If the Schlieffen plan had succeeded, would Germany been in Battle of Britian situation?

[RandomPoster]

If the Schlieffen plan had succeeded and France surrendered, would Germany have been in the same situation they were in during WW2 trying to get England to surrender? There would have been no bombing except maybe a few Zeppelins. Even after Russia surrendered, how could Germany have forced England out of the war in 1917?

 

[Bleipriester]

England´s power was the mercantile marine, right?

 

[SavannahMann]

The problem, or should I say one of the many problems, was that the Schlieffen Plan was always going to fail. It counted on the one thing you can’t guarantee. That is the enemy doing exactly what you want. If they do anything that is not to your advantage, then the plan will fail. France was prepared to remove the Government from Paris, and fight the war from the empire.

Second, England would have continued fighting, moving troops to the fortified city of Antwerp. Germany would have still faced the problem that eventually doomed them, strangulation by the blockade enforced by the Royal Navy.

Third, England would have been in an even more powerful position to continue fighting during the First World War than the Second. The Empire was stronger in 1914 than it was in 1940. They still had access to millions of troops from the many regions of the world. Remember, this was the era where the sun never set on the Empire.

Even if France had been occupied, then the British Military would have been able to assist/join Russia, which would have given Russia the one thing they needed most of all, and that is access to competent Military Leadership. Or at least far more competent than they had at that time. Coupled with the war materials that England was already getting from around the world including the United States, which could have shipped the materials from the west coast to be carried by rail across Russia to the front without any hope of Germany interfering with the passage and the situation would be similar.

Germany was doomed the minute the war began. By invading Belgium and flaunting the wrath of the world they became the bad guys in a war that even if they had captured France would simply demonstrate how barbaric they were.

I do not use barbaric lightly. The fire that destroyed the University of Louvain was shown to the world as an example that Germany was attacking civilization, and history, not just Europe.

https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/germans-burn-belgian-town-of-louvain

Under no circumstances was there a scenario where Germany emerged as anything but resented and hated after slaughtering civilians and calling it Military necessary to execute women and children. There was no real victory possible after that.

Britain would not surrender, and France would fight on from Algeria and the empire. Germany would still face shortages of food. Starvation was as much of a factor as military reality in the surrender.

 

[SavannahMann]

I mentioned that the Schleiffen Plan was never going to work as intended, and I’m going to explain why now.

The plan had as it’s goal forcing the surrender of France by destroying the French and any allied Armies in a pocket just as they had won at Sedan. However, the French had at least learned that lesson, and neither the British, nor the French, had any intention of standing still and being destroyed in detail. That is where the great pursuit began.

The fatal flaw of the plan was that it was not an occupation plan, but one of limited goals that had to be gained quickly. The destruction of the French Army and the forced capitulation thereof. When the French started to run instead of obligingly standing still and dying as they were supposed to, the plan had already failed. Paris. The Paris Garrison was a threat, but even if Moltke had not weakened the Right, they would not have had enough troops to both surround and begin the reduction of Paris, and maintain the pursuit.

On paper, and in military history books, the Schleiffen Plan is considered genius and it is argued that if the Germans after the retirement of Schleiffen had not reduced the power of the Right, the war would have been won. The Germans could never run as fast as the British and the French retreated. Even with a much stronger Right, they would not have been able to both capture Paris, and destroy the Army. Especially with the Russians coming from the East. There, the Germans were lucky the Russians were incompetently commanded, and sent in before they were really ready.

But even with that stroke of luck, the Germans needed not force of arms to defeat the Russians, but corruption within the Romanov’s. That set the stage for the successful revolution lead by Lenin.

The Germans needed to destroy the French quickly to force a surrender, and then withdraw to the East to deal with the Russians. One army intended to fight two wars sequentially, instead of simultaneously. Kaiser Wilhelm was a fool, hardly better in intelligence and foresight than Nicholas was in Russia. Nicholas knew he was wanting, and placed his trust in those who were in his favor. Wilhelm was worse. He believed he was a genius, and chosen by God to get Germany it’s place in the Sun. The problem with all the German Plans through the prewar era, and through the First World War was this. The clever plans were never quite as clever as they needed to be to succeed. Schlieffen was just another example of that trend. A great plan, providing the enemy obligingly stands still and is destroyed in detail. If the enemy does not, then the plan was doomed.

 

[Bleipriester]

The problem, or should I say one of the many problems, was that the Schlieffen Plan was always going to fail. It counted on the one thing you can’t guarantee. That is the enemy doing exactly what you want. If they do anything that is not to your advantage, then the plan will fail. France was prepared to remove the Government from Paris, and fight the war from the empire.

Second, England would have continued fighting, moving troops to the fortified city of Antwerp. Germany would have still faced the problem that eventually doomed them, strangulation by the blockade enforced by the Royal Navy.

Third, England would have been in an even more powerful position to continue fighting during the First World War than the Second. The Empire was stronger in 1914 than it was in 1940. They still had access to millions of troops from the many regions of the world. Remember, this was the era where the sun never set on the Empire.

Even if France had been occupied, then the British Military would have been able to assist/join Russia, which would have given Russia the one thing they needed most of all, and that is access to competent Military Leadership. Or at least far more competent than they had at that time. Coupled with the war materials that England was already getting from around the world including the United States, which could have shipped the materials from the west coast to be carried by rail across Russia to the front without any hope of Germany interfering with the passage and the situation would be similar.

Germany was doomed the minute the war began. By invading Belgium and flaunting the wrath of the world they became the bad guys in a war that even if they had captured France would simply demonstrate how barbaric they were.

I do not use barbaric lightly. The fire that destroyed the University of Louvain was shown to the world as an example that Germany was attacking civilization, and history, not just Europe.

https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/germans-burn-belgian-town-of-louvain

Under no circumstances was there a scenario where Germany emerged as anything but resented and hated after slaughtering civilians and calling it Military necessary to execute women and children. There was no real victory possible after that.

Britain would not surrender, and France would fight on from Algeria and the empire. Germany would still face shortages of food. Starvation was as much of a factor as military reality in the surrender.

Biased and anti-German rhetoric. If France had collapsed, the eastern frontier would have seen much more German troops and the Brits would have accepted the German victory.

 

[RandomPoster]

Even if France and Russia had fallen, how could Germany force England to surrender in 1915? How would the Battle of Britain have gone for Germany in 1915? No Luftwaffe, insufficient navy. I don't see how they could have made them surrender any easier in 1915 than in 1940.

 

[Bleipriester]

Even if France and Russia had fallen, how could Germany force England to surrender in 1915? How would the Battle of Britain have gone for Germany in 1915? No Luftwaffe, insufficient navy. I don't see how they could have made them surrender any easier in 1915 than in 1940.

No surrender and yes, there was an airforce. The Brits would have agreed to a peace treaty that allows them to keep their face.
The French defeat would not have created a new order but underlined the existing: Germany, the new powerhouse that already outpaced the Empire technologically and economic, would have occupied the place it deserves. The Empire made little progress since 1850 and was already declining while Germany offered all the modern stuff. The Empire´s economy made up one third of the world´s in 1850 but only one seventh in 1914.

 

[RandomPoster]

Even if France and Russia had fallen, how could Germany force England to surrender in 1915? How would the Battle of Britain have gone for Germany in 1915? No Luftwaffe, insufficient navy. I don't see how they could have made them surrender any easier in 1915 than in 1940.

No surrender and yes, there was an airforce. The Brits would have agreed to a peace treaty that allows them to keep their face.
The French defeat would not have created a new order but underlined the existing: Germany, the new powerhouse that already outpaced the Empire technologically and economic, would have occupied the place it deserves. The Empire made little progress since 1850 and was already declining while Germany offered all the modern stuff. The Empire´s economy made up one third of the world´s in 1850 but only one seventh in 1914.

Germany had an air force that could bomb England in WW1? Perhaps the Red Baron could have dropped a few bombs on the cliffs of Dover and killed some seagulls or a few Zeppelins could have made it farther. Absolutely nothing like the Luftwaffe of WW2.

 

[Bleipriester]

Even if France and Russia had fallen, how could Germany force England to surrender in 1915? How would the Battle of Britain have gone for Germany in 1915? No Luftwaffe, insufficient navy. I don't see how they could have made them surrender any easier in 1915 than in 1940.

No surrender and yes, there was an airforce. The Brits would have agreed to a peace treaty that allows them to keep their face.
The French defeat would not have created a new order but underlined the existing: Germany, the new powerhouse that already outpaced the Empire technologically and economic, would have occupied the place it deserves. The Empire made little progress since 1850 and was already declining while Germany offered all the modern stuff. The Empire´s economy made up one third of the world´s in 1850 but only one seventh in 1914.

Germany had an air force that could bomb England in WW1? Perhaps the Red Baron could have dropped a few bombs on the cliffs of Dover and killed some seagulls or a few Zeppelins could have made it farther. Absolutely nothing like the Luftwaffe of WW2.

