Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Rethinking WWI


Space Commander Travis

Recommended Posts

the Mussolini approach, there.

Yep, declare war on the last day to get some war reparations... Stalin used the same trick on Japan (though he had the decency of not choosing the last day).

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The main blame, if it is to be focused, would fall on Kaiser Wilhelm, a combination of arrogance and incompetence with entirely too much power.

I blame Gavrilo Princip who lit the fire that nearly burnt the world to the ground TWICE.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That would be Gavrilo Princip.

After that: on July 28, 1914 Austria-Hungary declared war on Serbia

On July 29th Russia attacked Germany and Austria without declaring war

On August 1st Germany declared war on Russia.

On August 2nd France declared war on Germany.

On August 3d Germany declared war on France.

I'm sorry, but a couple of the statements above are badly wrong, and give a completely incorrect impression of how the war started.

Firstly, on 29 July Russia did not attack Germany and Austria without a declaration of war. Russia did not attack Germany or Austria that day, and in fact Czar Nicholas did not order mobilisation until the following day - 30 July. That mobilisation was used by the German government as its excuse to declare war on 1 August. As Austria declared war on Russia on 6 August, Russia had no need to issue any declarations of its own. The first fighting involving Russians didn't occur until 17 August.

Secondly, France did not declare war on Germany on 2 August. The French government ordered mobilisation on 1 August. That evening, mobilising German soldiers occupied Luxembourg.

= = = =

I'd also like to address the issue of the outbreak of WW1 in more detail. Unfortunately a couple of the articles linked by earlier posters are also misleading in that they leave out events and details which provide context to what happened. To that end, I'd strongly recommend the Wikipedia article on the July Crisis: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/July_crisis (very long!)

What the Wikipedia article shows is that, in my opinion, a very large portion of the blame for the outbreak of World War One lies with the German government of the time, led by Chancellor Theobald von Bethmann Hollweg. Some of the blame can also be put on Britain, not because it was being aggressive but because it was trying to prevent war.

A second point which needs to be quickly made clear is that Germany had only one war plan: attack France and quickly knock it out of the war then concentrate on Russia. The problem with this war plan was that during the July Crisis it was very clear that the French government was uncertain about supporting Russia in case of war. The German government resolved this problem by demanding on 1 August that the French government break its Russian alliance or face immediate attack. That is what caused the French government to order mobilisation.

Anyway, here are some of the issues which I think lay the blame at the feet of the German government.

1. Following the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand, the Austrian government obtained complete support from the German government for whatever actions it wished to take against Serbia.

2. The Austrian government drafted an ultimatum to present to the Serbian government, holding it responsible for the assassination. It was intended to be so outrageous that the Serbian government would have to reject at least part of it, giving Austria an excuse to declare war. Following consultations with the German government, it was rewritten to be even more outrageous, to minimise the chance of the Serbian government accepting it. This was despite Austrian investigators concluding the Serbian government had nothing to do with the assassination.

3. While helping the Austrians rewrite the ultimatum, the German government assured the Russian, French and British governments that it had no idea what the Austrians were doing. On the strength of that assurance, the British Foreign Secretary told the German ambassador to Britain he was sure Germany and Britain could solve the Austria-Sebia issue.

4. Senior members of the German military were convinced that 1914 was the best time for a war against Russia and France. Germany was fully armed, while both Russia and France were militarily unprepared. Likewise, German Chancellor Bethmann Hollweg was convinced an Austrian invasion of Serbia would either cause a general European war (which he was similarly convinced Germany would win) or cause the alliance of France, Britain and Russia to collapse. Either way, Bethmann Hollweg's actions seem aimed at making a war happen in 1914.

5. When Austria issued its ultimatum to Serbia, the Russian government urged Serbia to accept as much as it could. The Russian government was keen to avoid war, and urged Austria to give Serbia more time to respond. The French government was unable to respond as its senior members were sailing back to France from Russia. To keep them in the dark, Germany jammed signals to French ship.

