Started By
Message

re: Knowing What we Know now, does Gavrilo Princip pull the Trigger?

Posted on 2/11/16 at 10:59 am to
Posted by MetArl15
Washington, DC
Member since Apr 2007
9483 posts
Posted on 2/11/16 at 10:59 am to
Don't f*** with a Serb. Tough people who are not inclined to back down. They're also not huge fans of America due to our support of Kosovo's independence.
Posted by rolltide32
Fort Payne, AL
Member since Nov 2013
6516 posts
Posted on 2/11/16 at 11:00 am to
World Warr was inevitable. Germany was looking for any excuse to attack France.

Serbia won big in WW1 as it happened with the creation of Yugoslavia compared to what Serbia was before the war

He would easily still do it
This post was edited on 2/11/16 at 11:01 am
Posted by Jim Rockford
Member since May 2011
98190 posts
Posted on 2/11/16 at 11:14 am to
quote:

Don't f*** with a Serb. Tough people who are not inclined to back down. They're also not huge fans of America due to our support of Kosovo's independence.


One might think so, but I have a friend who recently returned from traveling extensively in that area, and he said people of all ethnic persuasions were nearly universally cordial to him.
Posted by Darth_Vader
A galaxy far, far away
Member since Dec 2011
64599 posts
Posted on 2/11/16 at 11:18 am to
quote:

Germany was looking for any excuse to attack France.


Germany didn't see France as it's main threat at that time. If anything it was the French who wanted to get revenge against the Germans for what happened in 1870. The German's main rival on the world stage was Great Britain. But what the German's saw as their biggest threat was Russia. The whole reason Germany moved against France was because of the treaty between France and Russia. The alliance between these two countries meant that Germany had two potential enemies on both it's eastern & western borders. To the Germans, the French were simply in the wrong alliance. Had France not been treaty bound to go to war to aid Russia, WWI as we know it would have probably never happened.

Germany felt surrounded which for all intents and purposes, they were. Thus is what lead the Germans to come up with the Schlieffen Plan. Basically the plan called for knocking France out of a war in a campaign lasting about 6 weeks before the Russians could fully mobilize their massive reserves. The idea called for a massive concentration against the French, leaving the Eastern border with Russia lightly held. The hope was that in the 6 weeks France would be crushed and the German forces there could then be moved quickly east to face the Russians with Germany's western flank now secure. The only reason the Germans moved against France in 1914, is because they had to knock France out of the war in the opening moves thanks to France being treaty bound to Russia. The whole thing was an attempt to avoid fighting a war on two fronts. Of course when it came to it in 1914 the plan failed because France was not knocked out of the war in 6 weeks and Russia also mobilized and went on the offensive far faster than the Germans thought they would. The result was that instead of a short, sharp war on one then another front, Germany was confronted with a long, drawn out war of attrition on two fronts.
Posted by HarryBalzack
Member since Oct 2012
15226 posts
Posted on 2/11/16 at 11:23 am to
They have been aligned with Russia, historically.
Posted by Darth_Vader
A galaxy far, far away
Member since Dec 2011
64599 posts
Posted on 2/11/16 at 11:43 am to
quote:

They have been aligned with Russia, historically.


And that's another thing that lead to WWI. Russia saw themselves as the "protectors" of all Slavic peoples and countries. That's why a matter that really was only between Austria-Hungary and Serbia sucked in Russia. This in turn sucked in Germany thanks to their treaty with Austria-Hungary. Which in turn is what sucked in France thanks to their treaty with Russia. It was a domino effect thanks to the treaties between these powers to come to the aid of each other.

As for Britain and why they got involved, they could have stayed out of the war all together. They were not bound by treaty to either side, despite having joining France & Russia in the "Triple Entente" in 1907. Their involvement in this treaty dealt more with "spheres of influence" and economic matters rather than military involvement. Basically to the British before WWI their involvement with France & Russia was to counter Germany's rising economic power. However, when as part of their Schlieffen Plan, the Germans invaded neutral Belgium on the way to France, Britain used the German's violation of Belgium's neutrality as grounds for going to war.
This post was edited on 2/11/16 at 11:44 am
Posted by CadesCove
Mounting the Woman
Member since Oct 2006
40828 posts
Posted on 2/11/16 at 11:48 am to
quote:

. What's ironic though is right up until the moment armies mobilized and starting marching on their respective frontiers, most of the European leaders and great minds of 1914 considered the idea of a general European war to be impossible.


