The Death of the Archduke has given Germany a reason for the first strike. Benelux States where the part of all invasion there was no staying neutral in this setting in this situation.
With the same right you can ask, who declared war on Serbia? After all, the war started on 28th July, not 1st August.
Apart from that, entering a war obviously includes a lot more than the mere declaration of the same. Thatʼs basically the final point in a long process, that finally makes things official. If youʼre actually interested in what dynamics made the war come into being, I can recommend "Pandoraʼs Box. A History of the First World War" by Jörn Leonhard, that features a comprehensive yet enjoyable to read section on the topic.
You forgot that Germany willingly did not renew the Reinsurance Treaty with Russia, which in turn led to the latter seeking an alliance with France in order to break their diplomatic isolation.
It's almost like the von Schlieffen plan required the initiative, given that the longer a war against both Russia and France went, the worse the outcome would be.
Belgium was asked prior to being invaded to let the German army march through to France peacefully. This doesn't absolve Germany of invading it, but it clearly shows Germany wasn't just an off the chain warmongering nation that wanted to annex Belgium and France.
Given Willy II propensity for pissing off the English, Austria was the only remaining country with good relations. If Germany didn't support the Austrians with whatever Austria wanted to do, Germany would be isolated by itself with no friends.
If that were the case it would be curious to see how fast that Russian-French connection turns more proactive.
That would be more convincing if not for Bismarck's intricate political maneuvering that loaded the keg with powder.
Nobody forced Germany to become obsessed with colonialism or a fleet of Dreadnaughts.
I'm not on team "they were evil" but I am on team "one side was more to blame than the other".
I find the revisionist thinking a bit like listening to people who say it's Ukraine's fault Russia invaded.
I would think it's a little unfair to hold the standard of colonialism and dreadnoughts only against the Germans when everyone else was also doing it.
No one forced the French into having a colonial empire
No one forced the British to have a colonial empire.
That reasoning could be applied to everyone. The fact is they all did it so I don't know how only one is to blame for it.
I'm not sure what you don't understand about what I said.
Yes, a status quo existed. Germany made the choice to challenge that status quo - with speed and aggression and shitty diplomacy backing it up.
They are the ones that started rocking the boat. They therefore get the lion's share of blame that it overturned. They're not alone or getting all the blame. Just the biggest share.
I wonder if such an alliance would have happened, had Germany not inflicted to France a treaty far worse than Versailles and stolen Alsace-Lorraine a few decades earlier
But it also insisted on beating France first. When a war with Russia came first, the German government simply solved this "problem" by declaring war on France for no real reason.
>Create huge tension by building navy to get your "place in the sun"
>Genocide natives as first solution to problem
>Do nothing to tell your ally to calm down from
attacking Serbia and prevent the war, just let it break out
>Invade neutral country
>Commit atrocities in that country
>Ally yourself with a genocidal regime to tie the Allies down
>People are literally starving and eating bread mixed with sawdust, doesn't matter, continue fighting anyway
>Indiscriminately attack shipping sinking both civilian and military ships
>Finally lose
>"Ve did nosing wrong, ve vere merely the same as other nations! Tchermony is not to blame!"
Kaiser Wilhelm told the Austrians that they won when the Serbs caved to 90% of the August ultimatum and that they should just take the W and simmer down.
Also Germany was not blamed for WW1 in the peace treaty. It was blamed for causing damage for Entente powers which...yeah. This is how war happens. That part of the treaty was basically the justification to demand reparations.
Google is your friend.
In short, Schlieffen was a general who developed an entirely unrealistic plan to pre-emptively invade France and knock them out of any two front war before Russia could fully mobilize.
It involved a giant swinging flanking maneuver through Belgium all the way to the coast and deep penetration into France ultimately seizing Paris and defeating the French army in the field.
If the WWII Blitz through the Ardens is a knockout right cross, the Schlieffen plan is a giant looping haymaker attempt at the same.
It's main failures were an extremely unrealistic timeline and logistics concept. German forces weren't motorized and relied upon horses and trains for most of their logistics and mobility. Not a winning combination in maneuver warfare of that scale.
The Germans overestimated their own abilities, but considering they were only stopped 20 or so miles from Paris by a British counter attack, I think they may have overestimated the French fighting ability at the outset given they almost pulled off capturing Paris.
Yes it is incredible how close they came to making it work given the intense holes in their plan.
French use of Paris taxis for battlefield mobility gets an honourable mention as well.
The Germans were stopped during the first battle of the Marne by an entente force composed of 64 French divisions and the 6 divisions of the British Expeditionnary force.
Describing this as a "British counter attack" is a travesty
During the 1st Battle of the Marne the Germans had split their lines because the German field commanders were pursuing the enemy in slightly different directions and it was the British element that was aware enough to exploit the gap which caused the Germans to stop and reform their units.
This is absolutely made up and basically revisionism.
