NationStates Jolt Archive

Just for those who aren't too well-versed, here's a short introduction to who actually started the war:

Austria-Hungary (also called the K.u.K-monarchy, which is shorter to write :p ) had conquered much of the Balkans. Serbia (having been liberated from the Ottoman's not too long ago) was still free, but chances were that the Austrians were going to have a look or two at it.

To make sure that everyone in the Balkans knew who was boss, the Austrian Crown-Prince made a trip to occupied Bosnia and held a parade on the Serbian national holiday. Obviously that was a message to Serbia...and a Serbian nationalist terror group (The Black Hand) got the message. Gabrilo Princip, a young student, killed the Crown-Prince and his wife.

The KuK monarchy wasn't exactly thrilled, and immediately suspected the Serbian government of supporting such terrorism. They issued an ultimatum, which was completely over the top, but the Serbs accepted most points nonetheless.

At the same time, the Austrians asked the Germans whether they would have their support. The Kaiser Wilhelm II. assured them that Germany would stand by its alliances.
His Chancellor (ie the head of the elected part of government) was less happy, and tried everything to calm the Austrians down. He sent telegrams, he called ambassadors and so on.

The Serbs on the other hand needed help, and got it from the Russians. The ideology of Panslavism was one factor, that Russia wanted control of mediterranean ports another. At any rate, the Czar made it clear that he was going to protect little Serbia from an Austrian attack.

This in turn got France somewhat worried, because they were allied with Russia. Some voices in France were against war, but they were soon drowned out by the calls for revanche for the defeat of 1871.

At this point, the Schlieffen plan has to be explained: When it became clear that the new German government had managed to piss the rest of Europe off enough to create the scenario of a war on two fronts, one of the better heads of the German military developed this plan. It counted on Russia being slow to mobilise, and Germany using its advanced rail system to quickly move its troops around. Instead of attacking France along the direct border, as was to be expected, the plan called for the German army's right wing (ie the northern part) to march through Belgium and attack from there, get to Paris and force the French to sue for peace before the Russians had the time to do anything. Then the German Army was to move back to Russia and attack there.

So as Austria mobilised against Serbia, the Russians began to mobilise themselves against Austria. Which put the Germans under enormous pressure - for the Schlieffen plan to work, Russia could not be launching the first strike. So they told Russia to step down, which the Czar was not interested in.

Just days before the Austrians attacked Serbia, the Austrians contacted various German officials and asked for confirmation. The answer from the Chancellor was to wait and remain calm. The Kaiser was on holidays and didn't answer. And the military said: "Go right ahead. We'll kick some arse!"

So the Austrians attacked, and in turn Russia declared war on Austria. Germany stood by Austria, and declared war against Russia and France. Their forces stood ready along the border as by the plan, and they contacted Luxembourg and Belgium for allowance to let them march through. Any damages caused would be paid for by the German government.

Luxembourg accepted, Belgium didn't. The Belgian King would have made it known that his country was just a second-rate beach ball for the real powers to play with. Whether or not it was the right decision is a matter for contention, but he certainly had the right to make it.

So Germany attacked Belgium, defeating the Belgians relatively easily (although making mistakes and letting many retreat to their fortresses). And Britain could no longer ignore what was happening and cited the attack on neutral Belgium as the reason for their declaration of war on Germany.

After that (in short): Russia attacked Germany, got its arse kicked. Russia attacked Austria, kicked arse. Austria attacked Serbia, got its arse kicked. And Germany attacked France and kicked arse for a while until the Battle of the Marne, after which the trenches were dug.

So, that being said, there was a discussion that almost started but not quite on another thread about who were the bad guys in this. Some say there were no bad guys. Others say that Germany were the bad guys for their confrontational policies previous to the war (eg building a huge fleet).

What were the causes of WWI? And who could or should have prevented them?

And just because that's what's gonna happen anyways: Did the US save anyone's arse?

Just for those who aren't too well-versed, here's a short introduction to who actually started the war:

Austria-Hungary (also called the K.u.K-monarchy, which is shorter to write :p ) had conquered much of the Balkans. Serbia (having been liberated from the Ottoman's not too long ago) was still free, but chances were that the Austrians were going to have a look or two at it.

To make sure that everyone in the Balkans knew who was boss, the Austrian Crown-Prince made a trip to occupied Bosnia and held a parade on the Serbian national holiday. Obviously that was a message to Serbia...and a Serbian nationalist terror group (The Black Hand) got the message. Gabrilo Princip, a young student, killed the Crown-Prince and his wife.

The KuK monarchy wasn't exactly thrilled, and immediately suspected the Serbian government of supporting such terrorism. They issued an ultimatum, which was completely over the top, but the Serbs accepted most points nonetheless.

At the same time, the Austrians asked the Germans whether they would have their support. The Kaiser Wilhelm II. assured them that Germany would stand by its alliances.
His Chancellor (ie the head of the elected part of government) was less happy, and tried everything to calm the Austrians down. He sent telegrams, he called ambassadors and so on.

The Serbs on the other hand needed help, and got it from the Russians. The ideology of Panslavism was one factor, that Russia wanted control of mediterranean ports another. At any rate, the Czar made it clear that he was going to protect little Serbia from an Austrian attack.

