Historum - History Forums  

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

General History General History Forum - General history questions and discussions


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old December 16th, 2017, 03:03 PM   #11
DVW
Citizen
 
Joined: Dec 2017
From: Bosnia and Herzegovina
Posts: 5

Quote:
Originally Posted by Peaceful View Post
There's a strange thing that people over the centuries have thought: we British have manipulated everyone into fighting wars. Hitler and countless Europeans have said this. I've read it on this board from Europeans.

Which begs the question: are we really so smart and you're really so stupid that we can throw you a bone and you start fighting over it? Do you realise what you're saying?

Look, I'd make a distinction in your OP as follows:

1) Was Britain a contributor to WW1? Yes, because we held imperialistic values in high regard, and imperialistic values were a significant factor in causing WW1.

2) Did Britain want WW1 in 1914? No, because we had more to lose than anyone. We'd have been as happy as pigs in **** with the status quo. Did Austria and Germany want WW1 in 1914? Yes, they had most to gain.
Britain had to lose more than anyone is a statemant i can't agree on. Just like EmperoroftheBavarians43 said couple of posts above Britain would stay unharmed even if Germans had taken Paris, island was almost imposible to invade anyway. As for imperialism as a contributor for WW1 if it's not what else is? Every conflict we have witnessed throughout our history was beacuse of territorial ambitions and indeed we rarely have other reason. Securing your colonies is imperialism. Why the hell Britain will give Italy such a promises in land then? Why the hell will Britain give Serbia part of Hungary once war ended? Your (don't be mad beacuse i called it that way) primary interest was getting more nations involved in fight with "aggressive" Austria and Germany no matter what it takes. With new powers rising old ones would do anything to make them pay beacuse they only want to be important and known country all across the continent and even across the world those former were and still are. This applies for Germans, Hasburgs were in totally different situation. Attack on France was preemptive strike, not imperial aggression. While i don't deny German imperialism (normal for a country in it's barely fifth decade of existance) it was overshadowed by British. How many colonies Germany had? Except Namibia i can't remeber neither few of them. Now if start counting overseas territories of you and France i won't end 'till tomorrow. And yes, British are so clever and so skilled in manipulating geopolitics for their own benefits, USA is as well, but in last 70 years while you were always like that. Since the Middle Ages.
DVW is offline  
Remove Ads
Old December 16th, 2017, 03:42 PM   #12
Archivist
 
Joined: Dec 2017
From: Florida
Posts: 212

Quote:
Originally Posted by SirOrmondeWinter View Post
Britain (of course) and the Entente were the good guys. Our war aims were for the Germans to go back where they came from. These were their's;

http://historytothemax.wikispaces.co...Memorandum.pdf

And what they actually enforced on the Russians;

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Brest-Litovsk
Good guys don't starve entire nations to death.
Divinespark is offline  
Old December 16th, 2017, 03:44 PM   #13

Kotromanic's Avatar
McCartneynite-Lennonist
 
Joined: Dec 2011
From: Iowa USA
Posts: 4,093
Blog Entries: 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by Divinespark View Post
Good guys don't starve entire nations to death.
Once you are in a fight you have the moral duty to win it. True in a bar room and true for the blockade of Germany.

By the way, if you read the actual historians you will find that actual loss of life to lack of calories was a risk in Vienna and cities in Austria but not in Germany.
So much emotional revisionism.
Kotromanic is online now  
Old December 16th, 2017, 03:48 PM   #14
Archivist
 
Joined: Dec 2017
From: Florida
Posts: 212

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kotromanic View Post
Once you are in a fight you have the moral duty to win it. True in a bar room and true for the blockade of Germany.

By the way, if you read the actual historians you will find that actual loss of life to lack of calories was a risk in Vienna and cities in Austria but not in Germany.
So much emotional revisionism.
And that gives you the right to murder civilians? Anyone where from half a million to seven hundred thousand civilians died from food shortages in Germany.

You can't claim the moral high ground, "being the good guys" "fighting tyrannical monarchies" and "German militarism" and get to murder children. No sir, you don't get to get away with that. THAT is moral relativism.

And what is this "moral duty" you speak of? Who is the duty to?

Last edited by Divinespark; December 16th, 2017 at 04:00 PM.
Divinespark is offline  
Old December 16th, 2017, 03:50 PM   #15

Kotromanic's Avatar
McCartneynite-Lennonist
 
Joined: Dec 2011
From: Iowa USA
Posts: 4,093
Blog Entries: 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by Divinespark View Post
And that gives you the right to murder civilians? Anyone where from half a million to a million civilians died from food shortages in Germany.

You can't claim the moral high ground, "being the good guys" "fighting tyrannical monarchies" and "German militarism" and get to murder children. No sir, you don't get to get away with that. THAT is moral relativism.
Poppycock, there's no scholarship that support your rant about a million civilians.
Kotromanic is online now  
Old December 16th, 2017, 03:58 PM   #16
Archivist
 
Joined: Dec 2017
From: Florida
Posts: 212

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kotromanic View Post
Poppycock, there's no scholarship that support your rant about a million civilians.
Well the German Board of Health after the war concluded that close to 772,000 Germans died during the Starving of Germany. So I will amend my previous statement.
Divinespark is offline  
Old December 16th, 2017, 04:00 PM   #17

Maki's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Jan 2017
From: Republika Srpska
Posts: 1,857

Quote:
Originally Posted by Divinespark View Post
Good guys don't starve entire nations to death.
They also don't illegally invade other countries and attempt to seize them for themselves.
Maki is offline  
Old December 16th, 2017, 04:02 PM   #18
Archivist
 
Joined: Dec 2017
From: Florida
Posts: 212

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maki View Post
They also don't illegally invade other countries and attempt to seize them for themselves.
You are absolutely right. Considering every country involved in World War I did that at one time or another OR were actually in the process of doing that while the war was happening, then I think we can conclude that there are no good guys.
Divinespark is offline  
Old December 16th, 2017, 04:05 PM   #19

Maki's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Jan 2017
From: Republika Srpska
Posts: 1,857

Quote:
Originally Posted by Divinespark View Post
You are absolutely right. Considering every country involved in World War I did that at one time or another OR were actually in the process of doing that while the war was happening, then I think we can conclude that there are no good guys.
The Entente didn't start first though. Germany marched through Belgium first, before any Allied attempts at invasion.
Maki is offline  
Old December 16th, 2017, 04:08 PM   #20
Archivist
 
Joined: Dec 2017
From: Florida
Posts: 212

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maki View Post
The Entente didn't start first though. Germany marched through Belgium first, before any Allied attempts at invasion.
You act as though this all started when Germany crossed Belgium. It didn't. You are taking one event devoid of any nuance and incorrectly identifying a starting point.
Divinespark is offline  
Reply

  Historum > World History Forum > General History

Tags
entente, guilty, guys, ww1



Search tags for this page
Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Which side during the Crusades were the relative "good guys"? Futurist Middle Eastern and African History 197 February 17th, 2018 07:43 AM
Wars with clear-cut good guys and bad guys? WhatAnArtist War and Military History 64 October 7th, 2016 02:31 PM
UK support to Entente in ww1 Azatoth European History 5 December 31st, 2015 12:54 AM
Who were the good guys in Vietnam? Toltec Asian History 52 May 20th, 2010 08:37 PM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.