German production of heavy bombers began in early 2015 but it was still underdeveloped.
Gotha G.I - Wikipedia

There were blimps, though.
WW1 Airships (1914-1918)

But I am actually talking about the prospect of a war that cannot be won that would have made the Brits agree to peace.

 

[SavannahMann]

The problem, or should I say one of the many problems, was that the Schlieffen Plan was always going to fail. It counted on the one thing you can’t guarantee. That is the enemy doing exactly what you want. If they do anything that is not to your advantage, then the plan will fail. France was prepared to remove the Government from Paris, and fight the war from the empire.

Second, England would have continued fighting, moving troops to the fortified city of Antwerp. Germany would have still faced the problem that eventually doomed them, strangulation by the blockade enforced by the Royal Navy.

Third, England would have been in an even more powerful position to continue fighting during the First World War than the Second. The Empire was stronger in 1914 than it was in 1940. They still had access to millions of troops from the many regions of the world. Remember, this was the era where the sun never set on the Empire.

Even if France had been occupied, then the British Military would have been able to assist/join Russia, which would have given Russia the one thing they needed most of all, and that is access to competent Military Leadership. Or at least far more competent than they had at that time. Coupled with the war materials that England was already getting from around the world including the United States, which could have shipped the materials from the west coast to be carried by rail across Russia to the front without any hope of Germany interfering with the passage and the situation would be similar.

Germany was doomed the minute the war began. By invading Belgium and flaunting the wrath of the world they became the bad guys in a war that even if they had captured France would simply demonstrate how barbaric they were.

I do not use barbaric lightly. The fire that destroyed the University of Louvain was shown to the world as an example that Germany was attacking civilization, and history, not just Europe.

https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/germans-burn-belgian-town-of-louvain

Under no circumstances was there a scenario where Germany emerged as anything but resented and hated after slaughtering civilians and calling it Military necessary to execute women and children. There was no real victory possible after that.

Britain would not surrender, and France would fight on from Algeria and the empire. Germany would still face shortages of food. Starvation was as much of a factor as military reality in the surrender.

Biased and anti-German rhetoric. If France had collapsed, the eastern frontier would have seen much more German troops and the Brits would have accepted the German victory.

Indeed. You might want to start editing history books then. As one example, The Guns of August by Barbra W. Tuchman. In it the decision of the French Government to leave Paris and prepare to depart to Algeria was discussed, and that was in the first month of the war.

A World Undone. In that one the failures of the Schlieffen Plan was laid bare for all to see.

The biggest problem with the war was that the weapons and machines were really suited for defense, not so much to the attack. Which is why the trench warfare became such a stalemate. But we’re getting off the failures of the Germans.

I like the Germans. I like the people, and I love the cars made there.

Now, let’s be honest about the “anti German Propaganda” you accused me of. The Germans DID take hostages in the town, and DID execute those prisoners regularly. This is Historical Fact. And even the Germans admitted that this was contrary to International Treaties, which they had signed, but their excuse was they were fighting for their very lives and had to take this action to subdue the population and allow the war to be won.

Germany DID invade Belgium after signing a treaty guaranteeing the sovereignty of Belgium in perpetuity. King Leopoldo DID withdraw to Antwerp and that fortified city held out for a year or so into the war.

Germany WAS on the brink of starvation at the end of the war. During Operation Michael, the last attack the Germans launched, there are many diary reports from German Soldiers about how shocked they were to see the quality, quantity, and variety of supplies the British had. The Germans had not seen Chocolate in more than two years by this point.

German cleverness is well known, as is the fact, fact mind you, that this cleverness never seemed to be quite clever enough. Take the German Ciphers. The codes used by Germany. They never changed the codes during the entire war. They were using the same Ciphers at the end of the war, as they were in the beginning. “The Zimmerman Telegram” as one example. Sent via a code the British had broken years ago. It was pure arrogance that led the Germans to believe that a code conceived in the mind of a German could not be broken by a lesser being. “Zimmerman Telegram Barbra W. Tuchman”.

German War preparations were lacking. They counted on a short war, and as such had only a sufficient supply of Nitrates for six months. Until they figured out how to pull nitrogen from the air, they were in danger of having to surrender within the first year because they would not be able to make Gunpowder. The French were similarly short sighted, surrendering the Iron Mine regions to the Germans early on with the expectation of being able to take it back easily in a couple weeks. That Mine fed Germany for the entire war.

The U-Boat war. When they decided in 1916 to resume Unrestricted Warfar with the Submarines, they had calculated that they could and would starve the British into submission before the Americans could affect the outcome of the war.

Obviously, History tells us that their calculations were wrong. All they accomplished was to create another enemy, one with deeper industrial capacity than Germany dreamed of.

Example after example. There are thousands of them. Verdun, the plan was to bleed the French White. Well, that did happen, but the Germans were also bled white. Yes, they took fewer casualties, but they took far more than they intended or planned on. You see, the one thing the German War Plans never took into account, is what happens when the Enemy does not do what you want him to?

Finally, the German ideal that the war would be paid for by the losers. As each month went by, the amount of money needed to compensate for losing under the term Reparations increased to astronomical amounts. Fate had it that the Germans were saddled with this insane requirement, and it did to their economy what they had intended to do to France’s economy.

When I read about the First World War, I am often struck by the impression that both sides were trying desperately to lose. Both sides did the same stupid thing time and time again, claiming that this time, it would work.

World Opinion was heavily against the Germans, not because of Anti-German propaganda. But because of German actions. Worse, their actions were not downplayed, but celebrated. The U-Boats sinking passenger ships for example. All it could do is enrage the population, but the Germans were convinced that it would terrify the enemies into surrendering. This by the way was the same insane theories that both sides used to justify the bombing of cities one war later. An effort to terrorize the population into forcing the government to capitulate. It didn’t work.

Germany was, and is, a net importer of food. When Britain, which had the largest Navy in the World, enacted the blockade, it hampered the German War effort rather badly.

This is not propaganda. It is historical fact. All of this happened. Now, we can learn from History, and strive to avoid the same mistakes over and over again, or we can pretend it never happened, and doom ourselves into repeating the mistakes, over and over and over again.

In War II, the French made the same mistake, again. They ignored the open door of Belgium, and sure enough the Germans blasted through it, and the Ardennes, and just like War One, surprised the French.

Ok, now we have learned. But we have not in reality. You see, this time it was the Americans and the British, who believed that despite the fact that German Trucks and Tanks had invaded France in 1940 through the Ardennes and Belgium, that the terrain was impossible for German Tanks to manage. So we got surprised a third time. And the Battle of the Bulge was briefly successful for the Germans, and ultimately a horrific failure costing Germany tens of thousands of trained troops they could not afford to lose at that stage of the war.

I love History. I read a lot of it. I watch documentaries. I just finished one on the Second War done by the Russians and translated by the BBC to English.

As an aside, it is a curious fact. In the beginning Stalin was more hands on in the defense, requiring the troops to die in place rather than retreat. As the war continued, Stalin learned to let his Generals, who were getting more experience about what worked and what did not, run the show. Stalin became more hands off, letting the Experts manage the plans, and the tactical decisions while he focused on Strategic goals.

Hitler became more hands on as the war progressed, Taking more and more authority and power from the Generals, believing himself to be the only one who could with is military brilliance, save Germany.

The Soviets won, and the Germans lost. We should start a thread about the Eastern Front during the Second War. My opinion, in short, is that there were no good guys in that war. Both were bad guys who brutalized their own people, and those who were conquered. You had the Gestapo on one side, and the NKVD on the other.

 

[Bleipriester]

The problem, or should I say one of the many problems, was that the Schlieffen Plan was always going to fail. It counted on the one thing you can’t guarantee. That is the enemy doing exactly what you want. If they do anything that is not to your advantage, then the plan will fail. France was prepared to remove the Government from Paris, and fight the war from the empire.

Second, England would have continued fighting, moving troops to the fortified city of Antwerp. Germany would have still faced the problem that eventually doomed them, strangulation by the blockade enforced by the Royal Navy.

Third, England would have been in an even more powerful position to continue fighting during the First World War than the Second. The Empire was stronger in 1914 than it was in 1940. They still had access to millions of troops from the many regions of the world. Remember, this was the era where the sun never set on the Empire.

Even if France had been occupied, then the British Military would have been able to assist/join Russia, which would have given Russia the one thing they needed most of all, and that is access to competent Military Leadership. Or at least far more competent than they had at that time. Coupled with the war materials that England was already getting from around the world including the United States, which could have shipped the materials from the west coast to be carried by rail across Russia to the front without any hope of Germany interfering with the passage and the situation would be similar.

Germany was doomed the minute the war began. By invading Belgium and flaunting the wrath of the world they became the bad guys in a war that even if they had captured France would simply demonstrate how barbaric they were.

