WWI – Who’s to blame?
Mustang1 @ Sat Jul 23, 2005 5:25 pm
WWI – Who’s to blame?
With a lot of political topics dominating the forum lately, I’d thought I would offer up a good historical topic for the history buff: World War One. While it’s often considered one of the most significant events in Western Civilization’s history, it’s often eclipsed by its successor’s (WWII) more bombastic, morally right struggle against National Socialism and totalitarianism. While many possess a passing interest in WWII, I’d thought I’d throw out a topic that centres in on perhaps the true beginnings of the Great War (something different).
Let’s keep things initially simple; who/what do you feel is to blame (directly or indirectly) for causing the Great War?
ManifestDestiny @ Sat Jul 23, 2005 5:30 pm
The royal Family of England Germany and Russia. Because wwI was basicly a family sqauble. All 3 leaders were frist cousins all grandchildren of Queen Victoria. So in my opinion millions died for a dysfunctional family.
The French just wanted revenge on Germany for the Franco-Prussian war.
And then of course the Balkans what one thousand years of "multiculturalism" does. It creates a bloodbath!
ManifestDestiny @ Sat Jul 23, 2005 5:32 pm
OOOO and by the way beyond what many might beleive GW Bush was not responsible
Tman1 @ Sat Jul 23, 2005 6:04 pm
Im not much of a WWI fan so ill just say this: Massive arms buildups, Imperialism, and most important of all the feeling of Pan-Slavism in the Balkans.
The Hoser @ Sat Jul 23, 2005 6:10 pm
I guess that the main cause would have to be Alliances. Like Country X goes to war with Count Y and country Z has a pact with country Y to help defend it if attacked. Than that went back and forth and, ta da, you got yourself a World War!
Tman1 @ Sat Jul 23, 2005 6:12 pm
The Hoser The Hoser:
I guess that the main cause would have to be Alliances. Like Country X goes to war with Count Y and country Z has a pact with country Y to help defend it if attacked. Than that went back and forth and, ta da, you got yourself a World War!
Yes, secret alliances brought about distrust among the Colonial powers Germany,Britian, etc.
Tman1 @ Sat Jul 23, 2005 6:14 pm
I see ManifestDestiny is taking his American schooling to its limits. 
The Hoser @ Sat Jul 23, 2005 6:18 pm
Tman1 Tman1:
I see ManifestDestiny is taking his American schooling to its limits.
More like his 5th grade education cuppled with all the Republican brain-washing.
ShepherdsDog @ Sat Jul 23, 2005 6:29 pm
What a tangled web. England becoming an ally with France, who had been her her greatest foe for almost a thousand years and becoming an adversary of the Germans, who had been her traditional ally against the French, over the past two hundred years. And then Russia, entering European ploitics. A power that was considered only marginally European. European politics is still as convoluted today as it was then.
canadian1971 @ Sat Jul 23, 2005 7:16 pm
$1:
The World War of 1914-18 - The Great War, as contemporaries called it -- was the first man-made catastrophe of the 20th century. Historians can easily identify the literal "smoking gun" that set the War in motion: a revolver used by a Serbian nationalist to assassinate Archduke Franz Ferdinand (heir apparent to the Austro-Hungarian throne) in Sarajevo on June 28, 1914.
But scholars are still debating the underlying causes. Was it the desire for greater empire, wealth and territory? A massive arms race? The series of treaties which ensured that once one power went to war, all of Europe would quickly follow? Was it social turmoil and changing artistic sensibilities brought about by the Industrial Revolution? Or was it simply a miscalculation by rulers and generals in power? The answer provided in "The Great War and The Shaping of the 20th Century" is that all of these volatile elements combined to set off a gigantic explosion we now know as World War I.
But scholars are still debating the underlying causes. Was it the desire for greater empire, wealth and territory? A massive arms race? The series of treaties which ensured that once one power went to war, all of Europe would quickly follow? Was it social turmoil and changing artistic sensibilities brought about by the Industrial Revolution? Or was it simply a miscalculation by rulers and generals in power? The answer provided in "The Great War and The Shaping of the 20th Century" is that all of these volatile elements combined to set off a gigantic explosion we now know as World War I.
The Archduke is assasinated(the 1st domino), Austira/Hungary declares war on Serbia one month later*. Russia mobilizes her army to aid their ally Serbia. This in turn provokes the Germans, Austria/Hungary's ally, into mobilizing their army and declaring war against Russia. German, declares war on France(Russia's ally), the next day they declare war against Belguim and invade with the intent of destroying the French army quickly in a flanking manover. As a result of this invasion, Britian declares war against German.
To many things had a role in the big picture to say one specific thing is responsible alone....if you wanna pin the blame on one thing, than blame the stupidity of human beings.
*edit...I had said 1 day..
...thanks gunplumber
Mustang1 @ Sat Jul 23, 2005 8:04 pm
canadian1971 canadian1971:
link
The Archduke is assasinated(the 1st domino), Austira/Hungary declares war on Serbia the same day. Russia mobilizes her army to aid their ally Serbia. This in turn provokes the Germans, Austria/Hungary's ally, into mobilizing their army and declaring war against Russia. German, declares war on France(Russia's ally), the next day they declare war against Belguim and invade with the intent of destroying the French army quickly in a flanking manover. As a result of this invasion, Britian declares war against German.
