- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Knowing What we Know now, does Gavrilo Princip pull the Trigger?
Posted on 2/10/16 at 9:21 pm
Posted on 2/10/16 at 9:21 pm
A little backstory on Gavrilo Princip. He was a Serbian national in what was then known as Austria-Hungary. Many Serbs absolutely hated the Austro-Hungarian Empire. Well Princip and roughly 20 men thought it would be a great idea to assassinate the Archduke of Austria-Hungary, Franz Ferdinand, when he and his wife were on a trip to Sarajevo. Long story short, they try to kill him on his parade route through the city and the plan goes awry; they fail. Princip is eating lunch at a diner and walks out and lo and behold, the Archduke is sitting in his vehicle right there when he walks out of the restaurant. Princip shoots and kills Franz Ferdinand, as well as his wife. Thus, setting in motion the events of WWI.
The German, Russian, Ottoman, and Austro-Hungarian Empires were all toppled due to this war; which really vaulted the entire world into its present day nations. It demolished the "old world" and put us into the "new world".
World War One pretty much wiped out an entire generation of Europe; as well as, set in motion the events that would kick off WWII.
Judging by present-day life, does Gavrilo Princip pull the trigger?
The German, Russian, Ottoman, and Austro-Hungarian Empires were all toppled due to this war; which really vaulted the entire world into its present day nations. It demolished the "old world" and put us into the "new world".
World War One pretty much wiped out an entire generation of Europe; as well as, set in motion the events that would kick off WWII.
Judging by present-day life, does Gavrilo Princip pull the trigger?
This post was edited on 2/10/16 at 9:39 pm
18
Posted on 2/10/16 at 9:23 pm to TigerFanInSouthland
Would you prefer to be sodomized by Hitler or Princip, all things being equal?
Posted on 2/10/16 at 9:24 pm to TigerFanInSouthland
knowing what we know now, we try to learn about and respect the nations and people of the middle east instead of drawing lines on a map and calling them countries irrespective of those consequences or where those lines are drawn.
Posted on 2/10/16 at 9:24 pm to TigerFanInSouthland
Yep. I don't think he cared about the events that would ensue. I'm sure he knew that was a suicide mission.
Posted on 2/10/16 at 9:25 pm to TigerFanInSouthland
Posted on 2/10/16 at 9:27 pm to TigerFanInSouthland
Serbia was a sovereign state. The Austrians were just looking for a reason to go to war, as were the Russians, French, English and almost everyone else.
Posted on 2/10/16 at 9:28 pm to TigerFanInSouthland
I remember the first time I listened to Dan Carlin
Posted on 2/10/16 at 9:29 pm to TigerFanInSouthland
They memorialized his steps to the trigger point in Sarajevo, so I'm going to guess he would still pull it.
Maybe he'd wish the suicide attempt succeeded?
Maybe he'd wish the suicide attempt succeeded?
This post was edited on 2/10/16 at 9:31 pm
Posted on 2/10/16 at 9:30 pm to Rouge
quote:
I remember the first time I listened to Dan Carlin
I already knew the events that happened to start it. But yes, I am listening to "Blueprint for Armageddon"
Posted on 2/10/16 at 9:31 pm to TigerFanInSouthland
Yeah, he knew what he was doing. The alliances were in motion, he was sent by the societies to be the spark
Posted on 2/10/16 at 9:36 pm to TigerFanInSouthland
Check out Dan Carlin's Hardcore History Blueprint for Armageddon
Posted on 2/10/16 at 9:37 pm to OleWar
quote:
Serbia was a sovereign state
Ah, yes, I stand corrected.
Posted on 2/10/16 at 9:38 pm to Breesus
quote:
knowing what we know now, we try to learn about and respect the nations and people of the middle east instead of drawing lines on a map and calling them countries irrespective of those consequences or where those lines are drawn.
Just as a point of information, the Ottoman Empire basically covered all of the middle East prior to WWI. "Lawrence of Arabia" and his adventures played to the idea that independence and multiple country rule in the middle East was the way to go. Obviously that idea failed.
FWIW the Ottomans had held the middle East almost continuously since the crusades.
The question of whether or not the Ottomans involvement in WWI had a larger impact than the spread of Communism following WWII has been a lingering point of discussion for a long time.
ETA- If the Ottomans don't get involved in WWI, the middle east would be a very different place.
This post was edited on 2/10/16 at 9:42 pm
Posted on 2/10/16 at 9:42 pm to NYNolaguy1
quote:
The question of whether or not the Ottomans involvement in WWI had a larger impact than the spread of Communism following WWII has been a lingering point of discussion for a long time.
I think, judging by the state of affairs currently, that the Ottoman Empire going down will indeed have a longer lasting effect on the world.