I do not use barbaric lightly. The fire that destroyed the University of Louvain was shown to the world as an example that Germany was attacking civilization, and history, not just Europe.

https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/germans-burn-belgian-town-of-louvain

Under no circumstances was there a scenario where Germany emerged as anything but resented and hated after slaughtering civilians and calling it Military necessary to execute women and children. There was no real victory possible after that.

Britain would not surrender, and France would fight on from Algeria and the empire. Germany would still face shortages of food. Starvation was as much of a factor as military reality in the surrender.

Biased and anti-German rhetoric. If France had collapsed, the eastern frontier would have seen much more German troops and the Brits would have accepted the German victory.

Indeed. You might want to start editing history books then. As one example, The Guns of August by Barbra W. Tuchman. In it the decision of the French Government to leave Paris and prepare to depart to Algeria was discussed, and that was in the first month of the war.

A World Undone. In that one the failures of the Schlieffen Plan was laid bare for all to see.

The biggest problem with the war was that the weapons and machines were really suited for defense, not so much to the attack. Which is why the trench warfare became such a stalemate. But we’re getting off the failures of the Germans.

I like the Germans. I like the people, and I love the cars made there.

Now, let’s be honest about the “anti German Propaganda” you accused me of. The Germans DID take hostages in the town, and DID execute those prisoners regularly. This is Historical Fact. And even the Germans admitted that this was contrary to International Treaties, which they had signed, but their excuse was they were fighting for their very lives and had to take this action to subdue the population and allow the war to be won.

Germany DID invade Belgium after signing a treaty guaranteeing the sovereignty of Belgium in perpetuity. King Leopoldo DID withdraw to Antwerp and that fortified city held out for a year or so into the war.

Germany WAS on the brink of starvation at the end of the war. During Operation Michael, the last attack the Germans launched, there are many diary reports from German Soldiers about how shocked they were to see the quality, quantity, and variety of supplies the British had. The Germans had not seen Chocolate in more than two years by this point.

German cleverness is well known, as is the fact, fact mind you, that this cleverness never seemed to be quite clever enough. Take the German Ciphers. The codes used by Germany. They never changed the codes during the entire war. They were using the same Ciphers at the end of the war, as they were in the beginning. “The Zimmerman Telegram” as one example. Sent via a code the British had broken years ago. It was pure arrogance that led the Germans to believe that a code conceived in the mind of a German could not be broken by a lesser being. “Zimmerman Telegram Barbra W. Tuchman”.

German War preparations were lacking. They counted on a short war, and as such had only a sufficient supply of Nitrates for six months. Until they figured out how to pull nitrogen from the air, they were in danger of having to surrender within the first year because they would not be able to make Gunpowder. The French were similarly short sighted, surrendering the Iron Mine regions to the Germans early on with the expectation of being able to take it back easily in a couple weeks. That Mine fed Germany for the entire war.

The U-Boat war. When they decided in 1916 to resume Unrestricted Warfar with the Submarines, they had calculated that they could and would starve the British into submission before the Americans could affect the outcome of the war.

Obviously, History tells us that their calculations were wrong. All they accomplished was to create another enemy, one with deeper industrial capacity than Germany dreamed of.

Example after example. There are thousands of them. Verdun, the plan was to bleed the French White. Well, that did happen, but the Germans were also bled white. Yes, they took fewer casualties, but they took far more than they intended or planned on. You see, the one thing the German War Plans never took into account, is what happens when the Enemy does not do what you want him to?

Finally, the German ideal that the war would be paid for by the losers. As each month went by, the amount of money needed to compensate for losing under the term Reparations increased to astronomical amounts. Fate had it that the Germans were saddled with this insane requirement, and it did to their economy what they had intended to do to France’s economy.

When I read about the First World War, I am often struck by the impression that both sides were trying desperately to lose. Both sides did the same stupid thing time and time again, claiming that this time, it would work.

World Opinion was heavily against the Germans, not because of Anti-German propaganda. But because of German actions. Worse, their actions were not downplayed, but celebrated. The U-Boats sinking passenger ships for example. All it could do is enrage the population, but the Germans were convinced that it would terrify the enemies into surrendering. This by the way was the same insane theories that both sides used to justify the bombing of cities one war later. An effort to terrorize the population into forcing the government to capitulate. It didn’t work.

Germany was, and is, a net importer of food. When Britain, which had the largest Navy in the World, enacted the blockade, it hampered the German War effort rather badly.

This is not propaganda. It is historical fact. All of this happened. Now, we can learn from History, and strive to avoid the same mistakes over and over again, or we can pretend it never happened, and doom ourselves into repeating the mistakes, over and over and over again.

In War II, the French made the same mistake, again. They ignored the open door of Belgium, and sure enough the Germans blasted through it, and the Ardennes, and just like War One, surprised the French.

Ok, now we have learned. But we have not in reality. You see, this time it was the Americans and the British, who believed that despite the fact that German Trucks and Tanks had invaded France in 1940 through the Ardennes and Belgium, that the terrain was impossible for German Tanks to manage. So we got surprised a third time. And the Battle of the Bulge was briefly successful for the Germans, and ultimately a horrific failure costing Germany tens of thousands of trained troops they could not afford to lose at that stage of the war.

I love History. I read a lot of it. I watch documentaries. I just finished one on the Second War done by the Russians and translated by the BBC to English.

As an aside, it is a curious fact. In the beginning Stalin was more hands on in the defense, requiring the troops to die in place rather than retreat. As the war continued, Stalin learned to let his Generals, who were getting more experience about what worked and what did not, run the show. Stalin became more hands off, letting the Experts manage the plans, and the tactical decisions while he focused on Strategic goals.

Hitler became more hands on as the war progressed, Taking more and more authority and power from the Generals, believing himself to be the only one who could with is military brilliance, save Germany.

The Soviets won, and the Germans lost. We should start a thread about the Eastern Front during the Second War. My opinion, in short, is that there were no good guys in that war. Both were bad guys who brutalized their own people, and those who were conquered. You had the Gestapo on one side, and the NKVD on the other.

Shooting up to 100 random civilians for each soldier killed by civilians was legal and not only exercised by the Germans but by the allies as well. However, the propaganda was very grave, so expect vast exaggerations.
And you reason with civilian ships. You cannot expect during wartimes that there is a peaceful steamer cruising.

This is the Lusitania. A large ship. A single torpedo cannot sink it. It was either full of ammunitions or - as conspiracy theorists claim - full of explosives to create a reason to make America join the war.
The German embassy advertised in US newspapers and warned of the threats for civilian ships in the war zones but only one newspaper actually published the message.

As for the public opinion in America - they were against intervention.

As for the WWII eastern frontier, German traitors informed the Russians about every German plan.

 

[SavannahMann]

The problem, or should I say one of the many problems, was that the Schlieffen Plan was always going to fail. It counted on the one thing you can’t guarantee. That is the enemy doing exactly what you want. If they do anything that is not to your advantage, then the plan will fail. France was prepared to remove the Government from Paris, and fight the war from the empire.

Second, England would have continued fighting, moving troops to the fortified city of Antwerp. Germany would have still faced the problem that eventually doomed them, strangulation by the blockade enforced by the Royal Navy.

Third, England would have been in an even more powerful position to continue fighting during the First World War than the Second. The Empire was stronger in 1914 than it was in 1940. They still had access to millions of troops from the many regions of the world. Remember, this was the era where the sun never set on the Empire.

Even if France had been occupied, then the British Military would have been able to assist/join Russia, which would have given Russia the one thing they needed most of all, and that is access to competent Military Leadership. Or at least far more competent than they had at that time. Coupled with the war materials that England was already getting from around the world including the United States, which could have shipped the materials from the west coast to be carried by rail across Russia to the front without any hope of Germany interfering with the passage and the situation would be similar.

Germany was doomed the minute the war began. By invading Belgium and flaunting the wrath of the world they became the bad guys in a war that even if they had captured France would simply demonstrate how barbaric they were.

I do not use barbaric lightly. The fire that destroyed the University of Louvain was shown to the world as an example that Germany was attacking civilization, and history, not just Europe.

https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/germans-burn-belgian-town-of-louvain

Under no circumstances was there a scenario where Germany emerged as anything but resented and hated after slaughtering civilians and calling it Military necessary to execute women and children. There was no real victory possible after that.

Britain would not surrender, and France would fight on from Algeria and the empire. Germany would still face shortages of food. Starvation was as much of a factor as military reality in the surrender.

Biased and anti-German rhetoric. If France had collapsed, the eastern frontier would have seen much more German troops and the Brits would have accepted the German victory.

Indeed. You might want to start editing history books then. As one example, The Guns of August by Barbra W. Tuchman. In it the decision of the French Government to leave Paris and prepare to depart to Algeria was discussed, and that was in the first month of the war.

A World Undone. In that one the failures of the Schlieffen Plan was laid bare for all to see.

The biggest problem with the war was that the weapons and machines were really suited for defense, not so much to the attack. Which is why the trench warfare became such a stalemate. But we’re getting off the failures of the Germans.

