Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > World History Forum > European History
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

European History European History Forum - Western and Eastern Europe including the British Isles, Scandinavia, Russia


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old December 29th, 2017, 09:14 AM   #21
Historian
 
Joined: Apr 2017
From: Las Vegas, NV USA
Posts: 1,911

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fantasus View Post
In the period 1871-1912 there was no major intra-european wars. That some speculated it would not happen again may not have seen so improbable as it may do in hinsight
While there were no wars in that period, the Great Powers were preparing for war and the alliances that existed in WWI were being formed. Persisting national rivalries among the major powers leading to many wars were the rule in Europe since at least the 100 Years War. No one can say a similar situation will not develop in the future, but in the OP you asked what was different in the period 1945-1989.

Quote:
. And why see the neutrals as a "camp"?
OK. By what collective name would you call them? They were called the Non-Aligned at the time. They had some common interests on that basis alone.

Last edited by stevev; December 29th, 2017 at 09:39 AM.
stevev is online now  
Remove Ads
Old December 29th, 2017, 10:15 AM   #22

David Vagamundo's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Jan 2010
From: Atlanta, Georgia USA
Posts: 3,774

I believe that to a large extent this was the result of two wars-- called "world" wars" but starting in and driven by European nations-- in which the European nations had beaten themselves into a pulp and had learned their lesson about wars between European nations. Pacific Victory's comment on the west v east also had a lot to do with it (NATO v Warsaw Pact) , as did the United Nations and efforts at European economic and military integration (European Common Market, etc)
David Vagamundo is offline  
Old December 29th, 2017, 11:15 AM   #23
Historian
 
Joined: Jan 2012
From: Northern part of European lowland
Posts: 2,330

Quote:
Originally Posted by stevev View Post
While there were no wars in that period, the Great Powers were preparing for war and the alliances that existed in WWI were being formed. Persisting national rivalries among the major powers leading to many wars were the rule in Europe since at least the 100 Years War. No one can say a similar situation will not develop in the future, but in the OP you asked what was different in the period 1945-1989.



OK. By what collective name would you call them? They were called the Non-Aligned at the time. They had some common interests on that basis alone.
While Yugoslavia was a founding member of the organisation of "non-aligned nations" Sweden and Switzerland I think were never members. They were, if I am not wrong, just neutral countries and I doubt they cooperated that intimately with other neutral countries. And I also doubt the US of A could be said to be within any "neutral camp" before it became allied with others?
Fantasus is offline  
Old December 29th, 2017, 11:38 AM   #24

sparky's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Jan 2017
From: Sydney
Posts: 2,078
Blog Entries: 1

.
One could observe than both the USA and the USSR did manage a state of hostility pretty well

if all those gentlemen in the European capitals had had access to nuclear weapons in 1914 I doubt if they would have managed things better

three cheers for the cold war 1 ,and Kudos to Washington and Moscow
it was a roaring success , long may we rue its passing
sparky is offline  
Old December 29th, 2017, 12:11 PM   #25

Valens's Avatar
Puer Senex
 
Joined: Feb 2014
From: Colonia Valensiana
Posts: 8,179
Blog Entries: 19

I wouldn't go so far to call this period an 'exception' in European history. There had been other periods of European history that were free of major conflicts between preeminent powers. One of such examples being the period of European history starting after the Congress of Vienna in 1815 following the final defeat of Napoleon.
It's true that it's not directly comparable with the Cold War era, but still, the post-Napoleonic Europe kept status quo, despite the limited scale warfare between European countries.

Also, one of the factors behind the (relative) pacification of Europe post 1945, is that European powers had been devastated by two major wars, and the fact that outside powers gained great among of influence over European affairs.

It is logical, and even necessary, that European countries keep together during times of US and Soviet dominance of global politics, as well as a rising China.

Another indicative example: the rise of Germany and its quest for dominance prompted the two former rivals and enemies, Britain and France to ally and keep status quo on the continent.
Valens is offline  
Old December 29th, 2017, 12:48 PM   #26
Historian
 
Joined: Apr 2017
From: Las Vegas, NV USA
Posts: 1,911

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fantasus View Post
. And I also doubt the US of A could be said to be within any "neutral camp" before it became allied with others?
The US was a founding member of NATO. I'm not sure what your point is. Who's saying the US was in a neutral camp 1945- 1989 (the scope of reference that you defined)? I'm also not sure why you're making such an issue over the term, "neutral camp". They shared the common position of being European states not in NATO or the Warsaw Pact during the Cold War.

Last edited by stevev; December 29th, 2017 at 01:04 PM.
stevev is online now  
Old December 29th, 2017, 03:16 PM   #27
Historian
 
Joined: Apr 2017
From: Las Vegas, NV USA
Posts: 1,911

Quote:
Originally Posted by stevev View Post
The US was a founding member of NATO. I'm not sure what your point is. Who's saying the US was in a neutral camp 1945- 1989 (the scope of reference that you defined)? I'm also not sure why you're making such an issue over the term, "neutral camp". They shared the common position of being European states not in NATO or the Warsaw Pact during the Cold War.
BTW I forgot Ireland among the neutrals and Spain did join NATO in 1982. Portugal was a founding member.

Last edited by stevev; December 29th, 2017 at 03:58 PM.
stevev is online now  
Old December 30th, 2017, 02:41 AM   #28
Historian
 
Joined: Jan 2012
From: Northern part of European lowland
Posts: 2,330

Quote:
Originally Posted by stevev View Post
The US was a founding member of NATO. I'm not sure what your point is. Who's saying the US was in a neutral camp 1945- 1989 (the scope of reference that you defined)? I'm also not sure why you're making such an issue over the term, "neutral camp". They shared the common position of being European states not in NATO or the Warsaw Pact during the Cold War.
Here I admit I referred to the U.S. of the time before ww2.
Fantasus is offline  
Reply

  Historum > World History Forum > European History

Tags
european, exception, hisroey



Search tags for this page
Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Miracle on the Han River (South Korea): an Exception? VHS Asian History 24 May 7th, 2016 07:43 PM
Hungary 1945-1989 sor European History 3 August 15th, 2013 09:29 AM
Eastern European History 1945 to 1990, Challenge! larkin General History 5 February 7th, 2013 04:50 AM
Post War European Recovery 1945-1960 Richard Stanbery European History 24 November 13th, 2011 05:13 PM
Carrhae, the exception or the norm? Labienus Ancient History 11 June 5th, 2011 08:17 AM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.