- 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
re: Which country’s military do you consider to have won WWI?
Posted on 9/25/18 at 5:48 pm to Bama and Beer
Posted on 9/25/18 at 5:48 pm to Bama and Beer
quote:
Early on a country, I can't recall right now, would send a soldier out with a rifle and 2 soldiers behind him carrying only ammunition. Once the front guy went down the next would pick up the rifle and continue and so forth.
That’s Russia.
1
Posted on 9/25/18 at 5:49 pm to TigerFanInSouthland
They just didn't have the production of rifles to equip the amount of men they had on the field.
This post was edited on 9/25/18 at 5:49 pm
Posted on 9/25/18 at 5:52 pm to WestCoastAg
quote:
What would have been better for the world would have been if England and France weren't as vindictive towards Germany after the war and if they followed our blueprint of post ww2 in the mold of focusing on rebuilding a defeated Germany in their own image
Just think though. An early German victory likely results in some territory and colony transfers. Serbia punished.
The Middle East isn’t carved up along pointless lines. The immense loss of life doesn’t occur with an entire generation scarred and damned.
Germany isn’t punished and the war doesn’t shape key players of the Nazis. Terrible weapons of war aren’t developed.
Perhaps the Romanov dynasty doesn’t fall to the communists. Perhaps China doesn’t.
I don’t see the downside. Perhaps the heads of state in Europe see what a disaster they avoided and work to disarm the powder keg that was the system of alliances.
Posted on 9/25/18 at 5:53 pm to Bama and Beer
Correct, they were so behind in means of production that years before the war, Tsar Nicholas called a conference known as The Hague Convention. It was trying to slow down and then basically stop all forms of military production around Europe.
Hell, Russia never got helmets during the war. They were the only country that didn’t get helmets during the war.
Hell, Russia never got helmets during the war. They were the only country that didn’t get helmets during the war.
Posted on 9/25/18 at 5:53 pm to fr33manator
quote:
To be perfectly honest an early German victory would have been best for Europe as a whole. And the world
Leading to a Bolshevik regime controlling the industrial might of England or France instead of semi-agrarian Russia.
The Austro-Hungarian and Ottoman empires struggle on for a few more years, leading to unpredictable results. Perhaps a decade or more of chaotic civil war in eastern Europe and the Middle East.
A weakened Britain can't hold on to its colonies. Japan rolls up Singapore, Hong Kong, and India, becoming a superpower in the twenties and thirties, possibly leading to a confrontation with Germany.
What does this all mean for America? Would have it been a better or worse outcome? Absolutely no way of knowing.
Posted on 9/25/18 at 5:53 pm to WestCoastAg
quote:
Germany after the war and if they followed our blueprint of post ww2 in the mold of focusing on rebuilding a defeated Germany in their own image
This is true, but I don't know how much it would have curbed the German hard right, who were raised in a martial environment, and didn't see democracy as an answer. The German military establishment immediately tried to work around the treaty, as in 1921, Kurt von Schleicher made contacts with the Soviets which allowed Germany to remained armed through a series of shell corporations that allowed those arms to be built in the Soviet Union. The German right was so committed to upturning Versailles that they thought voting for the Social Democrats was akin to treason. Von Schleicher also formed a secret group to kill Germans accused of working with the Allies to ensure compliance on Part V of the treaty.
German hardliners drove the efforts for WWII just as much as England and France. The hardliners were so alarmed by the victory of the Social Democrats in 1928, who ran on a campaign based on anti-militarism, that many hardliners refused to work with the SPD, with the end of the coalition marking the end of the possibility of democratic governance.
The role of the German hard right is somewhat underrated with regards to what occurred with Hitler and WWII. More lenient terms in Versailles were probably impossible, considering the aim of the treaty was to break German dominance of continental politics.
Posted on 9/25/18 at 5:54 pm to fr33manator
quote:
Perhaps the Romanov dynasty doesn’t fall to the communists.
I basically agree with all your points except this one. The Romanovs were absolutely on their last legs even at the beginning of the war before Ludendorff sent Lenin back east.