6. The British Foreign Secretary issued several calls for talks to resolve the crisis, as late as 1 August. The German and Austrian governments publicly considered these calls, in the hope that this would convince Britain to remain neutral. Privately the German and Austrian governments agreed to not get involved in talks, in case they did actually resolve the crisis.

7. When Kaiser Wilhelm heard of Serbia's near capitulation, he suggested Austria needed only to occupy Belgrade (which was on the border with Austria), and that the crisis could be solved by negotiations. Angry at the Kaiser's comments, Bethmann Hollweg misrepresented the Kaiser's words when speaking to the Austrian government, and the German Chief of Staff threatened the Kaiser that the military would depose him. The Kaiser was even lied to by his younger brother, who said that King George V of Britain had promised him that Britain would stay neutral.

8. To help keep Britain neutral (and to ensure the public support) Bethmann Hollweg wanted Russia to mobilise first so that Germany looked like the victim. To that end he asked the Austrian government to mobilise against Russia in order to force the Russians to respond with their own mobilisation. In the end the Czar blinked and ordered mobilisation, giving Bethmann Hollweg his supposed excuse.

9. On 29 July Bethmann Hollweg told the British ambassador to Germany that Germany would soon be going to war with France and Russia, and asked for British neutrality in return for not annexing any part of France. But as it was now clear to the British government that Germany intended to go to war, they instead announced that a German attack on France would lead to Britain intervening. On hearing this, Bethmann Hollweg suddenly tried to get Austria to negotiate with Serbia, but the Austrian government said it was too late for that.

10. On hearing of Russian mobilisation, Kaiser Wilhelm ordered German mobilisation on 31 July. Mobilising German troops started to move towards Luxembourg and Belgium, as part of their one war plan - to invade France through Belgium. When the first reports arrived in France of German troops moving into Luxembourg and Belgium, the French government ordered mobilisation. Prior to this, French troops had been ordered to move at least 10 kilometres away from the German border to remove the chance of military accidents.

11. On 2 August the Germans completed their occupation of Luxembourg and asked the Belgian government for permission to march across Belgian territory to attack France. The Belgians refused. On 3 August Germany declared war on France, supposedly because of the French mobilisation and their refusal to break the alliance with Russia. On 4 August Germany declared war on Belgium.

TL;DR: The German government urged the Austrian government to issue an outrageous ultimatum to Serbia, then lied to Britain, Russia and France about both its own intentions and its knowledge of Austrian intentions. They then attacked France because that was the only war plan they had for going to war with Russia.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sorry, but a couple of the statements above are badly wrong, and give a completely incorrect impression of how the war started.

Then let me give you the timeline from another source:

• June 28: Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria-Hungary assassinated in Sarajevo by a Serbian activist.

• July 28: Austria-Hungary declares war on Serbia.

• July 29: Russia, Serbia's ally, orders the mobilization of troops.

• August 1: Germany, an ally of Austria-Hungary, declares war on Russia and demands the neutrality of Russia's ally France; France refuses and mobilizes. (which is the French declaration of war)

• August 3: Germany declares war on France.

• August 4: Germany invades neutral Belgium, as per the Schlieffen Plan to knock-put France; Britain responds by declaring war on Germany.

• August: Britain begins a 'Distant Blockade' of Germany, cutting off vital resources; declarations continue throughout the month, with the British, French and Russian Empires on one side (the Entente Powers, or 'Allies'), and the German and Austro-Hungarian on the other (the Central Powers), until everyone is officially at war with their opponents.

• August 10 - September 1: Austrian invasion of Russian Poland.

• August 15: Russia invades East Prussia.

• August 18: The USA declares itself neutral.

• August 18: Russia invades Eastern Galicia, makes fast progress.

• August 23: Hindenburg and Ludendorff given command of the German Eastern Front.

• August 23/24: Battle of Mons, where British slow German advance.

• August 26 - 30: Battle of Tannenberg - Germany shatter the invading Russians.

• September 4 - 10: First Battle of the Marne halts German invasion of France.

• September 7 - 14: First Battle of the Masurian Lakes - Germany beats Russia again.

• September 9 - 14: The Great Retreat (1, WF), where German troops retreat back to the river Aisne; the German commander, Moltke, replaced by Falkenhayn.

