Who Started WW ?

[Bruce Tuncks]

I have, for many years, thought that WW1 was primarily the fault of the English ( 65%) followed by Imperial Germany ( 35%) followed by everybody else ( 10%).

But on looking the subject up on Google etc, this is not the division of blame. The Austro-hungarians and the Serbs and the Germans are to blame mostly, it was said.

Maybe, thinks I, my belief that those  poms were awful has been misplaced?

This is a different thing to how I still reckon that Australia could have shortened the war and prevented both Hitler and Stalin from getting into power.

[Old Koreelah]

I recently happened upon a claim that a few years before 1914, Britain had developed a secret plan to attack Germany. Seems they were alarmed that German industry had developed so fast, out-producing the British.

 

For centuries, British policy in Europe has been to side with one power to prevent the other from dominating the continent. As a result they’ve allied with the Germans against the French and vice versa, Allied with Russia against Turkey and vice versa, etc…

[onetrack]

The Germans are the most aggressive tribe in the history of the world. Descended largely from the Saxons, they have been intent on overthrow of peaceful countries since ancient times.

They invaded Britain in ancient times, but their impact was so large, we ended up with Anglo-Saxons, as the Angles and the Saxons interbred.

 

Germany was intent on a vast expansion of its Empire from the start of the Industrial Revolution, around 1850, and their engineering skills are legendary, even in the 1800's. They are the ones who started "apprenticeships" and called them "Journeymen" - a term still used in America today.

The pride of German Journeymen is something to be admired, and they take their skills to high levels. Take a look at German armaments of the late 1800's, their artillery pieces are incredible pieces of engineering for the era.

 

The British became seriously alarmed at the constant expansion of Kaiser Bills Empire in the early 1900's, and they were most alarmed at the expansion of the German Navy, because the British Navy ruled the Seas and had done for a couple of hundred years before WW1. Britain came to the aid of France, when France was attacked by Germany through Belgium, and it was then on for young and old.

 

The Balkans have always been a hotbed of hatreds, and many major European conflicts start there.

 

https://www.in.gov/doe/files/guide.pdf

 

Edited May 24, 2023 by onetrack

[facthunter]

A residue of hate , fear and ignorance lasts a long time. That's why the EU has some good aspects.  Nev

[spacesailor]

HITLER'S DREAM ,

spacesailor

[Bruce Tuncks]

I think that the pommy lead was because their coal had less sulphur, and it was therefore much better to make steel with. This, combined with the European religious wars ( catholics vs protestants) kept the germans back for a long time.

This explains why england was so powerful and rich before WW1.

[onetrack]

Below is the succinct explanation of how the race to have the worlds major sea power, was behind the lead-up to WW1.

 

Interestingly, British technology in the form of the Parsons Steam Turbine, which powered the worlds biggest battleship, the Dreadnought, from 1906 - and Churchills decision to convert from coal power to oil power - were two of the most far-reaching decisions ever made by the British, that ensured they held the lead in naval power for decades to come.

 

And in WW1, the invention of the tank by the British in mid-1916, was a major technological and military advantage, that the Germans could not match.

In fact, just the sheer psychological advantage of tanks was overwhelming - and from their introduction, the German infantry often fled in terror whenever they saw British tanks approaching - even when the Germans had previously held a numerical and tactical advantage.

 

https://www.iwm.org.uk/history/the-naval-race-between-britain-and-germany-before-the-first-world-war

 

Edited May 24, 2023 by onetrack

[Old Koreelah]

6 hours ago, Bruce Tuncks said:

I think that the pommy lead was because their coal had less sulphur, and it was therefore much better to make steel with. This, combined with the European religious wars ( catholics vs protestants) kept the germans back for a long time.

This explains why england was so powerful and rich before WW1.

Another factor is education; both Scotland and Germany had technical education for centuries. Without Scotish scientists, inventors and engineers, Britain’s Industrial Revolution could never have happened.

[onetrack]

Indeed, the Scotsman David Mushet was the main leader of the development of steel that led to the Industrial Revolution. The man had an amazing mind.

 

His son Robert was equally gifted and also contributed greatly to British steel-making knowledge.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Mushet

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Forester_Mushet

 

Edited May 25, 2023 by onetrack

[old man emu]

If you really look into it, Germany really wasn't the instigator of the war to the extent people might say. It really started in the Balkans well before 1914. Also the Ottoman Empire was dissolving in that part of the world, and Hungary was moving in to fill the vacant spaces. I believe it was though to family alliances with Austria, Hungary that Germany with its industrial development was drawn in. That takes care of the Eastern Front and Near East. All the European countries had bits and pieces of Africa and the South Pacific. It is amazing that the South American Spanish and Portuguese heritage countries didn't get involved, although Mexico was being tempted by Germany to try to snatch back Texas and the southwest states.

 

France of course was bitter about being flogged by the  Germans in 1870 and wanted its lost territory back. England had alliances, but didn't want to get involved until the Germans overran Belgium and the Low Countries on their way to have a go at the French. Then England went to the defence of "Little Belgium" and declared war on Germany, which by default put England on the side of France. Meanwhile, Germany had been sending military advisors to the Ottoman Empire to improve its military under the regime of the Young Lions. England made a big mistake when it failed to deliver several armed naval vessels to the Ottomans, which they had paid for. As a result, the Ottomans went over to Germany and apart from annoying the French and British in the Middle East, also diverted Russian forces from battlefields of the Eastern Front where the Germans were having a go.