All the monarchs were basically related at that point. They were attacking their cousins.
Posted by Darth_Vader
A galaxy far, far away
Member since Dec 2011
64599 posts
Posted on 2/11/16 at 12:24 pm to
quote:


All the monarchs were basically related at that point. They were attacking their cousins.


Literally. The King of England, Czar of Russia, and Kaiser of Germany were all grandsons of Queen Victoria. They all even held honorary ranks in the others' armed forces. Britain's King George V was an "honorary" Field Marshall in the Imperial German Army. Here he is wearing the uniform....



He's on the right in the spiked "Pickelhaube" helmet. And standing next to him is the Kaiser who is wearing a British uniform. The Kaiser also held the rank of Russian Marshall as well...


The Kaiser is on the left in a Russian uniform and that's the Czar on the right wearing a German uniform.

On a side note, anyone notice the Czar of Russia and British king would almost pass for twins? Here they are side by side...



This post was edited on 2/11/16 at 12:26 pm
Posted by PiscesTiger
Concrete, WA
Member since Feb 2004
53696 posts
Posted on 2/11/16 at 12:39 pm to
quote:

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?



Someone took notes in U.S. History class this morning. Congrats.
Posted by udtiger
Over your left shoulder
Member since Nov 2006
98860 posts
Posted on 2/11/16 at 12:43 pm to
quote:

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.


This.

There had not been a major European war in some time (not since Prussia pushed France's shite in in 1870, giving rise to Germany) and they were itching to rumble.
Posted by ChewyDante
Member since Jan 2007
16923 posts
Posted on 2/11/16 at 12:53 pm to
quote:


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.


A Pyrrhic victory perhaps though. It changed American foreign policy forever and may result in our eventual internal collapse.
Posted by Darth_Vader
A galaxy far, far away
Member since Dec 2011
64599 posts
Posted on 2/11/16 at 12:55 pm to
quote:

This.

There had not been a major European war in some time (not since Prussia pushed France's shite in in 1870, giving rise to Germany) and they were itching to rumble.


While there were some who saw war as a chance to gain everything from glory to financial and territorial gain, the main players, namely the monarchs of Germany & Russia, pleaded with one another right up until the last moments to pull back from the brink of war.

LINK

The problem was that Germany supported Austria-Hungary in the matter of Austria going to war with Serbia over the assassination of the Crown Prince. But the Germans saw this as a matter between just Austria-Hungary & Serbia and wanted Russia to stay out of it. The Russians on the other hand were not about to let Austria-Hungary gain any more power in the Balkans which the Russians saw as being in their sphere of influence due to the Slavic populations there. And once Russia's ally France stepped in and gave Russia assurances they'd stand with Russia if it came to war in the defense of Serbia, Russia's mind was made up. If Austria-Hungary went to war with Serbia, Russia would go to war against Austria-Hungary.

This post was edited on 2/11/16 at 1:06 pm
Posted by ChewyDante
Member since Jan 2007
16923 posts
Posted on 2/11/16 at 1:28 pm to
Right. I hate the "the war was inevitable" crowd. Neither WWI nor WWII were inevitable. There were many factors that contributed to their outbreaks and it was much more complex than many people seem to understand.
Posted by Darth_Vader
A galaxy far, far away
Member since Dec 2011
64599 posts
Posted on 2/11/16 at 2:13 pm to
quote:

ight. I hate the "the war was inevitable" crowd. Neither WWI nor WWII were inevitable. There were many factors that contributed to their outbreaks and it was much more complex than many people seem to understand.



The situation in the summer of 1914 in Europe was about as complicated as you can get. There are so many things that by themselves looked insignificant but when added together all lead to the conflagration that we know as WWI. And there were many chances to avoid the war all together. Sadly those chances were lost. Basically once the mobilization of armies started, the die was cast and war was inevitable.