Read more

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some of the blame can also be put on Britain, not because it was being aggressive but because it was trying to prevent war.

The Monty Python crew would have a field day running all the way to France and back with this one ... :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

at the end of the day Germany plummeted Europe into war just like they did for a second time 21 years later. :tu: score to date Allies 2 Germany 0.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

at the end of the day Germany plummeted Europe into war just like they did for a second time 21 years later. :tu: score to date Allies 2 Germany 0.

Why is it more reprehensible that Germany fulfills its alliance commitments than France? After all, they would not budge either after the Russians forced the Germans to declare war.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is it more reprehensible that Germany fulfills its alliance commitments than France? After all, they would not budge either after the Russians forced the Germans to declare war.

There were two Russian mobilisations. The first only involving those units designated to the Austrian front, in order to comply with it's treaty obligations with Serbia. Austria had deliberately used the Princip affair as an excuse to wage war on Serbia, though it seems fashionable these days to blame Serbia and Princip for that war. That is total nonsense. German generals, led of course by Moltke, had been strongly agitating for war against Russia, who had no great desire for war with Germany, but did want to protect Serbia. Then, knowing that Germany was behind Austria's attack on Serbia, Russia realised the inevitability of the situatuation, a situation cynically engineered by Germany, and ordered full mobilisation. Russia did not "force" Germany to go to war, as America "forced" Japan to go to war in 1941. Germany really is the predominant guilty party in starting the war.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There were two Russian mobilisations. The first only involving those units designated to the Austrian front, in order to comply with it's treaty obligations with Serbia. Austria had deliberately used the Princip affair as an excuse to wage war on Serbia, though it seems fashionable these days to blame Serbia and Princip for that war. That is total nonsense. German generals, led of course by Moltke, had been strongly agitating for war against Russia, who had no great desire for war with Germany, but did want to protect Serbia. Then, knowing that Germany was behind Austria's attack on Serbia, Russia realised the inevitability of the situatuation, a situation cynically engineered by Germany, and ordered full mobilisation. Russia did not "force" Germany to go to war, as America "forced" Japan to go to war in 1941. Germany really is the predominant guilty party in starting the war.

The only target for Germany at the time was Britain, and more than Britain some British colonies. If Wilhelm wanted to get on Russia's back he would not have wasted all that money on the fleet.

And,as far as I know, if somebody attacks or mobilizes against somebody you have an assistance treaty with there are two choices, one is to renege on the treaty (and therefore my question,why is it more reprehensible for Germany to fulfill its treaty obligations than for France) or you declare war on those who want to attack your ally.

Edited by questionmark
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only target for Germany at the time was Britain, and more than Britain some British colonies. If Wilhelm wanted to get on Russia's back he would not have wasted all that money on the fleet.

And,as far as I know, if somebody attacks or mobilizes against somebody you have an assistance treaty with there are two choices, one is to renege on the treaty (and therefore my question,why is it more reprehensible for Germany to fulfill its treaty obligations than for France) or you declare war on those who want to attack your ally.

The Schlieffen plan was specifically designed to knock out France before Russia could complete mobilisation and was part of a general intention to attack France and Russia. If I were a German then I would also make succh a plan as it is commonsense to try to negate as much as possible the effects of war on two fronts. However, about being the "reprehensible" aspect, In my opinion, Germany acted in a very cynical way, and while I do not deny that apart from Belgium and Serbia, all sides in August 1914 share blame, Germany lost any "moral" credibility by it's cyniscism and it's greater desire for war than the other powers. I see the point you make, and it comes whithin all the major powers being responsible, but it is difficult to give Germany any benefit of the doubt in this matter, though that is simply my opinion, informed by Barbarrosa....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Schlieffen plan was specifically designed to knock out France before Russia could complete mobilisation and was part of a general intention to attack France and Russia. If I were a German then I would also make succh a plan as it is commonsense to try to negate as much as possible the effects of war on two fronts. However, about being the "reprehensible" aspect, In my opinion, Germany acted in a very cynical way, and while I do not deny that apart from Belgium and Serbia, all sides in August 1914 share blame, Germany lost any "moral" credibility by it's cyniscism and it's greater desire for war than the other powers. I see the point you make, and it comes whithin all the major powers being responsible, but it is difficult to give Germany any benefit of the doubt in this matter, though that is simply my opinion, informed by Barbarrosa....