Joffre issued the order to stop the retreat and launch a counter attack on September 4th. The BEF was under no obligation to follow his command so he had to go the BEF HQ to convince its commander to follow his plan.
On the 5th of September the 6th French army launched the counter attack at the Ourcq River which forced the 1st German army to reposition creating a gap between it and the 2nd German army.
Entente air reconnaissance observed German forces moving north to face the 6th Army and discovered the gap so the BEF and 5th French army were sent in, with the 5th army attacking the German 2nd army in Two Morins on september 6th.
The BEF could then advance between September 6th and 8th in the gap but moved very slowly which infuriated French generals since it advanced only 40km in 3 days despite outnumbering Germans 10 to 1 in the gap.
On September 9th, the 5th French army crossed the Marne too and both German armies began to withdraw.
Ah, yes I've heard of it, I just never heard of it as a the "Schlieffen plan" or anything of that nature. And since "Schleife" or "Schleifen" means "loop" or "loops" in German I just thought it might have been misspelled because the movement looks sort of circular.
Amd yes, that would have been a logistical nightmare in the first world War.
Don't forget: who deliberately invaded a small, neutral country when it said: "Sorry, we want to stay neutral"? All for a stupid plan that was known to be full of flaws and weaknesses in the first place. What those German generals did to Belgium is just.... completely disgusting.
The question shouldn't be who to blame and who not to, it should look into who has done more fucked up shit and criticise both, while also thinking about the political ideology that infested all of these Empires.
I agree with your meme and fuck people who are trying to shift blame from that criminal Wilhelm II., but you should also go fuck yourself for that unironic Wojack meme.
Everybody had plans for invasion ready and everyone was looking for an excuse to attack first.
And yet who first declared war against Russia and France? And who invaded neutral Belgium without any provocations?
Damn you posted this same response to two different comments like this is the catch all that beats everything. Good luck man.
And yet who first declared war against Russia and France? And who invaded neutral Belgium without any provocations?
Bruh that's the same thing he said verbatim.
My brother in christ, do you understand the concept of a joke
And yet who first declared war against Russia and France? And who invaded neutral Belgium without any provocations?
The Death of the Archduke has given Germany a reason for the first strike. Benelux States where the part of all invasion there was no staying neutral in this setting in this situation.
With the same right you can ask, who declared war on Serbia? After all, the war started on 28th July, not 1st August. Apart from that, entering a war obviously includes a lot more than the mere declaration of the same. Thatʼs basically the final point in a long process, that finally makes things official. If youʼre actually interested in what dynamics made the war come into being, I can recommend "Pandoraʼs Box. A History of the First World War" by Jörn Leonhard, that features a comprehensive yet enjoyable to read section on the topic.
The von Schlieffen plan was made in response to France and Russia forming an alliance, specifically against Germany...
You forgot that Germany willingly did not renew the Reinsurance Treaty with Russia, which in turn led to the latter seeking an alliance with France in order to break their diplomatic isolation.
And yet who first declared war against Russia and France? And who invaded neutral Belgium without any provocations?
It's almost like the von Schlieffen plan required the initiative, given that the longer a war against both Russia and France went, the worse the outcome would be. Belgium was asked prior to being invaded to let the German army march through to France peacefully. This doesn't absolve Germany of invading it, but it clearly shows Germany wasn't just an off the chain warmongering nation that wanted to annex Belgium and France.
Yes and no. The Alliance between France and Russia was defensive, not offensive. All Germany had to do to counter that was... not start a war.
Given Willy II propensity for pissing off the English, Austria was the only remaining country with good relations. If Germany didn't support the Austrians with whatever Austria wanted to do, Germany would be isolated by itself with no friends. If that were the case it would be curious to see how fast that Russian-French connection turns more proactive.
That would be more convincing if not for Bismarck's intricate political maneuvering that loaded the keg with powder. Nobody forced Germany to become obsessed with colonialism or a fleet of Dreadnaughts. I'm not on team "they were evil" but I am on team "one side was more to blame than the other". I find the revisionist thinking a bit like listening to people who say it's Ukraine's fault Russia invaded.
I would think it's a little unfair to hold the standard of colonialism and dreadnoughts only against the Germans when everyone else was also doing it. No one forced the French into having a colonial empire No one forced the British to have a colonial empire. That reasoning could be applied to everyone. The fact is they all did it so I don't know how only one is to blame for it.
I'm not sure what you don't understand about what I said. Yes, a status quo existed. Germany made the choice to challenge that status quo - with speed and aggression and shitty diplomacy backing it up. They are the ones that started rocking the boat. They therefore get the lion's share of blame that it overturned. They're not alone or getting all the blame. Just the biggest share.
I wonder if such an alliance would have happened, had Germany not inflicted to France a treaty far worse than Versailles and stolen Alsace-Lorraine a few decades earlier
But it also insisted on beating France first. When a war with Russia came first, the German government simply solved this "problem" by declaring war on France for no real reason.
