now some more opinions who WW1 started [:)]

SLAAKMAN -> RE: Who started World War I? (2/8/2014 8:18:16 PM)
quote: And let people discuss about WWI THE EVIL, SILLY WARSPITE2-CHICKENBOY-NEWBLETTE CARTEL CAUSED WWI & WWII UNDER ORDERS OF THE ILLUMINATI. NOW THEY MUST PAY REPARATIONS BY DOWNLOADING VASSAL-WiF & CYBERBOARD-FATAL ALLIANCES & FACE ME IN BATTLE!! [sm=00000023.gif] [image]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/c7/PanzerIII%28Afrika%292.jpg[/image]

Capt. Harlock -> RE: Who started World War I? (2/8/2014 8:29:18 PM)
It would be interesting (but mostly a matter of opinion) to make a list of which countries went to war for principles, and which went to war for gain. There would be greed-inspired nations on both sides, especially Italy and Japan on the side of the Allies. But I confess I'm not sure in which column to place the Ottoman Empire. Did they want simply to push the Russians back after the encroachments in central Asia, or did the Central Powers promise them territory in the Balkans?

Lieste -> RE: Who started World War I? (2/8/2014 8:32:21 PM)
Germany had previously promised Russia a free hand against them (lapsed by 1914, but nevertheless a historical posture, that may be permitted still).

TulliusDetritus -> RE: Who started World War I? (2/8/2014 8:46:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Capt. Harlock It would be interesting (but mostly a matter of opinion) to make a list of which countries went to war for principles, and which went to war for gain. There would be greed-inspired nations on both sides, especially Italy and Japan on the side of the Allies. But I confess I'm not sure in which column to place the Ottoman Empire. Did they want simply to push the Russians back after the encroachments in central Asia, or did the Central Powers promise them territory in the Balkans? Very unlikely. Balkanic states had already trashed Turkey some years before (I can't see how they could have accepted that yoke again). And the Turks were not anymore a powerful state. They were weak and feared above all the Russians. And rightly so as the latter wanted to rob them. EDIT for the lulz: funnily enough, they joined the Dark Side of the Force, thus on the losing side (who would have thought it), and ended up being robbed by France and the British Empire (it's what happens when you lose a war). Russia was not allowed to swallow her part of the pie because Lenin & his chums had left the arena and were ruling Mother Russia [sm=00000622.gif]

sullafelix -> RE: Who started World War I? (2/8/2014 9:06:11 PM)
The " blank check " that was given Austria was not thought to be to the Germans an excuse for war or an invasion. They were taken aback at the Austrian demands. At least some in the government. The one person who really started the war was Wilhelm II.By letting the three power accord between Russia,Austria and Germany expire.By destroying all of Bismark's hard work, the war is really in his lap. Once Russia was left out they had to find an ally somewhere and it sure wasn't going to be England.

Orm -> RE: Who started World War I? (2/8/2014 10:22:12 PM)
quote: The one person who really started the war was Wilhelm II.By letting the three power accord between Russia,Austria and Germany expire.By destroying all of Bismark's hard work, the war is really in his lap. So are you saying that by not allying he started the war?

catwhoorg -> RE: Who started World War I? (2/8/2014 10:42:30 PM)
I think Curtis/Elton are actually perilously close to the truth. Two vast super alliances, with members with itchy trigger fingers. It was inevitable.

Joe D. -> RE: Who started World War I? (2/8/2014 10:47:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: chemkid thank you Curtis Lemay! +1 Ditto +1

danlongman -> RE: Who started World War I? (2/8/2014 11:54:22 PM)
It is my belief that Alchenar said it best. There could have been a "containable" war in the Balkans and Eastern Europe. We shall never know because the German response to all the strutting and posturing was to unleash an aggressive war in the West against France and Belgium since that was their war plan, seen to be immutable. That precipitated the involvement of Britain, not allowing that empire to hedge their bets and play for advantage while others fought. ("Perfidious Albion" and all a'that.) Contributing factors were many and varied. Launching the Schleiffen Plan made continental war inevitable and the involvement of the British Empire would make it a world war. So the German General Staff with approval of the Kaiser elevated a nasty mess to a world changing catastrophe. The Second World War was probably just act two of the same paroxysm and the Cold War the denouement. There has been a brief intermission and now the boys are just getting suited up for the next one. Haven't picked sides yet but Bush II would have made a great Kaiser Bill. Too bad he's not playing anymore.

british exil -> RE: Who started World War I? (2/9/2014 12:19:58 AM)
The Ottoman Empire was building up in the area we today call the Arab States. They controlled the areas of todays Lebanon, Israel and Iraq. They had, with aid of German enginering built the Bagdad railway which was a target in WWI by the Allied forces using the Arab tribes under T.E.Lawrence "Lawrence of Arabia". The Turks were quite a powerful force in the desert area, not though in the Serb or Austro Hungary territories. Mat

rodney727 -> RE: Who started World War I? (2/9/2014 2:00:43 AM)
Sure sure remind me again who declared war on whom? quote: ORIGINAL: Terminus Germany, France and Russia all wanted war in 1914, but the Germans were definitely the aggressive power. Austria-Hungary was merely a tool for Germany.

rodney727 -> RE: Who started World War I? (2/9/2014 2:14:49 AM)
I think the more reasonable and rational question is who set the seed that planted WW2. quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 Given its the 100th anniversary of start of the Great War, I thought it would be interesting to hear peoples views on this. There has been a lot of books and programs over the recent past that have challenged the "Germany did it" version of events. Have people been swayed by these arguments? Have they always held a different view anyway? or have they read the new ideas and rejected them? Its a fascinating subject - anyone interested in such a debate?

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.953125