Who caused WW1 - revisited (Full Version)

All Forums >> [General] >> General Discussion



Message


GaryChildress -> Who caused WW1 - revisited (8/3/2017 6:33:43 AM)

There was a discussion quite a while back, probably a couple years ago now, concerning who ought to be credited with starting World War I. Several seemed to maintain it was Germany for giving Austria-Hungary a "blank check" to invade Serbia. I don't remember if this was explored or not but what was the verdict on Russia? Didn't Russia come to Serbia's aid and essentially strengthen Serbia's resolve not to give into Austria-Hungary's demands? I confess I'm not at all familiar with the history of WW1. I am more familiar with WWII and I suspect Germany's invasion of the Soviet Union may have been spurred on by the perception that Russia's involvement in things set the wheels in motion for WW1.




rico21 -> RE: Who caused WW1 - revisited (8/3/2017 7:44:48 AM)

It's much simpler start WWI and start WWII are first and foremost the confrontation of Germany and France, the rest is literature...




Trugrit -> RE: Who caused WW1 - revisited (8/3/2017 9:48:57 AM)

Gary,

It is very complicated.

I suggest you listen to this podcast on WW1. It is free. It will help make it all clear.

This is the first podcast in the series:
http://www.dancarlin.com/product/hardcore-history-50-blueprint-for-armageddon-i/

This is the main page. The WW1 podcast has 6 parts.
http://www.dancarlin.com/hardcore-history-series/





loki100 -> RE: Who caused WW1 - revisited (8/3/2017 9:50:58 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Gary Childress

There was a discussion quite a while back, probably a couple years ago now, concerning who ought to be credited with starting World War I. Several seemed to maintain it was Germany for giving Austria-Hungary a "blank check" to invade Serbia. I don't remember if this was explored or not but what was the verdict on Russia? Didn't Russia come to Serbia's aid and essentially strengthen Serbia's resolve not to give into Austria-Hungary's demands? I confess I'm not at all familiar with the history of WW1. I am more familiar with WWII and I suspect Germany's invasion of the Soviet Union may have been spurred on by the perception that Russia's involvement in things set the wheels in motion for WW1.


there is blame a-plenty to spread around all the powers. In general, I think that no-one wanted it - they all thought they could get their goals without a general war - but no-one could work out how to avoid it. For a variety of reasons almost every state had domestic problems and a war was potentially useful as a means to deflect this.

The UK as an eg, was facing renewed violence in Ireland - this time largely from the Protestant/Loyalist communities who felt they were being sold out, ongoing major strikes from a newly emboldened trades union movement and the unrest around restrictions on the vote. I'm not saying the British state sat down and decided on a war to deflect attention but to some extent a war was a potentially helpful outcome ... just not the war they got into.

Russian-Serb relations were complex. Russia had been playing in the Balkans since the 1860s and looking for a reliable partner. The Serbs had very much their own agendas incl clashes with Russia's previous preferred partner (Bulgaria). The Serb extremists were certainly prepared to bring about war with Austria, but whether Russia's potential backing made much difference is less clear.

The problem was that every European General Staff had worked out a complex mobilisation plan - as they all relied on reservists for most of their army. This took time to work through and rarely had much flexibility so once one side started the others followed, and they couldn't part mobilise as that would have disrupted the original schedule.

As to wider responsibility? Fundamentally Germany. They deliberately provoked the other powers, crossed lines that meant there was bound to be a re-action and generally acted as if the logic of cause and effect had been suspended.




RedLancer -> RE: Who caused WW1 - revisited (8/3/2017 3:15:06 PM)

If you can find BBC TV's Drama "37 Days" online I highly recommend it as an enjoyable watch on the countdown to WW1.




zakblood -> RE: Who caused WW1 - revisited (8/3/2017 3:16:19 PM)

agreed ^^




Aurorus -> RE: Who caused WW1 - revisited (8/3/2017 3:23:54 PM)

The definitive book on the subject of what caused WWI is Laurence Lafore´s The Long Fuse. It is required reading for every graduate student in European history.