I like the Germans. I like the people, and I love the cars made there.

Now, let’s be honest about the “anti German Propaganda” you accused me of. The Germans DID take hostages in the town, and DID execute those prisoners regularly. This is Historical Fact. And even the Germans admitted that this was contrary to International Treaties, which they had signed, but their excuse was they were fighting for their very lives and had to take this action to subdue the population and allow the war to be won.

Germany DID invade Belgium after signing a treaty guaranteeing the sovereignty of Belgium in perpetuity. King Leopoldo DID withdraw to Antwerp and that fortified city held out for a year or so into the war.

Germany WAS on the brink of starvation at the end of the war. During Operation Michael, the last attack the Germans launched, there are many diary reports from German Soldiers about how shocked they were to see the quality, quantity, and variety of supplies the British had. The Germans had not seen Chocolate in more than two years by this point.

German cleverness is well known, as is the fact, fact mind you, that this cleverness never seemed to be quite clever enough. Take the German Ciphers. The codes used by Germany. They never changed the codes during the entire war. They were using the same Ciphers at the end of the war, as they were in the beginning. “The Zimmerman Telegram” as one example. Sent via a code the British had broken years ago. It was pure arrogance that led the Germans to believe that a code conceived in the mind of a German could not be broken by a lesser being. “Zimmerman Telegram Barbra W. Tuchman”.

German War preparations were lacking. They counted on a short war, and as such had only a sufficient supply of Nitrates for six months. Until they figured out how to pull nitrogen from the air, they were in danger of having to surrender within the first year because they would not be able to make Gunpowder. The French were similarly short sighted, surrendering the Iron Mine regions to the Germans early on with the expectation of being able to take it back easily in a couple weeks. That Mine fed Germany for the entire war.

The U-Boat war. When they decided in 1916 to resume Unrestricted Warfar with the Submarines, they had calculated that they could and would starve the British into submission before the Americans could affect the outcome of the war.

Obviously, History tells us that their calculations were wrong. All they accomplished was to create another enemy, one with deeper industrial capacity than Germany dreamed of.

Example after example. There are thousands of them. Verdun, the plan was to bleed the French White. Well, that did happen, but the Germans were also bled white. Yes, they took fewer casualties, but they took far more than they intended or planned on. You see, the one thing the German War Plans never took into account, is what happens when the Enemy does not do what you want him to?

Finally, the German ideal that the war would be paid for by the losers. As each month went by, the amount of money needed to compensate for losing under the term Reparations increased to astronomical amounts. Fate had it that the Germans were saddled with this insane requirement, and it did to their economy what they had intended to do to France’s economy.

When I read about the First World War, I am often struck by the impression that both sides were trying desperately to lose. Both sides did the same stupid thing time and time again, claiming that this time, it would work.

World Opinion was heavily against the Germans, not because of Anti-German propaganda. But because of German actions. Worse, their actions were not downplayed, but celebrated. The U-Boats sinking passenger ships for example. All it could do is enrage the population, but the Germans were convinced that it would terrify the enemies into surrendering. This by the way was the same insane theories that both sides used to justify the bombing of cities one war later. An effort to terrorize the population into forcing the government to capitulate. It didn’t work.

Germany was, and is, a net importer of food. When Britain, which had the largest Navy in the World, enacted the blockade, it hampered the German War effort rather badly.

This is not propaganda. It is historical fact. All of this happened. Now, we can learn from History, and strive to avoid the same mistakes over and over again, or we can pretend it never happened, and doom ourselves into repeating the mistakes, over and over and over again.

In War II, the French made the same mistake, again. They ignored the open door of Belgium, and sure enough the Germans blasted through it, and the Ardennes, and just like War One, surprised the French.

Ok, now we have learned. But we have not in reality. You see, this time it was the Americans and the British, who believed that despite the fact that German Trucks and Tanks had invaded France in 1940 through the Ardennes and Belgium, that the terrain was impossible for German Tanks to manage. So we got surprised a third time. And the Battle of the Bulge was briefly successful for the Germans, and ultimately a horrific failure costing Germany tens of thousands of trained troops they could not afford to lose at that stage of the war.

I love History. I read a lot of it. I watch documentaries. I just finished one on the Second War done by the Russians and translated by the BBC to English.

As an aside, it is a curious fact. In the beginning Stalin was more hands on in the defense, requiring the troops to die in place rather than retreat. As the war continued, Stalin learned to let his Generals, who were getting more experience about what worked and what did not, run the show. Stalin became more hands off, letting the Experts manage the plans, and the tactical decisions while he focused on Strategic goals.

Hitler became more hands on as the war progressed, Taking more and more authority and power from the Generals, believing himself to be the only one who could with is military brilliance, save Germany.

The Soviets won, and the Germans lost. We should start a thread about the Eastern Front during the Second War. My opinion, in short, is that there were no good guys in that war. Both were bad guys who brutalized their own people, and those who were conquered. You had the Gestapo on one side, and the NKVD on the other.

Shooting up to 100 random civilians for each soldier killed by civilians was legal and not only exercised by the Germans but by the allies as well. However, the propaganda was very grave, so expect vast exaggerations.
And you reason with civilian ships. You cannot expect during wartimes that there is a peaceful steamer cruising.

This is the Lusitania. A large ship. A single torpedo cannot sink it. It was either full of ammunitions or - as conspiracy theorists claim - full of explosives to create a reason to make America join the war.
The German embassy advertised in US newspapers and warned of the threats for civilian ships in the war zones but only one newspaper actually published the message.

As for the public opinion in America - they were against intervention.

As for the WWII eastern frontier, German traitors informed the Russians about every German plan.

Wow, talk about Revisionist History. You take the cake. First, it was not legal to shoot civilian hostages. It wasn’t legal to take hostages.

The First World War: International Law Mattered More Than You Think - Legal History

International Law and the Laws of War | International Encyclopedia of the First World War (WW1)

That was not propaganda. Germany signed the treaties.

Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907 - Wikipedia

It showed the world that you could not trust Germany to keep her word. She would lie, and she would dismiss any objection as irrelevant. It made Germany a pariah among nations. Remember, a century ago, honor was important among the world leaders.

The United States was against the intervention, and probably would have stayed out even after the resumption of unrestricted Submarine Warfare, if the Germans had given time to the ships to make port before resuming after their announcement that might have helped. But the Germans, again trying to be clever, hoped to ferment more war. They sent what is known as the Zimmerman Telegram. It showed the duplicity, the untrustworthiness of the Germans to a nation that had no choice but to believe.

Again, this is all History. It is not propaganda. Foreign Minister Zimmerman admitted that he had sent the Telegram. Thus showing how unclever the Germans really were. A denial might have muddied the waters by claiming it was a British Plant, a British Lie. But no, Zimmerman admitted it afraid that the Americans would have proof. Which of course, they did not, but the British did and were not about to admit they had broken the Codes.

Ships of the era were not made of fine steel as we have today. They were made of what we would consider scrap metal. Metallurgy of the Titanic demonstrates that beyond doubt. Flawed material rife with impurities. Making the metal brittle as well as being held together by Rivits.

One Torpedo was often all it took to sink many ships. Including Warships, which are built even stronger than civilian ships.

HMS Majestic (1895) - Wikipedia

One single torpedo sunk a Battleship in 9 minutes. Nine minutes. If a single Torpedo can sink a Battleship, what makes you think that it could not sink a passenger ship that is not built nearly as strongly as it is not expected to face combat? I mean, a ship constructed of armor plate was sunk, why not one made of normal steel?

That was not a fluke, or a one off. It was one of two Battleships sunk by Torpedos during World War One. HMS Triumph (1903) - Wikipedia

A single torpedo sunk HMS Triumph. Another Battleship down to a single torpedo. Tell me again how it was impossible? I think a few thousand dead sailors would like to debate the issue with you.

Sinking a metal ship is not that hard. It happens when they bump into rocks and other hard things. When the water entering overcomes the ability of the ship to evacuate the water, then it is going to sink.

Your arguments are not even revisionist really. They are a denial of reality and an embracing of Conspiracy Theory coupled with German Superiority, which was how Germany got into World War II. Actually it was because of a lot of things, like the never ending use of propaganda like you are posting, that led the public to believe they were wining the war, which was why the end of the war and the German Surrender was such a shock. Germany was winning just yesterday. It must have been a betrayal by some insidious people. Hello Hitler, here is a chance to go after your target, blame them.

I often wondered why the Germans between the wars believed that crap. I mean, Jews made up about 1/2 of 1% of the population of Germany. How the hell could so few people bring down the mighty Germany? Even the most radical of Americans claim that it was only 3% of the population that won the Revolutionary War. And that is less unbelievable than the insane claims of the Nazi’s that Germany would have won the First World War if not for the Jews and their perfidy.

Forget the propaganda man. Deal with reality. Germany was doomed from the time the war began.