This in turn got France somewhat worried, because they were allied with Russia. Some voices in France were against war, but they were soon drowned out by the calls for revanche for the defeat of 1871.

At this point, the Schlieffen plan has to be explained: When it became clear that the new German government had managed to piss the rest of Europe off enough to create the scenario of a war on two fronts, one of the better heads of the German military developed this plan. It counted on Russia being slow to mobilise, and Germany using its advanced rail system to quickly move its troops around. Instead of attacking France along the direct border, as was to be expected, the plan called for the German army's right wing (ie the northern part) to march through Belgium and attack from there, get to Paris and force the French to sue for peace before the Russians had the time to do anything. Then the German Army was to move back to Russia and attack there.

So as Austria mobilised against Serbia, the Russians began to mobilise themselves against Austria. Which put the Germans under enormous pressure - for the Schlieffen plan to work, Russia could not be launching the first strike. So they told Russia to step down, which the Czar was not interested in.

Just days before the Austrians attacked Serbia, the Austrians contacted various German officials and asked for confirmation. The answer from the Chancellor was to wait and remain calm. The Kaiser was on holidays and didn't answer. And the military said: "Go right ahead. We'll kick some arse!"

So the Austrians attacked, and in turn Russia declared war on Austria. Germany stood by Austria, and declared war against Russia and France. Their forces stood ready along the border as by the plan, and they contacted Luxembourg and Belgium for allowance to let them march through. Any damages caused would be paid for by the German government.

Luxembourg accepted, Belgium didn't. The Belgian King would have made it known that his country was just a second-rate beach ball for the real powers to play with. Whether or not it was the right decision is a matter for contention, but he certainly had the right to make it.

So Germany attacked Belgium, defeating the Belgians relatively easily (although making mistakes and letting many retreat to their fortresses). And Britain could no longer ignore what was happening and cited the attack on neutral Belgium as the reason for their declaration of war on Germany.

After that (in short): Russia attacked Germany, got its arse kicked. Russia attacked Austria, kicked arse. Austria attacked Serbia, got its arse kicked. And Germany attacked France and kicked arse for a while until the Battle of the Marne, after which the trenches were dug.

So, that being said, there was a discussion that almost started but not quite on another thread about who were the bad guys in this. Some say there were no bad guys. Others say that Germany were the bad guys for their confrontational policies previous to the war (eg building a huge fleet).

What were the causes of WWI? And who could or should have prevented them?

And just because that's what's gonna happen anyways: Did the US save anyone's arse?

As i recall, it started because a guy called Archie Duke shot an Ostrich.

Or, at least, thats what Baldrick told me...

So, that being said, there was a discussion that almost started but not quite on another thread about who were the bad guys in this. Some say there were no bad guys. Others say that Germany were the bad guys for their confrontational policies previous to the war (eg building a huge fleet).

What were the causes of WWI? And who could or should have prevented them?

And just because that's what's gonna happen anyways: Did the US save anyone's arse?

Every one was a 'bad guy' and no one was. It was a unique situation that built up.

The US? No, arrived a bit too late to have any real substanial impact IMO. Psychologically maybe, but otherwise no.

As far as the US is concerned. I think the US broke the stalemate and ended that futile war. Would France have lost? I doubt it. Would have been a stalemate until both sides said enough.

It was the fault of Austria and Russia for being pompous DICKS.

It was the fault of the European ruling class and its stupid political games at the expense of the general population. Millions of people slaughtered for nothing worthwhile.

As far as the US is concerned. I think the US broke the stalemate and ended that futile war. Would France have lost? I doubt it. Would have been a stalemate until both sides said enough.

Actually, i think you'll find the Allies tactics of attrition were slowly beginning to work - the introduction of American troops speeded up the process, of this there can be no doubt, but it would have ended the same way without, basically - the British still had the strength of their Empire, for instance, on which they had (despite the hideous losses to Anzacs at Gallipoli etc) barely begun to draw. The German myth of the "stab in the back" was just that, a myth - if the war had continued for any length of time, their forces would have been rolled back, as was beginning to happen.

It was the fault of the European ruling class and its stupid political games at the expense of the general population. Millions of people slaughtered for nothing worthwhile.

Exactly.

Actually, i think you'll find the Allies tactics of attrition were slowly beginning to work - the introduction of American troops speeded up the process, of this there can be no doubt, but it would have ended the same way without, basically - the British still had the strength of their Empire, for instance, on which they had (despite the hideous losses to Anzacs at Gallipoli etc) barely begun to draw.
Did you know that the first US troops were attached to the ANZACs to learn how things were done?

The German myth of the "stab in the back" was just that, a myth - if the war had continued for any length of time, their forces would have been rolled back, as was beginning to happen.
Exactly. Ludendorff knew that he only had strength left for one last push. He tried, and he failed (if only by a thread). After that, his veteran units were destroyed, his resources spent.

Of course the Entente would win. They were losing a lot more people, but they had a lot more people to spare. They would eventually win.

As an aside, did you know that the French Navy ordered 1500 assault rifles from the US?