 

So, the causes of WWI were not as clear cut as we are often lead to believe by the stories of the victors afterwards. This has been the problem with the Imperial slant on the history taught throughout the 20th Century. It behoves us, now having access to so much information via the Internet, as well as having learned how better to research topics, to expose the intrigues and political twists and turns that sparked a century of global conflict.

[spacesailor]

'' his has been the problem with the Imperial slant on the history taught throughout the 20th Century. It behoves us, now having access to so much information via the Internet,''

 

That is a good reason for America to keep  Julian Assange in jail , for starting '' Wikileaks '' the internet secrecy breaker .

Can't have all our secrets given away , can we .

spacesailor

[old man emu]

9 hours ago, spacesailor said:

Can't have all our secrets given away , can we .

Actually there were no secrets at the time of the precursors to WWI. They were laid in the open by the Press. Because newspapers were the only means of spreading news there were a lot of them. If we study what was printed in each of the countries involved, and those looking on, and we apply a sensible "bias filter" we can get a very good history that is not burnished by the eventual victors.

 

That's where the Internet is such an asset. I don't know if it happens overseas, but here we have TROVE  to search in newspapers, as well as access to digitised government archives. “Mulder, the truth is out there, but so are lies.”

[Bruce Tuncks]

There is a great book called " The Guns of August" written by a woman for whom  they invented a new category of Pulitzer prize. She had access to the official records of course, but after a hundred years, there was a lot more stuff available. Also, she used letters written by big players to their wives at the time. In these letters, their true thoughts were often privately expressed.( I reckon it showed that Germany suffered from the Kaiser being a fool, but not a wicked one). It took a hundred years for these letters  to become public.

Europe, before WW1, was really run by an extended royal family. The Kaiser had a flat in Buckingham palace and was an honorary colonel in some pommy regiment for example. At the coronation of Edward 7th, they were scandalized by some noble relative turning up with his gorgeous servant woman instead of his wife.

[facthunter]

It's "all right IF you  can get it" as the song goes.. Certainly make the others envious.  Nev

[kgwilson]

Blackadder has the best explanation

 

 

[facthunter]

Most people think there was NO good reason and it wouldn't have happened to day  Nev

[old man emu]

1 hour ago, facthunter said:

Most people think there was NO good reason and it wouldn't have happened to day  Nev

 

WWI destroyed the hereditary aristocracy that had ruled Europe for a millennium in Europe except in France where it went in the 1790s and in Britain where compromise had created a stable political system in 1660. Humans are social animals which need a leader. Therefore the aristocracy as leaders was replaced by allegedly leaders selected by the people. That selection was initially based on the a system whereby the people could replace the leadership without resorting to bloodshed. A case of the pen being mightier than the sword. The rot started with the leadership of the Communist Party in Russia and spread to the Fascists in Italy, then Spain and Germany. Austria-Hungary was broken up and democracies formed. Since these were artificially created countries, their old ethnic rivalries occupied most of their political activity.

 

We know from experience that the totalitarian regimes of Russia, Italy, Germany and Spain produced another "-ocracy" that in essence wasn't much different in its actions than the old aristocracy. Vlad the Impaler from Romania would have been welcome at the table of Stalin, Hitler, Mussolini and Franco. And we know that this mob kicked off WWII - for NO good reason.

 

Move past WWII and we enter the period of Chinese Communism, US Imperialism, Russian Communist Imperialism, the demise of Britain and France and taming of Germany, the rise of Korean Communism, Idi Amin in Uganda, Gaddafi, Nasser, Ho Chi Min and we had the makings for WWIII.

 

Now we have the Islamic factions either fighting each other or the Judeo-Christians and Hindus. (They don't seem to bother much with the Orientals.) Of course we have Putin's alleged nationalistic reunification plans holding a match near the blue touch paper of at least another European-wide conflict.

 

So, although the players and the sets have changed, the script remains the same. Shakespeare gave us Romeo and Juliet,  which Leonard Bernstein and Stephen Sondheim remade it into Westside Story. The same dog with a different collar.

 

So, Nev. There is no reason to believe that it wouldn't happen today. 

[facthunter]

More likely NOW than  in a long time. It could also be the war that ended this planet as a place to live in any orderly fashion.. I was referring to WW1 where the killing of Archduke Ferdinand sparked a  war.   Nev

[old man emu]

2 hours ago, facthunter said:

I was referring to WW1 where the killing of Archduke Ferdinand sparked a  war. 

Fair enough. But you have to look further back in time to see why Serbians were agitating against the Austro-Hungarians. Austria's annexation of Bosnia in 1908 deeply alienated the Serbian peoples. Plotters swore revenge, which they achieved in 1914 by assassination of the Austrian heir

 

Just for fun, here's a link to a contemporary USA newspaper report

https://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/sn85058396/1914-07-28/ed-1/seq-1/#words=Archduke+Austria+Austria-Hungary+Austro+Austro-Hungarian+Bosnia+Ferdinand+Hungarian+Hungary+Serbia+Servia+SERVIA

[facthunter]

The view has been that such a "provocation" should not have resulted in a war. As a modern comparison look to Trumps extra judicial killing of a prominent Iranian Government leader. and the Saudi assassination of Khashoggi.  Nev