 

[martybegan]

If the Schlieffen plan had succeeded and France surrendered, would Germany have been in the same situation they were in during WW2 trying to get England to surrender? There would have been no bombing except maybe a few Zeppelins. Even after Russia surrendered, how could Germany have forced England out of the war in 1917?

A successful Moltke plan execution (he changed Schlieffen's plan so much he has to own it) Would have ended the war in the west within two months, eliminating the whole "Trench Mentality" that set in during the next few years. Depending on how things went in the East, I could see a negotiated peace coming about, with substantial German and Austrian territorial gains in the West AND the East, and maybe some French Colonies thrown in as well.

Great Britain probably could have been placated with the restoration of Belgian sovereignty.

 

[Bleipriester]

The problem, or should I say one of the many problems, was that the Schlieffen Plan was always going to fail. It counted on the one thing you can’t guarantee. That is the enemy doing exactly what you want. If they do anything that is not to your advantage, then the plan will fail. France was prepared to remove the Government from Paris, and fight the war from the empire.

Second, England would have continued fighting, moving troops to the fortified city of Antwerp. Germany would have still faced the problem that eventually doomed them, strangulation by the blockade enforced by the Royal Navy.

Third, England would have been in an even more powerful position to continue fighting during the First World War than the Second. The Empire was stronger in 1914 than it was in 1940. They still had access to millions of troops from the many regions of the world. Remember, this was the era where the sun never set on the Empire.

Even if France had been occupied, then the British Military would have been able to assist/join Russia, which would have given Russia the one thing they needed most of all, and that is access to competent Military Leadership. Or at least far more competent than they had at that time. Coupled with the war materials that England was already getting from around the world including the United States, which could have shipped the materials from the west coast to be carried by rail across Russia to the front without any hope of Germany interfering with the passage and the situation would be similar.

Germany was doomed the minute the war began. By invading Belgium and flaunting the wrath of the world they became the bad guys in a war that even if they had captured France would simply demonstrate how barbaric they were.

I do not use barbaric lightly. The fire that destroyed the University of Louvain was shown to the world as an example that Germany was attacking civilization, and history, not just Europe.

https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/germans-burn-belgian-town-of-louvain

Under no circumstances was there a scenario where Germany emerged as anything but resented and hated after slaughtering civilians and calling it Military necessary to execute women and children. There was no real victory possible after that.

Britain would not surrender, and France would fight on from Algeria and the empire. Germany would still face shortages of food. Starvation was as much of a factor as military reality in the surrender.

Biased and anti-German rhetoric. If France had collapsed, the eastern frontier would have seen much more German troops and the Brits would have accepted the German victory.

Indeed. You might want to start editing history books then. As one example, The Guns of August by Barbra W. Tuchman. In it the decision of the French Government to leave Paris and prepare to depart to Algeria was discussed, and that was in the first month of the war.

A World Undone. In that one the failures of the Schlieffen Plan was laid bare for all to see.

The biggest problem with the war was that the weapons and machines were really suited for defense, not so much to the attack. Which is why the trench warfare became such a stalemate. But we’re getting off the failures of the Germans.

I like the Germans. I like the people, and I love the cars made there.

Now, let’s be honest about the “anti German Propaganda” you accused me of. The Germans DID take hostages in the town, and DID execute those prisoners regularly. This is Historical Fact. And even the Germans admitted that this was contrary to International Treaties, which they had signed, but their excuse was they were fighting for their very lives and had to take this action to subdue the population and allow the war to be won.

Germany DID invade Belgium after signing a treaty guaranteeing the sovereignty of Belgium in perpetuity. King Leopoldo DID withdraw to Antwerp and that fortified city held out for a year or so into the war.

Germany WAS on the brink of starvation at the end of the war. During Operation Michael, the last attack the Germans launched, there are many diary reports from German Soldiers about how shocked they were to see the quality, quantity, and variety of supplies the British had. The Germans had not seen Chocolate in more than two years by this point.

German cleverness is well known, as is the fact, fact mind you, that this cleverness never seemed to be quite clever enough. Take the German Ciphers. The codes used by Germany. They never changed the codes during the entire war. They were using the same Ciphers at the end of the war, as they were in the beginning. “The Zimmerman Telegram” as one example. Sent via a code the British had broken years ago. It was pure arrogance that led the Germans to believe that a code conceived in the mind of a German could not be broken by a lesser being. “Zimmerman Telegram Barbra W. Tuchman”.

German War preparations were lacking. They counted on a short war, and as such had only a sufficient supply of Nitrates for six months. Until they figured out how to pull nitrogen from the air, they were in danger of having to surrender within the first year because they would not be able to make Gunpowder. The French were similarly short sighted, surrendering the Iron Mine regions to the Germans early on with the expectation of being able to take it back easily in a couple weeks. That Mine fed Germany for the entire war.

The U-Boat war. When they decided in 1916 to resume Unrestricted Warfar with the Submarines, they had calculated that they could and would starve the British into submission before the Americans could affect the outcome of the war.

Obviously, History tells us that their calculations were wrong. All they accomplished was to create another enemy, one with deeper industrial capacity than Germany dreamed of.

Example after example. There are thousands of them. Verdun, the plan was to bleed the French White. Well, that did happen, but the Germans were also bled white. Yes, they took fewer casualties, but they took far more than they intended or planned on. You see, the one thing the German War Plans never took into account, is what happens when the Enemy does not do what you want him to?

Finally, the German ideal that the war would be paid for by the losers. As each month went by, the amount of money needed to compensate for losing under the term Reparations increased to astronomical amounts. Fate had it that the Germans were saddled with this insane requirement, and it did to their economy what they had intended to do to France’s economy.

When I read about the First World War, I am often struck by the impression that both sides were trying desperately to lose. Both sides did the same stupid thing time and time again, claiming that this time, it would work.

World Opinion was heavily against the Germans, not because of Anti-German propaganda. But because of German actions. Worse, their actions were not downplayed, but celebrated. The U-Boats sinking passenger ships for example. All it could do is enrage the population, but the Germans were convinced that it would terrify the enemies into surrendering. This by the way was the same insane theories that both sides used to justify the bombing of cities one war later. An effort to terrorize the population into forcing the government to capitulate. It didn’t work.

Germany was, and is, a net importer of food. When Britain, which had the largest Navy in the World, enacted the blockade, it hampered the German War effort rather badly.

This is not propaganda. It is historical fact. All of this happened. Now, we can learn from History, and strive to avoid the same mistakes over and over again, or we can pretend it never happened, and doom ourselves into repeating the mistakes, over and over and over again.

In War II, the French made the same mistake, again. They ignored the open door of Belgium, and sure enough the Germans blasted through it, and the Ardennes, and just like War One, surprised the French.

Ok, now we have learned. But we have not in reality. You see, this time it was the Americans and the British, who believed that despite the fact that German Trucks and Tanks had invaded France in 1940 through the Ardennes and Belgium, that the terrain was impossible for German Tanks to manage. So we got surprised a third time. And the Battle of the Bulge was briefly successful for the Germans, and ultimately a horrific failure costing Germany tens of thousands of trained troops they could not afford to lose at that stage of the war.

I love History. I read a lot of it. I watch documentaries. I just finished one on the Second War done by the Russians and translated by the BBC to English.

As an aside, it is a curious fact. In the beginning Stalin was more hands on in the defense, requiring the troops to die in place rather than retreat. As the war continued, Stalin learned to let his Generals, who were getting more experience about what worked and what did not, run the show. Stalin became more hands off, letting the Experts manage the plans, and the tactical decisions while he focused on Strategic goals.

Hitler became more hands on as the war progressed, Taking more and more authority and power from the Generals, believing himself to be the only one who could with is military brilliance, save Germany.

The Soviets won, and the Germans lost. We should start a thread about the Eastern Front during the Second War. My opinion, in short, is that there were no good guys in that war. Both were bad guys who brutalized their own people, and those who were conquered. You had the Gestapo on one side, and the NKVD on the other.

Shooting up to 100 random civilians for each soldier killed by civilians was legal and not only exercised by the Germans but by the allies as well. However, the propaganda was very grave, so expect vast exaggerations.
And you reason with civilian ships. You cannot expect during wartimes that there is a peaceful steamer cruising.

This is the Lusitania. A large ship. A single torpedo cannot sink it. It was either full of ammunitions or - as conspiracy theorists claim - full of explosives to create a reason to make America join the war.
The German embassy advertised in US newspapers and warned of the threats for civilian ships in the war zones but only one newspaper actually published the message.

As for the public opinion in America - they were against intervention.

As for the WWII eastern frontier, German traitors informed the Russians about every German plan.

Wow, talk about Revisionist History. You take the cake. First, it was not legal to shoot civilian hostages. It wasn’t legal to take hostages.

The First World War: International Law Mattered More Than You Think - Legal History

International Law and the Laws of War | International Encyclopedia of the First World War (WW1)

That was not propaganda. Germany signed the treaties.

Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907 - Wikipedia

It showed the world that you could not trust Germany to keep her word. She would lie, and she would dismiss any objection as irrelevant. It made Germany a pariah among nations. Remember, a century ago, honor was important among the world leaders.

The United States was against the intervention, and probably would have stayed out even after the resumption of unrestricted Submarine Warfare, if the Germans had given time to the ships to make port before resuming after their announcement that might have helped. But the Germans, again trying to be clever, hoped to ferment more war. They sent what is known as the Zimmerman Telegram. It showed the duplicity, the untrustworthiness of the Germans to a nation that had no choice but to believe.

Again, this is all History. It is not propaganda. Foreign Minister Zimmerman admitted that he had sent the Telegram. Thus showing how unclever the Germans really were. A denial might have muddied the waters by claiming it was a British Plant, a British Lie. But no, Zimmerman admitted it afraid that the Americans would have proof. Which of course, they did not, but the British did and were not about to admit they had broken the Codes.

Ships of the era were not made of fine steel as we have today. They were made of what we would consider scrap metal. Metallurgy of the Titanic demonstrates that beyond doubt. Flawed material rife with impurities. Making the metal brittle as well as being held together by Rivits.

One Torpedo was often all it took to sink many ships. Including Warships, which are built even stronger than civilian ships.

HMS Majestic (1895) - Wikipedia

One single torpedo sunk a Battleship in 9 minutes. Nine minutes. If a single Torpedo can sink a Battleship, what makes you think that it could not sink a passenger ship that is not built nearly as strongly as it is not expected to face combat? I mean, a ship constructed of armor plate was sunk, why not one made of normal steel?

That was not a fluke, or a one off. It was one of two Battleships sunk by Torpedos during World War One. HMS Triumph (1903) - Wikipedia

A single torpedo sunk HMS Triumph. Another Battleship down to a single torpedo. Tell me again how it was impossible? I think a few thousand dead sailors would like to debate the issue with you.

Sinking a metal ship is not that hard. It happens when they bump into rocks and other hard things. When the water entering overcomes the ability of the ship to evacuate the water, then it is going to sink.

Your arguments are not even revisionist really. They are a denial of reality and an embracing of Conspiracy Theory coupled with German Superiority, which was how Germany got into World War II. Actually it was because of a lot of things, like the never ending use of propaganda like you are posting, that led the public to believe they were wining the war, which was why the end of the war and the German Surrender was such a shock. Germany was winning just yesterday. It must have been a betrayal by some insidious people. Hello Hitler, here is a chance to go after your target, blame them.

I often wondered why the Germans between the wars believed that crap. I mean, Jews made up about 1/2 of 1% of the population of Germany. How the hell could so few people bring down the mighty Germany? Even the most radical of Americans claim that it was only 3% of the population that won the Revolutionary War. And that is less unbelievable than the insane claims of the Nazi’s that Germany would have won the First World War if not for the Jews and their perfidy.

Forget the propaganda man. Deal with reality. Germany was doomed from the time the war began.

Ships like the Lusitania have many chambers. If a torpedo hits one or two of them, the ship is not threatened (given there is no ammo stored in them).
Battleships are more endangered because they usually carry a lot of ammunitions and are way smaller.

The British Blockade During World War I: The Weapon of Deprivation

And if the Germans killed 10.000 Belgian and French civilians in WWI it is still far less then the Coalition killed only in the Libya war in 2011.

 

[SavannahMann]

The problem, or should I say one of the many problems, was that the Schlieffen Plan was always going to fail. It counted on the one thing you can’t guarantee. That is the enemy doing exactly what you want. If they do anything that is not to your advantage, then the plan will fail. France was prepared to remove the Government from Paris, and fight the war from the empire.

Second, England would have continued fighting, moving troops to the fortified city of Antwerp. Germany would have still faced the problem that eventually doomed them, strangulation by the blockade enforced by the Royal Navy.

Third, England would have been in an even more powerful position to continue fighting during the First World War than the Second. The Empire was stronger in 1914 than it was in 1940. They still had access to millions of troops from the many regions of the world. Remember, this was the era where the sun never set on the Empire.

Even if France had been occupied, then the British Military would have been able to assist/join Russia, which would have given Russia the one thing they needed most of all, and that is access to competent Military Leadership. Or at least far more competent than they had at that time. Coupled with the war materials that England was already getting from around the world including the United States, which could have shipped the materials from the west coast to be carried by rail across Russia to the front without any hope of Germany interfering with the passage and the situation would be similar.

Germany was doomed the minute the war began. By invading Belgium and flaunting the wrath of the world they became the bad guys in a war that even if they had captured France would simply demonstrate how barbaric they were.

I do not use barbaric lightly. The fire that destroyed the University of Louvain was shown to the world as an example that Germany was attacking civilization, and history, not just Europe.

https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/germans-burn-belgian-town-of-louvain

Under no circumstances was there a scenario where Germany emerged as anything but resented and hated after slaughtering civilians and calling it Military necessary to execute women and children. There was no real victory possible after that.

Britain would not surrender, and France would fight on from Algeria and the empire. Germany would still face shortages of food. Starvation was as much of a factor as military reality in the surrender.

Biased and anti-German rhetoric. If France had collapsed, the eastern frontier would have seen much more German troops and the Brits would have accepted the German victory.

Indeed. You might want to start editing history books then. As one example, The Guns of August by Barbra W. Tuchman. In it the decision of the French Government to leave Paris and prepare to depart to Algeria was discussed, and that was in the first month of the war.

A World Undone. In that one the failures of the Schlieffen Plan was laid bare for all to see.

The biggest problem with the war was that the weapons and machines were really suited for defense, not so much to the attack. Which is why the trench warfare became such a stalemate. But we’re getting off the failures of the Germans.

I like the Germans. I like the people, and I love the cars made there.

Now, let’s be honest about the “anti German Propaganda” you accused me of. The Germans DID take hostages in the town, and DID execute those prisoners regularly. This is Historical Fact. And even the Germans admitted that this was contrary to International Treaties, which they had signed, but their excuse was they were fighting for their very lives and had to take this action to subdue the population and allow the war to be won.

Germany DID invade Belgium after signing a treaty guaranteeing the sovereignty of Belgium in perpetuity. King Leopoldo DID withdraw to Antwerp and that fortified city held out for a year or so into the war.

Germany WAS on the brink of starvation at the end of the war. During Operation Michael, the last attack the Germans launched, there are many diary reports from German Soldiers about how shocked they were to see the quality, quantity, and variety of supplies the British had. The Germans had not seen Chocolate in more than two years by this point.

German cleverness is well known, as is the fact, fact mind you, that this cleverness never seemed to be quite clever enough. Take the German Ciphers. The codes used by Germany. They never changed the codes during the entire war. They were using the same Ciphers at the end of the war, as they were in the beginning. “The Zimmerman Telegram” as one example. Sent via a code the British had broken years ago. It was pure arrogance that led the Germans to believe that a code conceived in the mind of a German could not be broken by a lesser being. “Zimmerman Telegram Barbra W. Tuchman”.

German War preparations were lacking. They counted on a short war, and as such had only a sufficient supply of Nitrates for six months. Until they figured out how to pull nitrogen from the air, they were in danger of having to surrender within the first year because they would not be able to make Gunpowder. The French were similarly short sighted, surrendering the Iron Mine regions to the Germans early on with the expectation of being able to take it back easily in a couple weeks. That Mine fed Germany for the entire war.

The U-Boat war. When they decided in 1916 to resume Unrestricted Warfar with the Submarines, they had calculated that they could and would starve the British into submission before the Americans could affect the outcome of the war.

Obviously, History tells us that their calculations were wrong. All they accomplished was to create another enemy, one with deeper industrial capacity than Germany dreamed of.

Example after example. There are thousands of them. Verdun, the plan was to bleed the French White. Well, that did happen, but the Germans were also bled white. Yes, they took fewer casualties, but they took far more than they intended or planned on. You see, the one thing the German War Plans never took into account, is what happens when the Enemy does not do what you want him to?

Finally, the German ideal that the war would be paid for by the losers. As each month went by, the amount of money needed to compensate for losing under the term Reparations increased to astronomical amounts. Fate had it that the Germans were saddled with this insane requirement, and it did to their economy what they had intended to do to France’s economy.

When I read about the First World War, I am often struck by the impression that both sides were trying desperately to lose. Both sides did the same stupid thing time and time again, claiming that this time, it would work.

World Opinion was heavily against the Germans, not because of Anti-German propaganda. But because of German actions. Worse, their actions were not downplayed, but celebrated. The U-Boats sinking passenger ships for example. All it could do is enrage the population, but the Germans were convinced that it would terrify the enemies into surrendering. This by the way was the same insane theories that both sides used to justify the bombing of cities one war later. An effort to terrorize the population into forcing the government to capitulate. It didn’t work.