Every country has contingency plans to knock out their neighbors in case of war, some times even contingencies against allies (if they don't trust them). That is the job of the higher brass of the military in peace time. That proves what...except that the Germans were good at it?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Every country has contingency plans to knock out their neighbors in case of war, some times even contingencies against allies (if they don't trust them). That is the job of the higher brass of the military in peace time. That proves what...except that the Germans were good at it?

They were indeed "good at it", mainly because they were founded a proper staff college before other countries. But this, almost mania, with such affairs, to the extent that Germany became, even with a civilian government, a military state where generals had power behind the scenes that they did not have in other countries. German, or perhaps more correctly, Prussian militarism, was real and was a malign influence on "greater" Germany. Such military power behind the scenes, and barely behind actually, led to a desire for war, and cynicism. Germany, any country, has every right to make plans, but in Germany the plan became everything, became almost a reason to exist, imo.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

They were indeed "good at it", mainly because they were founded a proper staff college before other countries. But this, almost mania, with such affairs, to the extent that Germany became, even with a civilian government, a military state where generals had power behind the scenes that they did not have in other countries. German, or perhaps more correctly, Prussian militarism, was real and was a malign influence on "greater" Germany. Such military power behind the scenes, and barely behind actually, led to a desire for war, and cynicism. Germany, any country, has every right to make plans, but in Germany the plan became everything, became almost a reason to exist, imo.

The desire for war was there for all Great European powers, they all were smiling broadly having tea with their cousins while sharpening the knife under the table. That includes Russia that wanted East Prussia back (took another world war before they got part of it). The Russians were the least prepared, but that does not make a difference in their intentions.

That still does not explain why it is more reprehensible for the Germans to fulfill their alliance obligations than for the French.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The desire for war was there for all Great European powers, they all were smiling broadly having tea with their cousins while sharpening the knife under the table. That includes Russia that wanted East Prussia back (took another world war before they got part of it). The Russians were the least prepared, but that does not make a difference in their intentions.

That still does not explain why it is more reprehensible for the Germans to fulfill their alliance obligations than for the French.

The German treaty obligations were made with the cynical intent of waging war, or more to encourage Austria to wage war against Serbia knowing that Russia would then be at war with Austria. Germany's treaties were not for defence, they were for offence, and therefore some steps below France in morality.

As for East Prussia. That it is now part of Russia is entirely the fault of Germany. East Prussia was never a part of Russian Empire at any stage of it's existance and Russia has never made any terrirorial claim on East Prussia, though due to the attacks launched on Russia from East Prussia by Teutonic Knights in the past, had a moral right to take action against it, but never did, until 1945. Gaining East Prussia was never a war aim of Russia in 1914 before war broke out, in the way you suggest. Russia did not invade East Prussia and then declare war, East Prussia was invaded as a consequence of there being a war, such things happen in war.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then let me give you the timeline from another source:

• June 28: Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria-Hungary assassinated in Sarajevo by a Serbian activist.

• July 28: Austria-Hungary declares war on Serbia.

• July 29: Russia, Serbia's ally, orders the mobilization of troops.

• August 1: Germany, an ally of Austria-Hungary, declares war on Russia and demands the neutrality of Russia's ally France; France refuses and mobilizes. (which is the French declaration of war)

• August 3: Germany declares war on France.

• August 4: Germany invades neutral Belgium, as per the Schlieffen Plan to knock-put France; Britain responds by declaring war on Germany.

• August: Britain begins a 'Distant Blockade' of Germany, cutting off vital resources; declarations continue throughout the month, with the British, French and Russian Empires on one side (the Entente Powers, or 'Allies'), and the German and Austro-Hungarian on the other (the Central Powers), until everyone is officially at war with their opponents...

