Woodrow Wilson embraces the Russian call for "no annexations or indemnities" in early 1917

Kotromanic

Ad Honorem
Dec 2011
4,718
Iowa USA
#11
That is more or less what he did. All terroritory Germany lost was justified on ethnic or pragmatioc grounds (Danzig and sea access for Poland etc) and well and truely signaled in his 14 points.

This hand wringing about Versallies if just theere wa smore idealism it would have all been perfect. Well People are involved it was not going to be perfect. Germany was never going to accept that it lost the war. Arguably the mistake was the armstice.
If Kerensky had dealt with Lenin appropriately, then the pressure for Germany to re-deploy to the interior wouldn't have been a factor.

Stopping Bolshevism in Central Europe was job one and was achieved.
 
Likes: Futurist

pugsville

Ad Honorem
Oct 2010
9,056
#12
If Kerensky had dealt with Lenin appropriately, then the pressure for Germany to re-deploy to the interior wouldn't have been a factor.

Stopping Bolshevism in Central Europe was job one and was achieved.
I'm not sure I understand. Are you saying if the Bolsheviks had been repressed they would have been no threat of German revolution thus no need to redeploy the German Amy to Germany to prevent social rebellion?

that the motivation for the Entente in offering the armstice was to allow this to happen?
 
Likes: Futurist

Kotromanic

Ad Honorem
Dec 2011
4,718
Iowa USA
#13
I'm not sure I understand. Are you saying if the Bolsheviks had been repressed they would have been no threat of German revolution thus no need to redeploy the German Amy to Germany to prevent social rebellion?

that the motivation for the Entente in offering the armstice was to allow this to happen?
As usual, you have understood my meaning, Pugs. "Dealt with" was shorthand to convey the beautifully constructed statement that you provided. Thanks so much.
 
Likes: Futurist

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
18,701
SoCal
#14
As usual, you have understood my meaning, Pugs. "Dealt with" was shorthand to convey the beautifully constructed statement that you provided. Thanks so much.
Wouldn't that have meant that there was some truth to the stab-in-the-back myth, though? I mean, sure, Germany's military situation was becoming worse and worse, but Germany could have continued the fight in the hope of bleeding the Allies to exhaustion if it didn't have to deal with a restive populace, correct?
 

Kotromanic

Ad Honorem
Dec 2011
4,718
Iowa USA
#15
Wouldn't that have meant that there was some truth to the stab-in-the-back myth, though? I mean, sure, Germany's military situation was becoming worse and worse, but Germany could have continued the fight in the hope of bleeding the Allies to exhaustion if it didn't have to deal with a restive populace, correct?
All myths are bigger than facts, Futurist.

Do you want to break this down a little further?
 
Likes: Futurist

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
18,701
SoCal
#16
All myths are bigger than facts, Futurist.

Do you want to break this down a little further?
Well, given the experience of WWII, I don't think that Germany could have bled the Allies enough for them to agree to better peace terms for Germany. After all, even in the late stages of WWI, some American newspapers--as well as soon-to-be US Senate Majority Leader Henry Cabot Lodge--were calling for unconditional surrender. This certainly doesn't sound like the kind of population who would be willing to quickly and easily give up on the war effort.
 

Kotromanic

Ad Honorem
Dec 2011
4,718
Iowa USA
#17
Well, given the experience of WWII, I don't think that Germany could have bled the Allies enough for them to agree to better peace terms for Germany. After all, even in the late stages of WWI, some American newspapers--as well as soon-to-be US Senate Majority Leader Henry Cabot Lodge--were calling for unconditional surrender. This certainly doesn't sound like the kind of population who would be willing to quickly and easily give up on the war effort.
The connotation in all the readers' minds of "stab in the back" is what I wanted to avoid.

To the comment that (given Austria's effective defeat by late July) the CP could not have bled the Entente to change political stance in both UK and USA, total agreement.
 
Likes: Futurist

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
18,701
SoCal
#18
The connotation in all the readers' minds of "stab in the back" is what I wanted to avoid.

To the comment that (given Austria's effective defeat by late July) the CP could not have bled the Entente to change political stance in both UK and USA, total agreement.
What happened in July?
 

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
18,701
SoCal
#20
I possibly have the wrong month here, but in the Herger survey on the war ( Holwig Herger, the Canadian historian ), well prior to breaching of the "Hindenburg line" in the West, mutinies had been widespread in A-H army.
What survey? Where can I find it? In which one of his books?

Also, it's quite interesting that in spite of all of these mutinies, the front in the south managed to remain stable until Bulgaria's collapse in September 1918.