Look at how unstable it is now without them in power. Hell, as bad as he was, Sadaam Hussein held a certain amount of stability in that region. I think that was the biggest mistake of WWI was getting rid of the Ottomans. Although, the Ottomans didn't have a very strong military and economy at the time so who knows if the empire would've stayed in tact anyway. Hindsight is 20/20 though.
This post was edited on 2/10/16 at 9:45 pm
Posted on 2/10/16 at 9:45 pm to genro
Some form of WWI would have happened eventually without the assassination.
Whether the Romanovs would have survived in Russia is questionable, and if not, would the Bolsheviks have been able to co-opt the replacement government as they did is subjective. Probably not.
Germany's fate is interesting to ponder, events could have broken many different ways, some better for them and some worse.
Ditto for France.
The U.K. loses Ireland in many other scenarios? Don't think so.
The U.S. was the clear winner after WWI, maybe not as much in other scenarios?
Sadly, larger scale, the unresolved issues from WWI led directly to WWII, too bad that drama played out as it did. We'll never know the answer to your question.
Whether the Romanovs would have survived in Russia is questionable, and if not, would the Bolsheviks have been able to co-opt the replacement government as they did is subjective. Probably not.
Germany's fate is interesting to ponder, events could have broken many different ways, some better for them and some worse.
Ditto for France.
The U.K. loses Ireland in many other scenarios? Don't think so.
The U.S. was the clear winner after WWI, maybe not as much in other scenarios?
Sadly, larger scale, the unresolved issues from WWI led directly to WWII, too bad that drama played out as it did. We'll never know the answer to your question.
Posted on 2/10/16 at 9:55 pm to soccerfüt
quote:
The U.S. was the clear winner after WWI, maybe not as much in other scenarios?
This is what I've gathered from this mostly. We got shitloads of money from it and kept our military out of the war until the very end when we came in and were the real knockout blow to the Germans. If WWII put America on the map as the biggest military power; then WWI put America on the map as the biggest economic power. I mean, we bankrolled the Allied powers, much like we did in WWII. Also, what a lot of people don't realize is that the center for world trade shifted from Britain to the U.S. in WWI.
Posted on 2/10/16 at 9:57 pm to TigerFanInSouthland
quote:
think, judging by the state of affairs currently, that the Ottoman Empire going down will indeed have a longer lasting effect on the world.
Look at how unstable it is now without them in power. Hell, as bad as he was, Sadaam Hussein held a certain amount of stability in that region. I think that was the biggest mistake of WWI was getting rid of the Ottomans. Although, the Ottomans didn't have a very strong military and economy at the time so who knows if the empire would've stayed in tact anyway. Hindsight is 20/20 though.
It crazy to look at the map and think how different the world was in 1913. Baghdad, Damascus, Jerusalem, Medina, Mecca, Constantinople --- all under the same stable rule. Now? No one would dream of that happening again.
Although I generally agree that the Ottomans involvement in WWi was of greater effect than Communism post WWII, there is an argument to be made.
Think of everything that came of it- the space race, the cold war, nuclear deterrants, Berlin Wall, finally a diminished Russia post Cold War that is looking to return to its old glory (Crimea/Ukraine). Definitely all things still affecting us today.
Posted on 2/10/16 at 10:03 pm to NYNolaguy1
he was basically just a kid caught up in nationalism, so he still pulls it ... didn't even get a life sentence ...
Posted on 2/10/16 at 10:12 pm to TigerFanInSouthland
Another thing that I find incredibly interesting about WWI is the amount of casualties inflicted in single battles. Although, the battles would last many times 6+ months along huge fronts; it's just astonishing that countries and militaries would willingly send men to the front for what was literally certain death for the men.
Take the Battle of the Somme, for instance. There were around 750,000 casualties on ONE side alone.
There's absolutely no way that there could be another battle nowadays that have even a quarter of those casualties. There would be riots in the streets. Whole governments would be brought down because of that today. Hell, in WWI, a battle with 100,000+ happened almost every single battle.
Take the Battle of the Somme, for instance. There were around 750,000 casualties on ONE side alone.
There's absolutely no way that there could be another battle nowadays that have even a quarter of those casualties. There would be riots in the streets. Whole governments would be brought down because of that today. Hell, in WWI, a battle with 100,000+ happened almost every single battle.
Posted on 2/10/16 at 10:22 pm to TigerFanInSouthland
quote:
Judging by present-day life, does Gavrilo Princip pull the trigger?
Does he, hell yes! (I don't agree with that decision)
Objective=
Is Serbia a free independent country? Yes
Cause massive casualties for the Russians? Yes
Dead Russians
WWI=3,394,369
WWII= 8,806,453
Page 1 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News