Read more

I'm sorry, but mobilisation is not the same as a declaration of war. Mobilisation is an internal act - the business of calling up reservists and arming them. The troops remain on home soil until ordered to attack (or defend). It can be considered provocative, but it was a separate act from declaring war. A declaration of war is a formal announcement by one country that it is at war with another country.

Consider that Germany mobilised on 31 July but declared war on Russia on 1 August, France on 3 August and Belgium on 4 August.

And on the basis that you appear to consider Russia's 29 July mobilisation as a declaration of war, it was aimed only at Austria, not Austria and Germany as you originally said. Mobilisation against Germany was not ordered until late on 30 August, and only after Czar Nicholas had dithered and tried to sort things out personally with Kaiser Wilhelm.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

border repositioning of military capable principles or intelligence gathering and communication is not the same then as it is today ~ and today's definition of decisiveness should not be taken as the relevant yard stick in terms of setting the bar in accordance to any military demonstration of offensive or defensive intentions ~

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is it more reprehensible that Germany fulfills its alliance commitments than France? After all, they would not budge either after the Russians forced the Germans to declare war.

It was reprehensible on a number of grounds.

1. The German government promised Austria any assistance whatsoever in its dispute with Serbia. After the Austrians had drafted an outrageous ultimatum to present to Serbia, they showed it to the Germans. The Germans then encouraged the Austrians to make its conditions even more extreme so as to minimise the chance that the Serbs would accept it.

2. While urging the Austrians to attack Serbia, the German government instructed its ambassadors in France, Russia and Britain to tell those countries that they had no idea what the Austrians were doing.

3. When the British Foreign Secretary proposed peace talks several times, the German and Austrian governments publicly professed interest in the hope that it would encourage Britain to remain neutral. At the same time they confirmed with each other that they had no intention of backing down.

4. Both France and Russia were reluctant to go to war in 1914 as both were militarily weak compared with Germany. Russia advised Serbia to do what it could to accede to Austria's ultimatum. On 31 July "...the German Ambassador in Paris delivered an ultimatum to Premier Viviani telling him that if Russia did not stop its mobilization, then Germany would attack France. Viviani, newly arrived back in France, knew nothing of a Russian general mobilization, and asked his ambassador in St. Petersburg for information. Marshal Joffre of the French Army asked for permission to order a general mobilization. His request was refused..." (from Wikipedia) At the same time French troops were ordered to pull back 10 kilometres from the border as a sign of peaceful intention. These were hardly the acts of a nation eager to go to war.

5. When France finally mobilised on 2 August, it was because German troops had already commenced their attack on France via Luxembourg and Belgium.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only target for Germany at the time was Britain, and more than Britain some British colonies. If Wilhelm wanted to get on Russia's back he would not have wasted all that money on the fleet.

I'm sorry, but this is also incorrect. Yes, the purpose of the German fleet was to challenge British control of the seas.

But the German government and military were worried that the completion of a Russian military plan in 1917 would see Russia and France too powerful for Germany to defeat. In a meeting in December 1912 Kaiser Wilhelm and Army Chief of Staff von Moltke wanted to go to war against Russia immediately. Admiral Tirpitz asked for an 18 month delay to allow the completion of a submarine base and the widening of the Kiel Canal. The assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand allowed the Germans to go to war pretty much at the time that Tirpitz proposed.

And,as far as I know, if somebody attacks or mobilizes against somebody you have an assistance treaty with there are two choices, one is to renege on the treaty (and therefore my question,why is it more reprehensible for Germany to fulfill its treaty obligations than for France) or you declare war on those who want to attack your ally.

Keep in mind that German actions pretty much took away France's ability to make a choice. Remember, on 31 July the German ambassador to France told the French government, "If Russia mobilises we will attack you." Even after a threat as blunt as that the French government did not order mobilisation.

It wasn't until the following day, 1 August, that German Chancellor Bethmann Hollweg gave France the option of breaking its alliance with Russia in order to avoid war. The problem with that offer was that von Moltke had already convinced Kaiser Wilhelm that it was impossible to stop the invasion of France.

So, in other words, Germany gave France no freedom of action. No matter what the French government did, Germany was going to invade France.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sorry, but this is also incorrect. Yes, the purpose of the German fleet was to challenge British control of the seas.