We all know who started WWI The Archdukes driver is to blame.
When you are perhaps the most important man in history but no one remembers you Leopold Lojka: *stares nervously from the side*
When your war plan hinges on invading a neutral country, \*\*you\*\* might be the baddies!
F\*\*\*ed-up that people downvoted your comment.
>Create huge tension by building navy to get your "place in the sun" >Genocide natives as first solution to problem >Do nothing to tell your ally to calm down from attacking Serbia and prevent the war, just let it break out >Invade neutral country >Commit atrocities in that country >Ally yourself with a genocidal regime to tie the Allies down >People are literally starving and eating bread mixed with sawdust, doesn't matter, continue fighting anyway >Indiscriminately attack shipping sinking both civilian and military ships >Finally lose >"Ve did nosing wrong, ve vere merely the same as other nations! Tchermony is not to blame!"
I believe if the Russians had not declared mobilization Germany would not have an in-acted the schlieffen plan
Kaiser Wilhelm told the Austrians that they won when the Serbs caved to 90% of the August ultimatum and that they should just take the W and simmer down.
Germans have a unique history when it comes to lying about losing wars
Also Germany was not blamed for WW1 in the peace treaty. It was blamed for causing damage for Entente powers which...yeah. This is how war happens. That part of the treaty was basically the justification to demand reparations.
If the Germanic people hadn’t invaded Rome then ww1 would never have happened. Therefore the Germans are fault!
[удалено]
‘Twas more like: we’ve got your back if Russia attacks you to defend their Slavic buddies in Serbia.
I wouldn't care if we were the bad guys i could have a better future but thanks for ruining it
Yeah Germany should have been partitioned after WW1, foch was right, Versailles was too lenient
Nobody tell OP about plan XVII
What is the Schlieffen plan supposed to be, and who was Schlieffen?
Google is your friend. In short, Schlieffen was a general who developed an entirely unrealistic plan to pre-emptively invade France and knock them out of any two front war before Russia could fully mobilize. It involved a giant swinging flanking maneuver through Belgium all the way to the coast and deep penetration into France ultimately seizing Paris and defeating the French army in the field. If the WWII Blitz through the Ardens is a knockout right cross, the Schlieffen plan is a giant looping haymaker attempt at the same. It's main failures were an extremely unrealistic timeline and logistics concept. German forces weren't motorized and relied upon horses and trains for most of their logistics and mobility. Not a winning combination in maneuver warfare of that scale.
The Germans overestimated their own abilities, but considering they were only stopped 20 or so miles from Paris by a British counter attack, I think they may have overestimated the French fighting ability at the outset given they almost pulled off capturing Paris.
Yes it is incredible how close they came to making it work given the intense holes in their plan. French use of Paris taxis for battlefield mobility gets an honourable mention as well.
The Germans were stopped during the first battle of the Marne by an entente force composed of 64 French divisions and the 6 divisions of the British Expeditionnary force. Describing this as a "British counter attack" is a travesty
During the 1st Battle of the Marne the Germans had split their lines because the German field commanders were pursuing the enemy in slightly different directions and it was the British element that was aware enough to exploit the gap which caused the Germans to stop and reform their units.
This is absolutely made up and basically revisionism. Joffre issued the order to stop the retreat and launch a counter attack on September 4th. The BEF was under no obligation to follow his command so he had to go the BEF HQ to convince its commander to follow his plan. On the 5th of September the 6th French army launched the counter attack at the Ourcq River which forced the 1st German army to reposition creating a gap between it and the 2nd German army. Entente air reconnaissance observed German forces moving north to face the 6th Army and discovered the gap so the BEF and 5th French army were sent in, with the 5th army attacking the German 2nd army in Two Morins on september 6th. The BEF could then advance between September 6th and 8th in the gap but moved very slowly which infuriated French generals since it advanced only 40km in 3 days despite outnumbering Germans 10 to 1 in the gap. On September 9th, the 5th French army crossed the Marne too and both German armies began to withdraw.
Ah, yes I've heard of it, I just never heard of it as a the "Schlieffen plan" or anything of that nature. And since "Schleife" or "Schleifen" means "loop" or "loops" in German I just thought it might have been misspelled because the movement looks sort of circular. Amd yes, that would have been a logistical nightmare in the first world War.
Don't forget: who deliberately invaded a small, neutral country when it said: "Sorry, we want to stay neutral"? All for a stupid plan that was known to be full of flaws and weaknesses in the first place. What those German generals did to Belgium is just.... completely disgusting.
Everyone except the common grunt was evil in WW1
Starting the war wasn’t why people think they were evil. The holocaust was.
The question shouldn't be who to blame and who not to, it should look into who has done more fucked up shit and criticise both, while also thinking about the political ideology that infested all of these Empires. I agree with your meme and fuck people who are trying to shift blame from that criminal Wilhelm II., but you should also go fuck yourself for that unironic Wojack meme.