Germany was, and is, a net importer of food. When Britain, which had the largest Navy in the World, enacted the blockade, it hampered the German War effort rather badly.

This is not propaganda. It is historical fact. All of this happened. Now, we can learn from History, and strive to avoid the same mistakes over and over again, or we can pretend it never happened, and doom ourselves into repeating the mistakes, over and over and over again.

In War II, the French made the same mistake, again. They ignored the open door of Belgium, and sure enough the Germans blasted through it, and the Ardennes, and just like War One, surprised the French.

Ok, now we have learned. But we have not in reality. You see, this time it was the Americans and the British, who believed that despite the fact that German Trucks and Tanks had invaded France in 1940 through the Ardennes and Belgium, that the terrain was impossible for German Tanks to manage. So we got surprised a third time. And the Battle of the Bulge was briefly successful for the Germans, and ultimately a horrific failure costing Germany tens of thousands of trained troops they could not afford to lose at that stage of the war.

I love History. I read a lot of it. I watch documentaries. I just finished one on the Second War done by the Russians and translated by the BBC to English.

As an aside, it is a curious fact. In the beginning Stalin was more hands on in the defense, requiring the troops to die in place rather than retreat. As the war continued, Stalin learned to let his Generals, who were getting more experience about what worked and what did not, run the show. Stalin became more hands off, letting the Experts manage the plans, and the tactical decisions while he focused on Strategic goals.

Hitler became more hands on as the war progressed, Taking more and more authority and power from the Generals, believing himself to be the only one who could with is military brilliance, save Germany.

The Soviets won, and the Germans lost. We should start a thread about the Eastern Front during the Second War. My opinion, in short, is that there were no good guys in that war. Both were bad guys who brutalized their own people, and those who were conquered. You had the Gestapo on one side, and the NKVD on the other.

Shooting up to 100 random civilians for each soldier killed by civilians was legal and not only exercised by the Germans but by the allies as well. However, the propaganda was very grave, so expect vast exaggerations.
And you reason with civilian ships. You cannot expect during wartimes that there is a peaceful steamer cruising.

This is the Lusitania. A large ship. A single torpedo cannot sink it. It was either full of ammunitions or - as conspiracy theorists claim - full of explosives to create a reason to make America join the war.
The German embassy advertised in US newspapers and warned of the threats for civilian ships in the war zones but only one newspaper actually published the message.

As for the public opinion in America - they were against intervention.

As for the WWII eastern frontier, German traitors informed the Russians about every German plan.

Wow, talk about Revisionist History. You take the cake. First, it was not legal to shoot civilian hostages. It wasn’t legal to take hostages.

The First World War: International Law Mattered More Than You Think - Legal History

International Law and the Laws of War | International Encyclopedia of the First World War (WW1)

That was not propaganda. Germany signed the treaties.

Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907 - Wikipedia

It showed the world that you could not trust Germany to keep her word. She would lie, and she would dismiss any objection as irrelevant. It made Germany a pariah among nations. Remember, a century ago, honor was important among the world leaders.

The United States was against the intervention, and probably would have stayed out even after the resumption of unrestricted Submarine Warfare, if the Germans had given time to the ships to make port before resuming after their announcement that might have helped. But the Germans, again trying to be clever, hoped to ferment more war. They sent what is known as the Zimmerman Telegram. It showed the duplicity, the untrustworthiness of the Germans to a nation that had no choice but to believe.

Again, this is all History. It is not propaganda. Foreign Minister Zimmerman admitted that he had sent the Telegram. Thus showing how unclever the Germans really were. A denial might have muddied the waters by claiming it was a British Plant, a British Lie. But no, Zimmerman admitted it afraid that the Americans would have proof. Which of course, they did not, but the British did and were not about to admit they had broken the Codes.

Ships of the era were not made of fine steel as we have today. They were made of what we would consider scrap metal. Metallurgy of the Titanic demonstrates that beyond doubt. Flawed material rife with impurities. Making the metal brittle as well as being held together by Rivits.

One Torpedo was often all it took to sink many ships. Including Warships, which are built even stronger than civilian ships.

HMS Majestic (1895) - Wikipedia

One single torpedo sunk a Battleship in 9 minutes. Nine minutes. If a single Torpedo can sink a Battleship, what makes you think that it could not sink a passenger ship that is not built nearly as strongly as it is not expected to face combat? I mean, a ship constructed of armor plate was sunk, why not one made of normal steel?

That was not a fluke, or a one off. It was one of two Battleships sunk by Torpedos during World War One. HMS Triumph (1903) - Wikipedia

A single torpedo sunk HMS Triumph. Another Battleship down to a single torpedo. Tell me again how it was impossible? I think a few thousand dead sailors would like to debate the issue with you.

Sinking a metal ship is not that hard. It happens when they bump into rocks and other hard things. When the water entering overcomes the ability of the ship to evacuate the water, then it is going to sink.

Your arguments are not even revisionist really. They are a denial of reality and an embracing of Conspiracy Theory coupled with German Superiority, which was how Germany got into World War II. Actually it was because of a lot of things, like the never ending use of propaganda like you are posting, that led the public to believe they were wining the war, which was why the end of the war and the German Surrender was such a shock. Germany was winning just yesterday. It must have been a betrayal by some insidious people. Hello Hitler, here is a chance to go after your target, blame them.

I often wondered why the Germans between the wars believed that crap. I mean, Jews made up about 1/2 of 1% of the population of Germany. How the hell could so few people bring down the mighty Germany? Even the most radical of Americans claim that it was only 3% of the population that won the Revolutionary War. And that is less unbelievable than the insane claims of the Nazi’s that Germany would have won the First World War if not for the Jews and their perfidy.

Forget the propaganda man. Deal with reality. Germany was doomed from the time the war began.

Ships like the Lusitania have many chambers. If a torpedo hits one or two of them, the ship is not threatened (given there is no ammo stored in them).
Battleships are more endangered because they usually carry a lot of ammunitions and are way smaller.

The British Blockade During World War I: The Weapon of Deprivation

And if the Germans killed 10.000 Belgian and French civilians in WWI it is still far less then the Coalition killed only in the Libya war in 2011.

Warships have those same Chambers. In fact, they have many more chambers. Yet two Battleships were sunk with a single torpedo each. Pfui. Propaganda might work on the uninformed but not on anyone with a modicum of knowledge.

Your final argument is even dumber. What anyone else has done does not relieve me of the responsibility of my own actions. If someone else robs five banks it does not mean I am not a bank robber for only holding one up.

It is good to see you have stopped with the insane argument that it was legal, a contention now thoroughly discredited.

There were many “great” plans in military history. The ones that work are lauded. The ones that didn’t are the subject of endless bickering. National pride means that Germans want to believe they were close to victory. Just a little bad luck stopped them. Nonsense.

It is in a way like the lie that five minutes was what doomed the Japanese Carriers at Midway. Carriers of the era could launch, or recover aircraft. They could not do both. We are told that there were fully armed and fueled aircraft on the deck waiting to take off. Or that some were being rearmed and bombs were stacked on the deck.

It never happened. The four Japanese Carriers were landing fighters to rearm them and refuel them. They were shooting down squadrons of torpedo bombers and aircraft from Midway. They needed ammunition. They could not land if planes were parked on the flight deck awaiting takeoff. Also, the weapons elevators did not go to the flight decks, but only up to the hanger deck. The aircraft were armed and fueled on the hanger deck.

Fuchida wrote the five minute lie, as a sop to National Pride. It was easier to believe a little bad luck doomed the Japanese than they were just beaten by a smaller force.

Your arguments are no less a sop to national pride. The Germans believed you could plan for every contingency. They did, except for one. They had no plan for the British and French retreating and refusing to obligingly die.

 

[there4eyeM]

If they had kept the U.S. out of the war while maintaining submarine warfare, Britain may have come to terms.
After all, the royal families were related!

 

[Bleipriester]

Biased and anti-German rhetoric. If France had collapsed, the eastern frontier would have seen much more German troops and the Brits would have accepted the German victory.

Indeed. You might want to start editing history books then. As one example, The Guns of August by Barbra W. Tuchman. In it the decision of the French Government to leave Paris and prepare to depart to Algeria was discussed, and that was in the first month of the war.

A World Undone. In that one the failures of the Schlieffen Plan was laid bare for all to see.

The biggest problem with the war was that the weapons and machines were really suited for defense, not so much to the attack. Which is why the trench warfare became such a stalemate. But we’re getting off the failures of the Germans.

I like the Germans. I like the people, and I love the cars made there.

Now, let’s be honest about the “anti German Propaganda” you accused me of. The Germans DID take hostages in the town, and DID execute those prisoners regularly. This is Historical Fact. And even the Germans admitted that this was contrary to International Treaties, which they had signed, but their excuse was they were fighting for their very lives and had to take this action to subdue the population and allow the war to be won.