But the German government and military were worried that the completion of a Russian military plan in 1917 would see Russia and France too powerful for Germany to defeat. In a meeting in December 1912 Kaiser Wilhelm and Army Chief of Staff von Moltke wanted to go to war against Russia immediately. Admiral Tirpitz asked for an 18 month delay to allow the completion of a submarine base and the widening of the Kiel Canal. The assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand allowed the Germans to go to war pretty much at the time that Tirpitz proposed.

So,you are admitting that all wanted to get at each others hide. The fact is that Russia wanted Eastern Prussia (did not get it in WWI but in WWII), Galizia (did not get it in WWI but in WWII) and Armenia (got it in WWI, lost part of it during the Bolshevik revolution back to Turkey).

Keep in mind that German actions pretty much took away France's ability to make a choice. Remember, on 31 July the German ambassador to France told the French government, "If Russia mobilises we will attack you." Even after a threat as blunt as that the French government did not order mobilisation.

It wasn't until the following day, 1 August, that German Chancellor Bethmann Hollweg gave France the option of breaking its alliance with Russia in order to avoid war. The problem with that offer was that von Moltke had already convinced Kaiser Wilhelm that it was impossible to stop the invasion of France.

Which still would not have happened at the time if France would have broken the treaty, Germany wanted nothing in the East nor anything in France (they already had what they wanted as a result of the 1870-'71 war), the primordial goal was to get to extend German colonies in Africa and break Britain's supremacy.

And, while the German ambassador might not have been as peaceful as it was intended by the German government, the fact of the matter is that the French ambassador was antechambering in St. Petersburg so the Russians play hardball with the Germans and mobilize. That indicates that the French did nothing to stop the war (and mostly because they did not count on the Germans to just walk past their lines by declaring war on Belgium).

The fact of the matter is that all in Europe, including Turkey wanted something from their neighbor except Britain (that was quite content maintaining its Empire together):

Austria wanted the terror to stop, fomented by Serbia. (They got nothing)

Bulgaria wanted the Bosporus

France wanted the Alsace and the Saar region. (which they got)

Germany wanted a bigger part of Africa and reduce Britain's influence

Greece wanted the Bosporus

Italy wanted South Tyrol(which they got after WWI)

Russia wanted East Prussia (which they got partially after WWII), Galizia (which they got partially after WWII) and Armenia (which they got partially after WWI).

Serbia wanted the Balkans (which they got after WWII)

Turkey wanted to keep its empire and, if possible, get Egypt with the canal back. They were the grand looser of WWI because the empire ceased to exist.

And to achieve that they had been arming themselves for over 30 years at the time WWI broke out.

How could the war have been avoided in 1914? Very simple, Austria's demands towards Serbia after the assassination were not that much different than the American demands to Afghanistan after 9/11. Quit supporting terrorists, prosecute those involved in the assassination and quit anti-Hungarian propaganda that was the cause of that terrorism.

That does not mean that a few years later the war would not have broken out anyway and that there it actually would have been Germany's fault, but WWI was the fault of all but Britain and Austria. Blaming just the Germans falls way short.

Edited by questionmark
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So,you are admitting that all wanted to get at each others hide. The fact is that Russia wanted Eastern Prussia (did not get it in WWI but in WWII), Galizia (did not get it in WWI but in WWII) and Armenia (got it in WWI, lost part of it during the Bolshevik revolution back to Turkey).

It is not a fact that Russia had aims before the war to take any territory, on what documents do you base this? What happens after war has broken out is not relevant to the OP. Was it a war aim of the USA to march into Tokyo before Peal Harbor? I hardly think there were any plans for that eventuality, but there would be plans made when the war was underway. You are conflating two issues, that of cold blooded pre war planning to take territory, and plans made by the needs of a hot war.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is not a fact that Russia had aims before the war to take any territory, on what documents do you base this? What happens after war has broken out is not relevant to the OP. Was it a war aim of the USA to march into Tokyo before Peal Harbor? I hardly think there were any plans for that eventuality, but there would be plans made when the war was underway. You are conflating two issues, that of cold blooded pre war planning to take territory, and plans made by the needs of a hot war.