On the first day of WWI they ordered 1500 Winchester model 1894 .30-30 Carbines... Good 'ol Grampaw's Brokeback Deerslaying Levergun.

The Russians had over 200,000 Winchester 1895 Leverguns used in the Revolution, WWI and then in the homeguard for WWII.

Not to mention the Turks who used .44-40 Winchester Leverguns them to great effect against the Russians after they stopped using them.

Damn Evil Military Assault Rifles...

if only they had m16s back in the day

It was the fault of the European ruling class and its stupid political games at the expense of the general population. Millions of people slaughtered for nothing worthwhile.

Yup.

Every one was a 'bad guy' and no one was. It was a unique situation that built up.

The US? No, arrived a bit too late to have any real substanial impact IMO. Psychologically maybe, but otherwise no.

Sure the United States had an effect. It was a big one. The Allies were about worn out and Germany most likely would have won in time. America then sent fresh troops over which made all the difference.

As for bad guys I'd say there weren't really any except for just sheer arrogance of nations. The alliance system dragged everyone down though they all had their own reasons to get involved. Politics caused WWI, nothing more or less.

Sure the United States had an effect. It was a big one. The Allies were about worn out and Germany most likely would have won in time. America then sent fresh troops over which made all the difference.
I don't think so. The US troops didn't get involved in any major way until the Ludendorff offensives were pretty much over.

I don't think so. The US troops didn't get involved in any major way until the Ludendorff offensives were pretty much over.

Well we still managed to get 100,000 American soldiers killed there. Seems we must have participated in getting the war to its conclusion.

I am an American. I am also a history major. The U.S. involvement was primarily psychological- a big new ally, all sorts of fresh troops coming over. In actual combat, the U.S. forces were too little, too late to have been a major factor. The war was won by millions of French, British, and Russian troops who sacrificed their lives.


And the primary causes of the war: Nationalism and entangling alliances. There were other factors, such as the desire to keep any one nation in europe from becoming too powerful, but those were secondary.

Well we still managed to get 100,000 American soldiers killed there. Seems we must have participated in getting the war to its conclusion.
Well, on the scale of WWI, that could almost have been in a single day (it wasn't, but you need to keep these things in context).

At the same time, the Austrians asked the Germans whether they would have their support. The Kaiser Wilhelm II. assured them that Germany would stand by its alliances.
His Chancellor (ie the head of the elected part of government) was less happy, and tried everything to calm the Austrians down. He sent telegrams, he called ambassadors and so on.


The Chancellor sent the blank cheque. link (http://www.firstworldwar.com/source/blankcheque.htm). Probably fueled by his belief that germany's best hope of avoiding civil unrest - owing to the election of 110 socialist deputies to the Reichstag, and the rising socialist movement in germany - lay in war to unify the country.

I could say that the catalyst for WWI was the struggle to maintian coherence amongst the diametrically opposed ethnic groups in Austro-Hungaria.

But nah. I'll just blame the germans.

But nah. I'll just blame the germans.

Which is what the Treaty of Versailles did. And what did it get us? Hitler. WWII.

The Chancellor sent the blank cheque.
True.

Not sure what his personal view was, but much of the German diplomatic establishment didn't think this was a case for war. They'd stick to the alliance, but they didn't think it'd get that serious.
http://www.lib.byu.edu/~rdh/wwi/memoir/Gerard/4yrs2.htm#ch8

And for example the ex-Chancellor, von Bülow, thought that the Austrians were doing the wrong thing and the Serbian government was innocent. Unfortunately, I can't find a link for that.

True.

Not sure what his personal view was, but much of the German diplomatic establishment didn't think this was a case for war. They'd stick to the alliance, but they didn't think it'd get that serious.
http://www.lib.byu.edu/~rdh/wwi/memoir/Gerard/4yrs2.htm#ch8

And for example the ex-Chancellor, von Bülow, thought that the Austrians were doing the wrong thing and the Serbian government was innocent. Unfortunately, I can't find a link for that.

Interesting link. Thanks.

I'll be fair, and state that I think that britian should have declared its intentions sooner, rather than dithering about the whole thing and trying to act as a mediator &c. Had Germany been assured that britian intended to enter the war from the outset of the crisis, then probably greater efforts would have been made resolve things diplomatically perhaps. The cynic in me thinks that Britian believed that it could gain some advantage from playing both sides if you will.

When talking about America's contribution to the war, you must remember it wasn't only military. I doubt the Entente would have won without America's economic support.

Meh. Everyone sucked.

The US’s involvement? Physiological. In the few battles we participate in, Pershing showed that he apparently wasn’t afraid to send thousands of Doughboys to their deaths by charging across the open terrain between trenches with disturbing regularity. I’m sure the prospect of a million odd extra allied soldiers who seemed unwilling to follow the precedents of the other forces, didn’t dissuade the Germans from surrendering.

Also, the Treaty of Versailles=Biggest Crock of Shit Ever.

As i recall, it started because a guy called Archie Duke shot an Ostrich.

Or, at least, thats what Baldrick told me...
i suppose he also had a cunning plan to go along with it eh:p