Chickenboy -> RE: Who caused WW1 - revisited (8/3/2017 3:27:29 PM)

I enjoyed the "Great Courses: World War I: The Great War" audio book lectures by Professor Vejas Gabriel Liulevicius. I checked these out from my library and recommend them. It's 36 lectures, but they're well done. The first 4-5 lectures deal with the instigation of the war, causes, responses and the initial rush to militancy.




warspite1 -> RE: Who caused WW1 - revisited (8/3/2017 4:10:26 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Gary Childress

There was a discussion quite a while back, probably a couple years ago now, concerning who ought to be credited with starting World War I.

warspite1

You mean this one?

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3541193&mpage=1&key=austria-hungary


quote:

If you can find BBC TV's Drama "37 Days" online I highly recommend it as an enjoyable watch on the countdown to WW1.


+1 - stonking [&o]




warspite1 -> RE: Who caused WW1 - revisited (8/3/2017 4:29:29 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

I enjoyed the "Great Courses: World War I: The Great War" audio book lectures by Professor Vejas Gabriel Liulevicius. I checked these out from my library and recommend them. It's 36 lectures, but they're well done. The first 4-5 lectures deal with the instigation of the war, causes, responses and the initial rush to militancy.
warspite1

So is that what he's doing when he's not hanging out in The Thread?




VPaulus -> RE: Who caused WW1 - revisited (8/3/2017 5:06:40 PM)

I also suggest the reading of William Jannen's "The Lions of July: Prelude to War, 1914".




Lecivius -> RE: Who caused WW1 - revisited (8/3/2017 7:11:09 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1


quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

I enjoyed the "Great Courses: World War I: The Great War" audio book lectures by Professor Vejas Gabriel Liulevicius. I checked these out from my library and recommend them. It's 36 lectures, but they're well done. The first 4-5 lectures deal with the instigation of the war, causes, responses and the initial rush to militancy.
warspite1

So is that what he's doing when he's not hanging out in The Thread?




Hey, I resemble that remark!!




warspite1 -> RE: Who caused WW1 - revisited (8/3/2017 7:31:28 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lecivius


quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1


quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

I enjoyed the "Great Courses: World War I: The Great War" audio book lectures by Professor Vejas Gabriel Liulevicius. I checked these out from my library and recommend them. It's 36 lectures, but they're well done. The first 4-5 lectures deal with the instigation of the war, causes, responses and the initial rush to militancy.
warspite1

So is that what he's doing when he's not hanging out in The Thread?




Hey, I resemble that remark!!
warspite1

[:)]




operating -> RE: Who caused WW1 - revisited (8/3/2017 9:52:01 PM)

Found this program pretty interesting about the week to week events about WW I: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6FgaL0xIazk&list=PLB2vhKMBjSxMK8YelHj6VS6w3KxuKsMvT




Fred98 -> RE: Who caused WW1 - revisited (8/3/2017 10:08:20 PM)

In the years leading up to the Great War, there were a few wars in the Balkans. Everyone thought this would be another small war in the Balkans.

However the Ottoman Empire attacked Serbia centuries ago and Russia became friends with Serbia. Russia decided to assist Serbia and then the Germans intervened.
.




bayonetbrant -> RE: Who caused WW1 - revisited (8/4/2017 12:21:12 AM)

As taught by Dr John Riddle, Professor of History at NC State

quote:

Croeses fell off his horse.




Capt. Harlock -> RE: Who caused WW1 - revisited (8/4/2017 2:11:58 AM)

quote:

In general, I think that no-one wanted it - they all thought they could get their goals without a general war


I'm afraid I can't agree. Germany and France knew that sooner or later they would come to blows over Alsace and Lorraine. There may have been those who wanted peace in the German government, but the German military had their toy -- the Von Schlieffen Plan -- that they were just itching to try. Fighting both France and Russia (and Belgium into the bargain) is a general war no matter how you slice it.




warspite1 -> RE: Who caused WW1 - revisited (8/4/2017 3:07:00 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Gary Childress

There was a discussion quite a while back, probably a couple years ago now, concerning who ought to be credited with starting World War I. Several seemed to maintain it was Germany for giving Austria-Hungary a "blank check" to invade Serbia. I don't remember if this was explored or not but what was the verdict on Russia? Didn't Russia come to Serbia's aid and essentially strengthen Serbia's resolve not to give into Austria-Hungary's demands? I confess I'm not at all familiar with the history of WW1. I am more familiar with WWII and I suspect Germany's invasion of the Soviet Union may have been spurred on by the perception that Russia's involvement in things set the wheels in motion for WW1.
warspite1

I don't think memories of WWI (as far as Russia was concerned) had any role in the thinking of Adolf Hitler.

Hitler wanted to ensure that Germany was self-sufficient. That she could never be blockaded into submission again (whether she actually was or not is not really relevant). He looked at the USA and wanted that for Germany. Russia (Soviet Union) was the only place that could provide 'Lebensraum' and his wet dream of a Greater German Empire stretching all the way to the Urals. Oil of the Caucasus, wheat from the Ukraine, plus all the other minerals and resources that such a huge land mass can provide; that was his goal, not some revenge mission for what happened in 1914.




loki100 -> RE: Who caused WW1 - revisited (8/4/2017 5:53:01 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1


...

I don't think memories of WWI (as far as Russia was concerned) had any role in the thinking of Adolf Hitler.

Hitler wanted to ensure that Germany was self-sufficient. That she could never be blockaded into submission again (whether she actually was or not is not really relevant). He looked at the USA and wanted that for Germany. Russia (Soviet Union) was the only place that could provide 'Lebensraum' and his wet dream of a Greater German Empire stretching all the way to the Urals. Oil of the Caucasus, wheat from the Ukraine, plus all the other minerals and resources that such a huge land mass can provide; that was his goal, not some revenge mission for what happened in 1914.



It might actually. The 'railway war' of 1917 is often cited in German memoires of how they envisaged the second half of Barbarossa working out, after they had destroyed the Red Army west of the Dneipr. So they had a model of how easy it was to advance in Russia once the main armies had fallen apart.

In addition, their occupation of the Ukraine from 1917-18 was relatively easy for them. Mainly as even though the Civil War had already started neither the Soviets nor the Whites wanted to tangle with the Germans so there was neither military operations nor an attempt at creating civil unrest in that region till after the German withdrawal in December 1918. Contrast this with the sheer chaos the French and Greeks walked into when they intervened in the Ukraine in 1919.

Not saying this directly affected the politics behind Barbarossa, but it did influence how the German commanders envisaged the war working out.




Fred98 -> RE: Who caused WW1 - revisited (8/4/2017 2:20:43 PM)

The Gene Jeanie says that I am more right that you are!




warspite1 -> RE: Who caused WW1 - revisited (8/4/2017 4:03:09 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: loki100

I am more familiar with WWII and I suspect Germany's invasion of the Soviet Union may have been spurred on by the perception that Russia's involvement in things set the wheels in motion for WW1.

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1

I don't think memories of WWI (as far as Russia was concerned) had any role in the thinking of Adolf Hitler.

Hitler wanted to ensure that Germany was self-sufficient. That she could never be blockaded into submission again (whether she actually was or not is not really relevant). He looked at the USA and wanted that for Germany. Russia (Soviet Union) was the only place that could provide 'Lebensraum' and his wet dream of a Greater German Empire stretching all the way to the Urals. Oil of the Caucasus, wheat from the Ukraine, plus all the other minerals and resources that such a huge land mass can provide; that was his goal, not some revenge mission for what happened in 1914.



Not saying this directly affected the politics behind Barbarossa, but it did influence how the German commanders envisaged the war working out.
warspite1

Just to be clear though loki, I was answering Gary's point about what could have been behind AH's decision to invade as opposed to the way it panned out - or was thought it might - pan out. I don't recall anything in Mein Kampf or subsequent speeches to suggest his attention toward the Soviet Union was anything other than the wish for Lebensraum.





WingedIncubus -> RE: Who caused WW1 - revisited (8/29/2017 5:33:54 PM)

One thing to keep in mind in Germany's calculations involving Russia was that in 1914 - just like with Hitler in 1940-1941 - Russia was in the midst of reorganizing its Army and increasing its industrial armament production. Germany's General Chief of Staff's estimation was that within a few years, Russia would have more machine guns and heavy guns than Germany. Plus, it was widely known that the French public was itching for a fight (albeit ideally with the Germans provoked as the aggressor), and the newspaper (bribed with Russian money) was selling Russia's incredible numerical advantage as their ally which domestically fueled revanchism against Germany because of Alsace-Lorraine.

A conflict with Russia could not conceivably be separated from war with France - because a Russian defeat without France intervening would be disastrous for the latter's aims to contain Germany. Plus, no one would trust France again as a defensive ally and diplomatic partner if it cowered out of a war against Germany and defending its ally in the East. Plus, let's say that Germany mobilizes for a Russia First plan, then France mobilizes, then what? War with France on German soil right in the Ruhr basin area, where most of German's industries are situated?

Waiting for Germany until 1917 and over meant that it would find himself pincered between two fully armed and organized foes. If things were coming to shove and war with Russia assuredly meant war with France, better do it now than later. The thing is, no one expected how much of a pushover the early war Russians would be.




Joe D. -> RE: Who caused WW1 - revisited (8/29/2017 11:52:40 PM)

Although Serbian intrigue started it, when it was over Germany was forced to pick up the tab.




warspite1 -> RE: Who caused WW1 - revisited (8/30/2017 6:25:37 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Joe D.

Although Serbian intrigue started it, when it was over Germany was forced to pick up the tab.
warspite1

Yes but surely 'Serbian intrigue' didn't start World War I. There had been plenty of Balkan incidents and even Balkan wars. One can argue Sarajevo was a catalyst, but there was much, much, that had to happen before a world war developed. Germany, rightly or wrongly depending on one's point of view, 'picked up the tab' because they gave Austria-Hungary the blank cheque - without which AH would have had to back down - or at least take less drastic measures against Serbia.




Joe D. -> RE: Who caused WW1 - revisited (8/30/2017 11:51:14 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1


quote:

ORIGINAL: Joe D.

Although Serbian intrigue started it, when it was over Germany was forced to pick up the tab.
warspite1

Yes but surely 'Serbian intrigue' didn't start World War I. There had been plenty of Balkan incidents and even Balkan wars. One can argue Sarajevo was a catalyst, but there was much, much, that had to happen before a world war developed. Germany, rightly or wrongly depending on one's point of view, 'picked up the tab' because they gave Austria-Hungary the blank cheque - without which AH would have had to back down - or at least take less drastic measures against Serbia.



Surely the assassination of the Austro-Hungarian archduke by the secret Serbian terrorist group led by Col. Dragutin Dimitrijevic triggered World War I. Dimitrijevic's Black Hand -- which had close ties to the Serbian army -- had recruited Gavrillo Princip and others.




altipueri -> RE: Who caused WW1 - revisited (8/30/2017 1:41:22 PM)

Princip was lucky, his first attempt failed and if the archduke's driver had taken the correct turn on leaving the hospital after visiting the victims of the first attempt they wouldn't have passed Princip who was sulking in a cafe. He saw his chance, pulled his revolver and fired without really aiming.