So you are claiming that Russia did not declare war on Turkey with the aim to take Armenia? (Which BTW is one of the two they were decent enough to actually declare war on before mobilizing)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you are claiming that Russia did not declare war on Turkey with the aim to take Armenia? (Which BTW is one of the two they were decent enough to actually declare war on before mobilizing)

Questionmark, are you trying to shift the blame from Germany? - take Germany out of the equation and world war one doesn't happen.

All this re-writing of history from some quarters is telling, they've waited until all those involved have died. they do this re-writing of history without fear of contradiction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Questionmark, are you trying to shift the blame from Germany? - take Germany out of the equation and world war one doesn't happen.

All this re-writing of history from some quarters is telling, they've waited until all those involved have died. they do this re-writing of history without fear of contradiction.

take Russia or France out of the equation and it would not have happened either, so your point is?

And no, far from trying to wash Germany clean (they would have been involved in a major war sooner or later) what I am pointing out is that what Germany did is but what the other two did, just a little more effectively.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you are claiming that Russia did not declare war on Turkey with the aim to take Armenia? (Which BTW is one of the two they were decent enough to actually declare war on before mobilizing)

Your post is remarkable for what you leave out, namely dates and reasons. So, I will fill in the gaps you conveniently left out.

Russia declared war on Turkey on 2 Nov 1914, after diplomatic attempts by Russia, France and Great Britain to keep Turkey out of the war. Turkey, however, was duplicitous and had no intention of keeping out of the war on the side of Germany. I link here to the secret treaty made between Turkey and Germany.

http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/turkgerm.asp

You fail to give any credible reason why Russia declared war on Turkey, and I can see why, for the dates of events work against your revisionism. On 29 October 1914, the German battlecruiser Goeben, and the cruiser Breslau, with elements of the Turkish navy, bombarded Sevastopol. This was an act of undeclared war by Turkey against Russia. So it is hardly surprising that Russia declared war on Turkey four days later after having been first attacked by Turkey.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pursuit_of_Goeben_and_Breslau

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your post is remarkable for what you leave out, namely dates and reasons. So, I will fill in the gaps you conveniently left out.

Russia declared war on Turkey on 2 Nov 1914, after diplomatic attempts by Russia, France and Great Britain to keep Turkey out of the war. Turkey, however, was duplicitous and had no intention of keeping out of the war on the side of Germany. I link here to the secret treaty made between Turkey and Germany.

http://avalon.law.ya...ry/turkgerm.asp

You fail to give any credible reason why Russia declared war on Turkey, and I can see why, for the dates of events work against your revisionism. On 29 October 1914, the German battlecruiser Goeben, and the cruiser Breslau, with elements of the Turkish navy, bombarded Sevastopol. This was an act of undeclared war by Turkey against Russia. So it is hardly surprising that Russia declared war on Turkey four days later after having been first attacked by Turkey.

http://en.wikipedia....ben_and_Breslau

so why is it more reprehensible that Turkey fulfills its alliance with Germany than Russia with Serbia? That is the question you are all pussyfooting around here.

We have a very clear beginning, there was a terrorist attack in Sarajevo. Austria demands that those attacks are to be stopped or they would have to stop them. Serbia does not stop it, nor has any intention to do so, after that they attack (which is what ultimatums are for), then:

Russia mobilizes against Austria because they have a treaty with Serbia, not reprehensible according to you.

Germany mobilizes against Russia because they have a treaty with Austria, reprehensible according to you.

France mobilizes against Germany because they have a treaty with Russia, not reprehensible according to you.

So, where is the difference? And don't come with "Germany had the better plan" because later they gave Belgium an ultimatum to either let them through their territory to attack France or else....

And while the Breslau and Goeben actually crossed Turkish waters to get to Sebastopol, there is no official recognition on any part, except Russian claims, that Turkish forces were actually anywhere near the boat nor that any Turkish boat was involved or that any member of the Turkish forces were anywhere on any of them.

Edited by questionmark
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.