Posted on 9/25/18 at 5:58 pm to crazy4lsu
I dont disagree with any of that. And even then, if england and france were strong enough to check germany shite during the interwar years, they may have been successful in keeping German power down and under control
I was just merely offering a simple better solution to "it would have been better if germany won" or what actually happened with the benefit of 100 years of hindsight
I was just merely offering a simple better solution to "it would have been better if germany won" or what actually happened with the benefit of 100 years of hindsight
Posted on 9/25/18 at 5:59 pm to fr33manator
quote:
An early German victory likely results in some territory and colony transfers.
An early Germany victory would have sealed the domination of European politics by the Germans to a degree that the English and French could not have tolerated. The desire of Western Europe to moderate the claims of German peoples would have remained with a German and Austrian victory. That's not to mention the wave of nationalism that was sweeping through the Ottoman Empire, which despite its many attempts to be seen as a cosmopolitan empire (the Fez has an interesting history in that regard), was still dominated by Turks, which made other groups extremely nervous.
The social and liberal order that America established after WWII was better for the world than the status quo, in my view.
Posted on 9/25/18 at 6:01 pm to WestCoastAg
quote:
I was just merely offering a simple better solution to "it would have been better if germany won" or what actually happened with the benefit of 100 years of hindsight
I see. I'm more of the school that the world wars could not be any other way. The second WW could have possibly been avoided had the anti-militarist SPD been able to win enough seats to rule without a coalition, but given that they had to work with so many groups made effective governance impossible.
Posted on 9/25/18 at 6:04 pm to TigerFanInSouthland
Ottoman
Posted on 9/25/18 at 6:06 pm to TigerFanInSouthland
Militarily, it was the French army and British navy. The British army right behind those two forces.
Posted on 9/25/18 at 6:06 pm to fr33manator
quote:
To be perfectly honest an early German victory would have been best for Europe as a whole. And the world
It probably would have short circuited Hitler's German nationalism and what he was able to accomplish by appealing to the Germans sense of being effectively raped (they were) by the terms of the treaty of Versaille. At that point who knows where things go relative to another world war, Russian expansion and a possible confrontation with Russia. World War II is what set America up as a superpower, so who knows what that would have meant.
Posted on 9/25/18 at 6:10 pm to crazy4lsu
I think ultimately ww2 was good for human history if the single most cataclysmic and destructive event ever could possibly be good for human civilization. It woke us the frick up and we understood the kind of world that needed to exist in the 20th century better than the British and french and were much more capable of establishing and ensuring that worlds survival
Posted on 9/25/18 at 6:13 pm to WestCoastAg
I agree that the US-led world order was far better than the British or French or Russians or Germans leading it.
Posted on 9/25/18 at 6:17 pm to crazy4lsu
quote:
The social and liberal order that America established after WWII was better for the world than the status quo, in my view.
One which we are in the process of deliberately dismantling, with grave consequences for the world, in my opinion.
Posted on 9/25/18 at 6:19 pm to Jim Rockford
quote:
One which we are in the process of deliberately dismantling, with grave consequences for the world, in my opinion.
I agree.
Posted on 9/25/18 at 6:22 pm to TigerFanInSouthland
quote:
I basically agree with all your points except this one. The Romanovs were absolutely on their last legs even at the beginning of the war before Ludendorff sent Lenin back east.
Yes, but without Russian failures in the war and all the fallout from those issues, without Lenin...do the Bolsheviks prevail?
Perhaps a more democratic form of government arises instead of the horror of the commies
Posted on 9/25/18 at 6:30 pm to fr33manator
quote:but how do you know that imperial Germany takes a hard stance against the bolshevik revolution coming to defeated england and france? The bolshevik revolution failed because of us. We made it our damned mission for 60 years to make that way of life fail. Does imperial germany feel the same way? Maybe. I also think theres a real chance they dont
Yes, but without Russian failures in the war and all the fallout from those issues, without Lenin...do the Bolsheviks prevail?
Posted on 9/25/18 at 6:40 pm to TigerFanInSouthland
quote:
We could be talking about another Napoleon type instead of Hitler.
France provoked war in 1914 to regain Alsace Lorraine, as German population was growing far too quickly and France would never in the future have the manpower too regain its lost territory. France was not going to produce anyone that could allow it to dominate the Continent.
Page 2 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News