Serbia basically agreed to everything in the Austro-Hungarian ultimatum. So, AH + Germany definitely guilty.

The fact there was pressure building between the great powers doesn't mean it was OK to invade Belgium because that happened to be part of War Plan of the week.




loki100 -> RE: Who caused WW1 - revisited (8/30/2017 1:55:13 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Joe D.


quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1


quote:

ORIGINAL: Joe D.

Although Serbian intrigue started it, when it was over Germany was forced to pick up the tab.
warspite1

Yes but surely 'Serbian intrigue' didn't start World War I. There had been plenty of Balkan incidents and even Balkan wars. One can argue Sarajevo was a catalyst, but there was much, much, that had to happen before a world war developed. Germany, rightly or wrongly depending on one's point of view, 'picked up the tab' because they gave Austria-Hungary the blank cheque - without which AH would have had to back down - or at least take less drastic measures against Serbia.



Surely the assassination of the Austro-Hungarian archduke by the secret Serbian terrorist group led by Col. Dragutin Dimitrijevic triggered World War I. Dimitrijevic's Black Hand -- which had close ties to the Serbian army -- had recruited Gavrillo Princip and others.


true but Europe managed to avoid general war over the earlier Balkan conflicts and the various clashes between Britain and France at the end of the 19C and the escalating set of disputes between Britain and Germany from 1901-13.

Equally the Serbs were not the only state in Europe that had either infiltrated an existing terrorist group or was running its own - to achieve goals or destabilise a rival.

Generally by early 1914, a lot of European diplomats were starting to think that the sequence of crises/disputes from the late 1890s to 1913 had started to calm down and that a general war was less likely.

So it becomes interesting to try and work out why this particular crisis (which was relatively minor) did set off the chain to a general European war?




WingedIncubus -> RE: Who caused WW1 - revisited (8/30/2017 2:02:03 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1

Yes but surely 'Serbian intrigue' didn't start World War I. There had been plenty of Balkan incidents and even Balkan wars. One can argue Sarajevo was a catalyst, but there was much, much, that had to happen before a world war developed. Germany, rightly or wrongly depending on one's point of view, 'picked up the tab' because they gave Austria-Hungary the blank cheque - without which AH would have had to back down - or at least take less drastic measures against Serbia.



The 'blank cheque' given by Germany was under the assumption that Austria invades Serbia and occupy Sarajevo immediately and quickly, like now, before Russia could even prepare to mobilize. Occupation, not annexation. This was made very clear to Count Szőgyény-Marich by both Kaiser Wilhelm and Bethmann-Hollweg, but the Count was a very old geezer who most probably over-exaggerated Germany's support in his report back to Vienna. It was not a "blank cheque" to send Europe into a total war.

Such a reasoning was not bad, from a brinksmanship point-of-view: Austria did have the casus belli - after all, everyone in the know had a sense Serbia was involved, some way or another, in assassinating Franz Ferdinand and the country had the reputation of being a rogue state anyway. They were arguably justified to intervene against Serbia, but what other Great Powers did not want was Austria annexing Serbia. Never Russia would be allowing being cheated again like they had been in 1908's Bosnian Crisis: They had made been to look like total buffoons because of Count Isvolsky's reckless negotiating and because of this had Bosnia snatched right under their nose. Russia backing down again would be disastrous for Nicholas II's government.

Acting now would put Europe in face of an fait accompli, no one would go to all-out war for Serbia, Serbia is not annexed yet, and then the Kaiser could organize a peace conference to settle the Serbian issue once and for all while mollifying Russia away from France. What a coup it would have been for Germany! That is why the Kaiser was so incensed when he came back urgently from his vacation in Norway - not only the Austrians were not even close to Sarajevo, but they had sent an ultimatum that painted Austria as the warmonger in Europe, which got the British to intervene (the last thing the Kaiser wanted) while allowing time to Russia to bring in troops and posture that they will defend Serbia.