One aspect of the summer of 1914 that's long interested me from a "what if" standpoint is what would have the war looked like had the Brits not got involved and instead let the continental powers sort things out among themselves. I'd say there's a good chance had this happened Germany would have forced France to sue for peace within it's allotted 6 week time frame, thus freeing up massive forces it could then turn on Russia. Which if this had happened it's very likely the Russians, abandoned by their main ally and facing a both Germany & Austria-Hungary, themselves would have sued for peace before the fall of 1914.

Imagine how that would have changed the world. Germany's & Austria's Empires would have been victorious and thus probably never collapse. These two powers would have become the undisputed powers in Europe.

The Ottomans, who entered the war in November 1914 would have, in this altered war, never got involved and thus their empire likely would have not seen it's own collapse either. The whole structure of the Middle East over the past century would be fundamentally changed. And with the rise of Middle Eastern oil, there's a good chance that even today the Ottoman Empire could be one of the richest, if not the richest countries on the planet.

Then there's Russia. With a short war lasting only weeks or a couple months, the Romanov Dynasty, already facing problems no doubt, would have probably survived at least until Nicolas II died years later. Imagine a world without a USSR and the "rise of communism" that dominated so much of the 20th century.

Great Britain would have remained the world's biggest economic power, albeit with an even more emboldened Germany nipping at it's heels. Would these two "super powers" eventually gone to war? Who know?

Then there's us. What of America? Without a long drawn out WWI, the U.S. would not see the massive flood of money coming in from GB, France, & Russia as we bankrolled and supplied their war efforts. How would the US look today without all the wealth we made off WWI?

And what of France? This would be the second time in about a generation they'd been crushed by those damn Germans? It's almost a certainty the French government of 1914 would collapse and be replaced by something. But what? Could there have been a disgruntled French corporal who rose from the ranks of an upstart political party to seize power with promises of returning France to her former glory?

Then there's also more general aspects of how WWI shaped our lives. Without a long war there would never have been a flood of women leaving the home for the first time to work in war factories. What would the "feminist" movement look like today? Would there really even be one? Yes, there were feminists before WWI, but it was WWI, and the massive transfer of women from housewives to workers, more than anything else that brought their movement to where it is today.

And what of technology? Look at how WWI took aircraft development and put it into warp drive. Without WWI what would aircraft development looked like today? Would be be this advanced? And it doesn't stop there. Without WWI, there's no such things as tanks or chemical weapons.

And you've also got to consider the technological advances of not just WWI, but also WWII as well since WWII is yet another result of WWI. WWII gave us things like the rocket, atomic energy (and weapons) and even the computer. When would these things have been developed? Would they have been developed?

There's so many "what ifs" that come to mind had even small details in the summer of 1914 gone differently that it boggles the mind.
This post was edited on 2/11/16 at 2:16 pm
Posted by LSUfan20005
Member since Sep 2012
8817 posts
Posted on 2/11/16 at 2:30 pm to
quote:

Right. I hate the "the war was inevitable" crowd. Neither WWI nor WWII were inevitable. There were many factors that contributed to their outbreaks and it was much more complex than many people seem to understand.


Agree.

And stubborn pig-headedness despite minimal progress resulted in the needless death of so many.
This post was edited on 2/11/16 at 2:31 pm
Posted by TigerFanInSouthland
Louisiana
Member since Aug 2012
28065 posts
Posted on 2/11/16 at 8:39 pm to
quote:

The situation in the summer of 1914 in Europe was about as complicated as you can get. There are so many things that by themselves looked insignificant but when added together all lead to the conflagration that we know as WWI. And there were many chances to avoid the war all together. Sadly those chances were lost. Basically once the mobilization of armies started, the die was cast and war was inevitable.

One aspect of the summer of 1914 that's long interested me from a "what if" standpoint is what would have the war looked like had the Brits not got involved and instead let the continental powers sort things out among themselves. I'd say there's a good chance had this happened Germany would have forced France to sue for peace within it's allotted 6 week time frame, thus freeing up massive forces it could then turn on Russia. Which if this had happened it's very likely the Russians, abandoned by their main ally and facing a both Germany & Austria-Hungary, themselves would have sued for peace before the fall of 1914.

