Wilhelm II

Feb 2007
538
Ohio
See what I mean? I said you have a different perspective; it does not necessarily mean we are in opposition. :)
You were, earlier in this thread, expressing surprise that you were in agreement with heikstheo. Why would you, having duly noted actually being in agreement with heikstheo, then ask where your meds are?
 

PADDYBOY

Historum Emeritas
Jan 2007
6,500
Scotland
You were, earlier in this thread, expressing surprise that you were in agreement with heikstheo. Why would you, having duly noted actually being in agreement with heikstheo, then ask where your meds are?

Heikstheo
This is something we sometimes refer to as HUMOUR?
It is something which is often used to, BREAK THE ICE, so to speak,
B.T.W. I hope you don't take offence at me sticking my neb in !
 

Lucius

Forum Staff
Jan 2007
16,363
Nebraska
Did the Kaiser have a choice whether or not to enter World War One?

That's a good question, GermanDude92. Sure, he could have picked Franz Graf von Ballestrem(leader of the Centre Party) instead of Major General Georg Leo Graf von Caprivi to be Reichskanzler after Bismark, in 1890.

But, then he wouldn't have been Wilhelm Hohenzollern, would he?

Or do you mean to ask what date was the latest he could have moved to prevent German entry into the war?
 
Feb 2007
538
Ohio
Heikstheo
This is something we sometimes refer to as HUMOUR?
It is something which is often used to, BREAK THE ICE, so to speak,
B.T.W. I hope you don't take offence at me sticking my neb in !
I'm not trying to be a humourless person; I'm just joking around with Belisarius. :)
 
Jun 2007
26
Virginia, USA
It was sort of out of his hands. Things were already set in motion with alliances. He was thoroughly shackled to the interests and actions of Austro-Hungary, and it soon became apparent, as the war pressed on, that he was "shackled to a corpse."

Eric
 

Lucius

Forum Staff
Jan 2007
16,363
Nebraska
Practically, the latest year Germany could have avoided the disaster was 1890. In that year the German-Russian Re-insurance treaty was allowed to lapse, but the German-Austrian Dual Alliance of 1879 remained in force. They should have done it the other way round. Then sat back and watched the Austrians and Russians fight it out in the Balkans, then, at "just the right moment", sent his armies into the Austrian Crownlands, to "save the doomed", as it were (especially if it started to look like they were winning).

Then, later, when the Russian monarchy began collapsing from it's own internal contradictions, cut Alsace-Lorraine loose, and start the Drang nach Osten.

That's what Frederick the Great would have done.
 
Sep 2007
34
Mexico City, Mexico
Also if i remember right, at one time he supported the Nazis. This more or less reasured that the Hohenzollerns would never again sit on the throne of Germany.
Not really. He was out of the throne and in exile when the Nazi party took over. He did hope the new chancellor, Adolph Hitler, could restore some of the benefits he once had, but soon it became evident that Hitler wasn't trying to restore the monarchy, and was instead pursuing his own agenda and expansionist program. The kaiser was actually a prisoner of the Nazis, who keept him "guarded" and "protected" in a golden cage. They sent soldiers to his palace, and controlled the funds he was allowed to take from his family fortune back in Germany. So basically, they made sure he didn't say or do anything that could be against their interests.

As a matter of fact, there were discussions over the convenience of rescuing the aged former Kaiser and taking him by plane to England... but the idea didn't meet with much approval there, and the kaiser himself refused to leave his property in the Netherlands. He died there, and was buried in exile, and gave instructions that there should not be swastikas in his funeral, though some small ones were nevertheless present in the funeral flowers sent by Hitler.