To many things had a role in the big picture to say one specific thing is responsible alone....if you wanna pin the blame on one thing, than blame the stupidity of human beings.
$1:
The World War of 1914-18 - The Great War, as contemporaries called it -- was the first man-made catastrophe of the 20th century. Historians can easily identify the literal "smoking gun" that set the War in motion: a revolver used by a Serbian nationalist to assassinate Archduke Franz Ferdinand (heir apparent to the Austro-Hungarian throne) in Sarajevo on June 28, 1914.
But scholars are still debating the underlying causes. Was it the desire for greater empire, wealth and territory? A massive arms race? The series of treaties which ensured that once one power went to war, all of Europe would quickly follow? Was it social turmoil and changing artistic sensibilities brought about by the Industrial Revolution? Or was it simply a miscalculation by rulers and generals in power? The answer provided in "The Great War and The Shaping of the 20th Century" is that all of these volatile elements combined to set off a gigantic explosion we now know as World War I.
But scholars are still debating the underlying causes. Was it the desire for greater empire, wealth and territory? A massive arms race? The series of treaties which ensured that once one power went to war, all of Europe would quickly follow? Was it social turmoil and changing artistic sensibilities brought about by the Industrial Revolution? Or was it simply a miscalculation by rulers and generals in power? The answer provided in "The Great War and The Shaping of the 20th Century" is that all of these volatile elements combined to set off a gigantic explosion we now know as World War I.
The Archduke is assasinated(the 1st domino), Austira/Hungary declares war on Serbia the same day. Russia mobilizes her army to aid their ally Serbia. This in turn provokes the Germans, Austria/Hungary's ally, into mobilizing their army and declaring war against Russia. German, declares war on France(Russia's ally), the next day they declare war against Belguim and invade with the intent of destroying the French army quickly in a flanking manover. As a result of this invasion, Britian declares war against German.
To many things had a role in the big picture to say one specific thing is responsible alone....if you wanna pin the blame on one thing, than blame the stupidity of human beings.
I can appreciate the multi-causality explanation for WWI’s blame, but I don’ think that should deter someone from looking for a cause that exerts more direct influence than others (like nationalism over alliance systems). In fact, I’d submit that some aspects need to be downgraded in favour of others’ in terms of impact – I’d suggest Germany and Austria-Hungary had a higher level of culpability than France or Great Britain.
Mustang1 @ Sat Jul 23, 2005 8:06 pm
ManifestDestiny ManifestDestiny:
The royal Family of England Germany and Russia. Because wwI was basicly a family sqauble. All 3 leaders were frist cousins all grandchildren of Queen Victoria. So in my opinion millions died for a dysfunctional family.
How exactly is the Royal Family of Great Britain a cause of WWI?
$1:
“The French just wanted revenge on Germany for the Franco-Prussian war.”
And subjecting themselves to invasion was their attempt at revenge?
$1:
“And then of course the Balkans what one thousand years of "multiculturalism" does. It creates a bloodbath!”
Balkan wars and pan-nationalism certainly are a contributing factor, but how does this relate to Germany – wasn't it more of a Balkan, Austria-Hungarian and Russian issue?
The Hoser @ Sat Jul 23, 2005 8:10 pm
Mustang1 Mustang1:
ManifestDestiny ManifestDestiny:
The royal Family of England Germany and Russia. Because wwI was basicly a family sqauble. All 3 leaders were frist cousins all grandchildren of Queen Victoria. So in my opinion millions died for a dysfunctional family.
How exactly is the Royal Family of Great Britain a cause of WWI?
$1:
“The French just wanted revenge on Germany for the Franco-Prussian war.”
And subjecting themselves to invasion was their attempt at revenge?
$1:
“And then of course the Balkans what one thousand years of "multiculturalism" does. It creates a bloodbath!”
Balkan wars and pan-nationalism certainly are a contributing factor, but how does this relate to Germany – wasn't it more of a Balkan, Austria-Hungarian and Russian issue?
What were you expecting from somone who believes in Manifest Destiny?
xerxes @ Sat Jul 23, 2005 10:27 pm
"If there is ever another war in Europe, it will come out of some damned silly thing in the Balkans." - Prince Bismarck, 1898
$1:
I can appreciate the multi-causality explanation for WWI’s blame, but I don’ think that should deter someone from looking for a cause that exerts more direct influence than others (like nationalism over alliance systems). In fact, I’d submit that some aspects need to be downgraded in favour of others’ in terms of impact – I’d suggest Germany and Austria-Hungary had a higher level of culpability than France or Great Britain.
The thing is, with such a complex event as WW1, there can only be a myriad of contributing factors.
But if I were to weight the balme I would put it on Germany. Their increasing belligerance (naval build-up, increasing assertiveness in foreign affairs vis-a-vis Autria-Hungary) was a destabiliziing influence on the continent.
WLDB @ Sat Jul 23, 2005 11:07 pm
I dont think its possible to blame one thing in particular. It was a culmination of many things. Nationalism, imperialism, militarism.
Tension had been building for years in the Balkans and between Germany and Great Britain.
The assassination of Franz Ferdinand was the last straw which led to a domino effect. I would blame the leaders of Austria Hungary, Germany, Russia, France and Britain.
Germany got way too much blame in the treaty of Versailles.
In the end the war was pointless. All it did was guarantee another one would come.