The closer Germany got to all-out war, the more frenzied the Kaiser became to have it remain a limited conflict. However, the machine of mobilization tables is merciless and uncompromising.




Joe D. -> RE: Who caused WW1 - revisited (8/30/2017 5:08:36 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: loki100


quote:

ORIGINAL: Joe D.


quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1


quote:

ORIGINAL: Joe D.

Although Serbian intrigue started it, when it was over Germany was forced to pick up the tab.
warspite1

Yes but surely 'Serbian intrigue' didn't start World War I. There had been plenty of Balkan incidents and even Balkan wars. One can argue Sarajevo was a catalyst, but there was much, much, that had to happen before a world war developed. Germany, rightly or wrongly depending on one's point of view, 'picked up the tab' because they gave Austria-Hungary the blank cheque - without which AH would have had to back down - or at least take less drastic measures against Serbia.



Surely the assassination of the Austro-Hungarian archduke by the secret Serbian terrorist group led by Col. Dragutin Dimitrijevic triggered World War I. Dimitrijevic's Black Hand -- which had close ties to the Serbian army -- had recruited Gavrillo Princip and others.


true but Europe managed to avoid general war over the earlier Balkan conflicts and the various clashes between Britain and France at the end of the 19C and the escalating set of disputes between Britain and Germany from 1901-13.

Equally the Serbs were not the only state in Europe that had either infiltrated an existing terrorist group or was running its own - to achieve goals or destabilise a rival....


Col. Dimitrijevic's Black Hand succeeded in achieving its goal of assassination and in the process destabilized the entire region once hostilities involved other countries that had alliances with either Serbia or Austro-Hungary.




warspite1 -> RE: Who caused WW1 - revisited (8/30/2017 8:42:41 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Joe D.


quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1


quote:

ORIGINAL: Joe D.

Although Serbian intrigue started it, when it was over Germany was forced to pick up the tab.
warspite1

Yes but surely 'Serbian intrigue' didn't start World War I. There had been plenty of Balkan incidents and even Balkan wars. One can argue Sarajevo was a catalyst, but there was much, much, that had to happen before a world war developed. Germany, rightly or wrongly depending on one's point of view, 'picked up the tab' because they gave Austria-Hungary the blank cheque - without which AH would have had to back down - or at least take less drastic measures against Serbia.



Surely the assassination of the Austro-Hungarian archduke by the secret Serbian terrorist group led by Col. Dragutin Dimitrijevic triggered World War I. Dimitrijevic's Black Hand -- which had close ties to the Serbian army -- had recruited Gavrillo Princip and others.
warspite1

No. It triggered a crisis in the northern Balkans between Austria-Hungary and Serbia – and not for the first time. But once the assassination took place, there were so many decisions, so many courses of action, so many opportunities (taken and lost) that could have stopped what we know as World War I. Sarajevo was a catalyst – it got a ball rolling. Where that ball ended up was anyone’s guess. It had to be steered in the path it ultimately took. The death of the Archduke – as humiliating as it was for AH – could not lead to a Europe-wide conflagration without a lot of additional ‘assistance’ from those with the power to make things happen – i.e. a trigger or two.

It’s like the simplistic notion that the Treaty of Versailles caused World War II or the Treaty of Versailles was responsible for Hitler and the Nazi party. No it didn’t. Versailles helped create the conditions in which extreme politics – of all different hue – was able to begin or re-appear. But one only has to look at all the things that happened – global economic depression, failure of the League of Nations, the withdrawal of the US, the rise of Hitler, of Stalin, of Mussolini, Japanese expansion, the fact that the west sought to appease to prevent war rather than take a firm stance, the economic (and thus military) weakness of the British and French post WWI, the underestimation of Hitler by the German people – and those in power in particular when Hitler’s popularity was on the wane – there are just so many things that happened between the signing of Versailles and September 1939 that blaming Versailles is simply wrong.





Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.90625