Imagine how that would have changed the world. Germany's & Austria's Empires would have been victorious and thus probably never collapse. These two powers would have become the undisputed powers in Europe.

The Ottomans, who entered the war in November 1914 would have, in this altered war, never got involved and thus their empire likely would have not seen it's own collapse either. The whole structure of the Middle East over the past century would be fundamentally changed. And with the rise of Middle Eastern oil, there's a good chance that even today the Ottoman Empire could be one of the richest, if not the richest countries on the planet.

Then there's Russia. With a short war lasting only weeks or a couple months, the Romanov Dynasty, already facing problems no doubt, would have probably survived at least until Nicolas II died years later. Imagine a world without a USSR and the "rise of communism" that dominated so much of the 20th century.

Great Britain would have remained the world's biggest economic power, albeit with an even more emboldened Germany nipping at it's heels. Would these two "super powers" eventually gone to war? Who know?

Then there's us. What of America? Without a long drawn out WWI, the U.S. would not see the massive flood of money coming in from GB, France, & Russia as we bankrolled and supplied their war efforts. How would the US look today without all the wealth we made off WWI?

And what of France? This would be the second time in about a generation they'd been crushed by those damn Germans? It's almost a certainty the French government of 1914 would collapse and be replaced by something. But what? Could there have been a disgruntled French corporal who rose from the ranks of an upstart political party to seize power with promises of returning France to her former glory?

Then there's also more general aspects of how WWI shaped our lives. Without a long war there would never have been a flood of women leaving the home for the first time to work in war factories. What would the "feminist" movement look like today? Would there really even be one? Yes, there were feminists before WWI, but it was WWI, and the massive transfer of women from housewives to workers, more than anything else that brought their movement to where it is today.

And what of technology? Look at how WWI took aircraft development and put it into warp drive. Without WWI what would aircraft development looked like today? Would be be this advanced? And it doesn't stop there. Without WWI, there's no such things as tanks or chemical weapons.

And you've also got to consider the technological advances of not just WWI, but also WWII as well since WWII is yet another result of WWI. WWII gave us things like the rocket, atomic energy (and weapons) and even the computer. When would these things have been developed? Would they have been developed?

There's so many "what ifs" that come to mind had even small details in the summer of 1914 gone differently that it boggles the mind.


Holy shite, this.

Also what you did there...

quote:

And what of France? This would be the second time in about a generation they'd been crushed by those damn Germans? It's almost a certainty the French government of 1914 would collapse and be replaced by something. But what? Could there have been a disgruntled French corporal who rose from the ranks of an upstart political party to seize power with promises of returning France to her former glory?


I see it.

For as much shite as you get on here, Darth, you damn sure know your history.
This post was edited on 2/11/16 at 8:41 pm
Posted by 62zip
One Particular Harbor
Member since Aug 2005
6353 posts
Posted on 2/11/16 at 9:08 pm to
The Croatians are genocidal animals who have never acknowledged their sick crimes.

Signed,
The civilized world
Posted by 62zip
One Particular Harbor
Member since Aug 2005
6353 posts
Posted on 2/11/16 at 9:11 pm to
quote:

Don't f*** with a Serb. Tough people who are not inclined to back down. They're also not huge fans of America due to our support of Kosovo's independence.



And unlike the Croat POS, they sided with the Allies, not the Nazis.
Posted by TigerFanInSouthland
Louisiana
Member since Aug 2012
28065 posts
Posted on 2/11/16 at 9:11 pm to
quote:

The Croatians are genocidal animals who have never acknowledged their sick crimes.


Well...humans are genocidal animals, in general.
Posted by CroakaBait
Gulf Coast of the Land Mass
Member since Nov 2013
3975 posts
Posted on 2/11/16 at 10:01 pm to
quote:

The Croatians are genocidal animals who have never acknowledged their sick crimes.

We talking the beginning of the Croatian War for Independence?
Serbs did the crimes there.
The Bosnian War?
Yeah, total clusterfrick. But they weren't the only guilty parties.
first pageprev pagePage 3 of 4Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram