4th July 2003, 9:33 AM
Great Rumbler = OBI Jr.
Ack, second half of the 19th century European politics... I can't remember the details of the Franco-Prussian war, really... I remember the Crimean War much better though, given how we covered that last year in school (as opposed to over 2 1/2 years since I've had Western European history).
Well, that helps my side of the argument... a signed confession that you don't know what the hell you're talking about.
Yes, of course they were trying to catch up. They had finally gotten their nation together for the first time and didn't want to be left behind everyone else...
...so you're saying that they are free to illegitimately use any means they deam fit to compete with the rest of Europe? If so, then you also justify Nazi Germany. Zeig heil, herr ABF!
Then why did the Western Allies say that they were protecting Democracy? Just for propaganda value while they supported Czarist Russia?
Because in calling it a war for democracy, it'd appeal for more democracies to enter the course of the war. It was common logic, and a good sound strategy. The allies WERE mostly democracies, but they weren't fighting to make the WORLD a giant democracy.
What, you expect the major European powers to all agree on peace in that era? That's a bit ... unrealistic ...
Yes it happened again and again. France and Germany almost went to war several times between 1871 and 1914, but the Europenean community stepped in. It's not at all unrealistic at this time...the war-like evil Europe seemed to die after Napoleon.
Yes, Germany was pressing outwards... like others before it... but you make it sound like it is they alone who are responsible for all of it. That is just simply false... alliances were bound to form given the political situation of the time, and with that comes some kind of eventual confrontation... so the sides weren't certain but I don't see how they could have completely avoided the two World Wars.
It takes two to fight, and Germany was the instigator. Italy unified without declaring an arbitrary war on France. Germany could've too...Bismarck was a completely miserable person, and is responisble for BOTH world wars (and I dare say even the rise of of communism.)
But the Serbians wouldn't have been agitating and standing up to Austria if they hadn't had Russia there at their back with a close alliance, that's for sure!
What is wrong with you...? That's like blaming the American Revolution on France because "the Americans wouldn't have been agitating and standing up to Britain is they hadn't had France there at their back with a close alliance, that's for sure!" THE AUSTRIANS WERE THE BAD GUYS! Don't blame Russia for helping Serbia! They did the right thing, for once.
You think they could unite without making enemies? Really?
Garibaldi and Italy did it.
Not with the way they were, I doubt it... sure they didn't have to do it as they did, but confilict was inevitable... the French and Germans weren't exactly friends before that point...
Neither were Britain and France...they'd been constant enemies for 700 years, and were EASILY less trusting of one another than France and Germany. Your argument is invalid...if Germany could drive those two pitch nemesis' into one another's arms, they were doing something wrong.
Absolutely Austria was incompetent. Its a big reason why the war happened of course... Austria just wasn't competent enough to fight Serbia alone so all the alliances started being called... and at that point Europe was a gas-filled room just waiting for a match to blow it up.
Alright, you admit I was right with that one.
Oh, and they weren't exactly constantly warmongering... not like Napoleon's France, which burned itsself out in just a few decades...
Burnt itself out in just a few decades...? Napoleonic France occupied more of Europe, and lasted 23 years (1792-1815). Your Third Reich lasted, what, a decade? The Second Reich lasted abour forty years. Germany wasn't WARMONGERING!? WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU, ARE YOU NOT GETTING THIS! THEY DIRECTLY INSTIGATED THREE FUCKING WARS! One with Austria, Denmark, and France! THEY DELIBERATELY STARTED THREE WARS!! Not warmongering my ass!
Somewhat, but the level of mistreatment wasn't even REMOTELY close to the levels that the Allied propaganda portrayed. That is a FACT too.
No it is NOT a fact. You're just trying to convince me that it is, and I do not agree. The allies didn't blow it out of proportion; many books of today (including one I got at BJ's last year) shows photos and has a paragraph on German cruelty in Belgium.
I didn't say its okay... I said it might be fake.
Might be fake...? Well, it ISN'T...they admitted to it...you're not really much of a buff on that WWI stuff are you.
If it is real it is bad... not unexpected given the way America was clearly turning at that point, but bad.
Again, you're justifying the unjustifiable.
The British Surface Fleet was equal to the German one, but the German one was stuck. The British could easily block them from getting out... meaning that exactly as I said U-Boats were their only weapon against the convoys that they needed desperately to sink to hurt Britain.
Then why didn't they use their unterseeboots to torpedo the British fleet, instead of taking the cowardly, shameful means of sinking civilian transports?
And the much more moral allies of course refused to use it too?
IT DOESN'T MATTER IF THEY USED IT OR NOT, THE GERMANS INVENTED, TESTED, AND WERE THE FIRST TO USE IT!
First, no one had a clue that their actions would lead to a major world war. They just reacted to the events...
Point being?
Second, a world war at that point was inevitable -- the two armed camps hated eachother and were looking for any excuse they could find to fight. Serbia just provided that excuse.
Yes, it was inevitable---due to German aggression. My point exactly. Thank you for conceding to me.
Is that atmosphere partly Germany's fault? Of course! But are they the sole group responsible? NO WAY! Not even close!
All I'm asking of you is that you admit that they were MORE responsible (not totally) than any other country for the inevitable slope to WWI.
Ack, second half of the 19th century European politics... I can't remember the details of the Franco-Prussian war, really... I remember the Crimean War much better though, given how we covered that last year in school (as opposed to over 2 1/2 years since I've had Western European history).
Well, that helps my side of the argument... a signed confession that you don't know what the hell you're talking about.
Yes, of course they were trying to catch up. They had finally gotten their nation together for the first time and didn't want to be left behind everyone else...
...so you're saying that they are free to illegitimately use any means they deam fit to compete with the rest of Europe? If so, then you also justify Nazi Germany. Zeig heil, herr ABF!
Then why did the Western Allies say that they were protecting Democracy? Just for propaganda value while they supported Czarist Russia?
Because in calling it a war for democracy, it'd appeal for more democracies to enter the course of the war. It was common logic, and a good sound strategy. The allies WERE mostly democracies, but they weren't fighting to make the WORLD a giant democracy.
What, you expect the major European powers to all agree on peace in that era? That's a bit ... unrealistic ...
Yes it happened again and again. France and Germany almost went to war several times between 1871 and 1914, but the Europenean community stepped in. It's not at all unrealistic at this time...the war-like evil Europe seemed to die after Napoleon.
Yes, Germany was pressing outwards... like others before it... but you make it sound like it is they alone who are responsible for all of it. That is just simply false... alliances were bound to form given the political situation of the time, and with that comes some kind of eventual confrontation... so the sides weren't certain but I don't see how they could have completely avoided the two World Wars.
It takes two to fight, and Germany was the instigator. Italy unified without declaring an arbitrary war on France. Germany could've too...Bismarck was a completely miserable person, and is responisble for BOTH world wars (and I dare say even the rise of of communism.)
But the Serbians wouldn't have been agitating and standing up to Austria if they hadn't had Russia there at their back with a close alliance, that's for sure!
What is wrong with you...? That's like blaming the American Revolution on France because "the Americans wouldn't have been agitating and standing up to Britain is they hadn't had France there at their back with a close alliance, that's for sure!" THE AUSTRIANS WERE THE BAD GUYS! Don't blame Russia for helping Serbia! They did the right thing, for once.
You think they could unite without making enemies? Really?
Garibaldi and Italy did it.
Not with the way they were, I doubt it... sure they didn't have to do it as they did, but confilict was inevitable... the French and Germans weren't exactly friends before that point...
Neither were Britain and France...they'd been constant enemies for 700 years, and were EASILY less trusting of one another than France and Germany. Your argument is invalid...if Germany could drive those two pitch nemesis' into one another's arms, they were doing something wrong.
Absolutely Austria was incompetent. Its a big reason why the war happened of course... Austria just wasn't competent enough to fight Serbia alone so all the alliances started being called... and at that point Europe was a gas-filled room just waiting for a match to blow it up.
Alright, you admit I was right with that one.
Oh, and they weren't exactly constantly warmongering... not like Napoleon's France, which burned itsself out in just a few decades...
Burnt itself out in just a few decades...? Napoleonic France occupied more of Europe, and lasted 23 years (1792-1815). Your Third Reich lasted, what, a decade? The Second Reich lasted abour forty years. Germany wasn't WARMONGERING!? WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU, ARE YOU NOT GETTING THIS! THEY DIRECTLY INSTIGATED THREE FUCKING WARS! One with Austria, Denmark, and France! THEY DELIBERATELY STARTED THREE WARS!! Not warmongering my ass!
Somewhat, but the level of mistreatment wasn't even REMOTELY close to the levels that the Allied propaganda portrayed. That is a FACT too.
No it is NOT a fact. You're just trying to convince me that it is, and I do not agree. The allies didn't blow it out of proportion; many books of today (including one I got at BJ's last year) shows photos and has a paragraph on German cruelty in Belgium.
I didn't say its okay... I said it might be fake.
Might be fake...? Well, it ISN'T...they admitted to it...you're not really much of a buff on that WWI stuff are you.
If it is real it is bad... not unexpected given the way America was clearly turning at that point, but bad.
Again, you're justifying the unjustifiable.
The British Surface Fleet was equal to the German one, but the German one was stuck. The British could easily block them from getting out... meaning that exactly as I said U-Boats were their only weapon against the convoys that they needed desperately to sink to hurt Britain.
Then why didn't they use their unterseeboots to torpedo the British fleet, instead of taking the cowardly, shameful means of sinking civilian transports?
And the much more moral allies of course refused to use it too?
IT DOESN'T MATTER IF THEY USED IT OR NOT, THE GERMANS INVENTED, TESTED, AND WERE THE FIRST TO USE IT!
First, no one had a clue that their actions would lead to a major world war. They just reacted to the events...
Point being?
Second, a world war at that point was inevitable -- the two armed camps hated eachother and were looking for any excuse they could find to fight. Serbia just provided that excuse.
Yes, it was inevitable---due to German aggression. My point exactly. Thank you for conceding to me.
Is that atmosphere partly Germany's fault? Of course! But are they the sole group responsible? NO WAY! Not even close!
All I'm asking of you is that you admit that they were MORE responsible (not totally) than any other country for the inevitable slope to WWI.
H.R.M. DARVNIVS MAXIMVS EX TENEBRIS EXIT REX DEVSQVE GORONORVMQVE TENDORVM ROMANORVM ET GRÆCORVM OMNIS SEMPER EST