Germany DID invade Belgium after signing a treaty guaranteeing the sovereignty of Belgium in perpetuity. King Leopoldo DID withdraw to Antwerp and that fortified city held out for a year or so into the war.

Germany WAS on the brink of starvation at the end of the war. During Operation Michael, the last attack the Germans launched, there are many diary reports from German Soldiers about how shocked they were to see the quality, quantity, and variety of supplies the British had. The Germans had not seen Chocolate in more than two years by this point.

German cleverness is well known, as is the fact, fact mind you, that this cleverness never seemed to be quite clever enough. Take the German Ciphers. The codes used by Germany. They never changed the codes during the entire war. They were using the same Ciphers at the end of the war, as they were in the beginning. “The Zimmerman Telegram” as one example. Sent via a code the British had broken years ago. It was pure arrogance that led the Germans to believe that a code conceived in the mind of a German could not be broken by a lesser being. “Zimmerman Telegram Barbra W. Tuchman”.

German War preparations were lacking. They counted on a short war, and as such had only a sufficient supply of Nitrates for six months. Until they figured out how to pull nitrogen from the air, they were in danger of having to surrender within the first year because they would not be able to make Gunpowder. The French were similarly short sighted, surrendering the Iron Mine regions to the Germans early on with the expectation of being able to take it back easily in a couple weeks. That Mine fed Germany for the entire war.

The U-Boat war. When they decided in 1916 to resume Unrestricted Warfar with the Submarines, they had calculated that they could and would starve the British into submission before the Americans could affect the outcome of the war.

Obviously, History tells us that their calculations were wrong. All they accomplished was to create another enemy, one with deeper industrial capacity than Germany dreamed of.

Example after example. There are thousands of them. Verdun, the plan was to bleed the French White. Well, that did happen, but the Germans were also bled white. Yes, they took fewer casualties, but they took far more than they intended or planned on. You see, the one thing the German War Plans never took into account, is what happens when the Enemy does not do what you want him to?

Finally, the German ideal that the war would be paid for by the losers. As each month went by, the amount of money needed to compensate for losing under the term Reparations increased to astronomical amounts. Fate had it that the Germans were saddled with this insane requirement, and it did to their economy what they had intended to do to France’s economy.

When I read about the First World War, I am often struck by the impression that both sides were trying desperately to lose. Both sides did the same stupid thing time and time again, claiming that this time, it would work.

World Opinion was heavily against the Germans, not because of Anti-German propaganda. But because of German actions. Worse, their actions were not downplayed, but celebrated. The U-Boats sinking passenger ships for example. All it could do is enrage the population, but the Germans were convinced that it would terrify the enemies into surrendering. This by the way was the same insane theories that both sides used to justify the bombing of cities one war later. An effort to terrorize the population into forcing the government to capitulate. It didn’t work.

Germany was, and is, a net importer of food. When Britain, which had the largest Navy in the World, enacted the blockade, it hampered the German War effort rather badly.

This is not propaganda. It is historical fact. All of this happened. Now, we can learn from History, and strive to avoid the same mistakes over and over again, or we can pretend it never happened, and doom ourselves into repeating the mistakes, over and over and over again.

In War II, the French made the same mistake, again. They ignored the open door of Belgium, and sure enough the Germans blasted through it, and the Ardennes, and just like War One, surprised the French.

Ok, now we have learned. But we have not in reality. You see, this time it was the Americans and the British, who believed that despite the fact that German Trucks and Tanks had invaded France in 1940 through the Ardennes and Belgium, that the terrain was impossible for German Tanks to manage. So we got surprised a third time. And the Battle of the Bulge was briefly successful for the Germans, and ultimately a horrific failure costing Germany tens of thousands of trained troops they could not afford to lose at that stage of the war.

I love History. I read a lot of it. I watch documentaries. I just finished one on the Second War done by the Russians and translated by the BBC to English.

As an aside, it is a curious fact. In the beginning Stalin was more hands on in the defense, requiring the troops to die in place rather than retreat. As the war continued, Stalin learned to let his Generals, who were getting more experience about what worked and what did not, run the show. Stalin became more hands off, letting the Experts manage the plans, and the tactical decisions while he focused on Strategic goals.

Hitler became more hands on as the war progressed, Taking more and more authority and power from the Generals, believing himself to be the only one who could with is military brilliance, save Germany.

The Soviets won, and the Germans lost. We should start a thread about the Eastern Front during the Second War. My opinion, in short, is that there were no good guys in that war. Both were bad guys who brutalized their own people, and those who were conquered. You had the Gestapo on one side, and the NKVD on the other.

Shooting up to 100 random civilians for each soldier killed by civilians was legal and not only exercised by the Germans but by the allies as well. However, the propaganda was very grave, so expect vast exaggerations.
And you reason with civilian ships. You cannot expect during wartimes that there is a peaceful steamer cruising.

This is the Lusitania. A large ship. A single torpedo cannot sink it. It was either full of ammunitions or - as conspiracy theorists claim - full of explosives to create a reason to make America join the war.
The German embassy advertised in US newspapers and warned of the threats for civilian ships in the war zones but only one newspaper actually published the message.

As for the public opinion in America - they were against intervention.

As for the WWII eastern frontier, German traitors informed the Russians about every German plan.

Wow, talk about Revisionist History. You take the cake. First, it was not legal to shoot civilian hostages. It wasn’t legal to take hostages.

The First World War: International Law Mattered More Than You Think - Legal History

International Law and the Laws of War | International Encyclopedia of the First World War (WW1)

That was not propaganda. Germany signed the treaties.

Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907 - Wikipedia

It showed the world that you could not trust Germany to keep her word. She would lie, and she would dismiss any objection as irrelevant. It made Germany a pariah among nations. Remember, a century ago, honor was important among the world leaders.

The United States was against the intervention, and probably would have stayed out even after the resumption of unrestricted Submarine Warfare, if the Germans had given time to the ships to make port before resuming after their announcement that might have helped. But the Germans, again trying to be clever, hoped to ferment more war. They sent what is known as the Zimmerman Telegram. It showed the duplicity, the untrustworthiness of the Germans to a nation that had no choice but to believe.

Again, this is all History. It is not propaganda. Foreign Minister Zimmerman admitted that he had sent the Telegram. Thus showing how unclever the Germans really were. A denial might have muddied the waters by claiming it was a British Plant, a British Lie. But no, Zimmerman admitted it afraid that the Americans would have proof. Which of course, they did not, but the British did and were not about to admit they had broken the Codes.

Ships of the era were not made of fine steel as we have today. They were made of what we would consider scrap metal. Metallurgy of the Titanic demonstrates that beyond doubt. Flawed material rife with impurities. Making the metal brittle as well as being held together by Rivits.

One Torpedo was often all it took to sink many ships. Including Warships, which are built even stronger than civilian ships.

HMS Majestic (1895) - Wikipedia

One single torpedo sunk a Battleship in 9 minutes. Nine minutes. If a single Torpedo can sink a Battleship, what makes you think that it could not sink a passenger ship that is not built nearly as strongly as it is not expected to face combat? I mean, a ship constructed of armor plate was sunk, why not one made of normal steel?

That was not a fluke, or a one off. It was one of two Battleships sunk by Torpedos during World War One. HMS Triumph (1903) - Wikipedia

A single torpedo sunk HMS Triumph. Another Battleship down to a single torpedo. Tell me again how it was impossible? I think a few thousand dead sailors would like to debate the issue with you.

Sinking a metal ship is not that hard. It happens when they bump into rocks and other hard things. When the water entering overcomes the ability of the ship to evacuate the water, then it is going to sink.

Your arguments are not even revisionist really. They are a denial of reality and an embracing of Conspiracy Theory coupled with German Superiority, which was how Germany got into World War II. Actually it was because of a lot of things, like the never ending use of propaganda like you are posting, that led the public to believe they were wining the war, which was why the end of the war and the German Surrender was such a shock. Germany was winning just yesterday. It must have been a betrayal by some insidious people. Hello Hitler, here is a chance to go after your target, blame them.

I often wondered why the Germans between the wars believed that crap. I mean, Jews made up about 1/2 of 1% of the population of Germany. How the hell could so few people bring down the mighty Germany? Even the most radical of Americans claim that it was only 3% of the population that won the Revolutionary War. And that is less unbelievable than the insane claims of the Nazi’s that Germany would have won the First World War if not for the Jews and their perfidy.

Forget the propaganda man. Deal with reality. Germany was doomed from the time the war began.

Ships like the Lusitania have many chambers. If a torpedo hits one or two of them, the ship is not threatened (given there is no ammo stored in them).
Battleships are more endangered because they usually carry a lot of ammunitions and are way smaller.

The British Blockade During World War I: The Weapon of Deprivation

And if the Germans killed 10.000 Belgian and French civilians in WWI it is still far less then the Coalition killed only in the Libya war in 2011.

Warships have those same Chambers. In fact, they have many more chambers. Yet two Battleships were sunk with a single torpedo each. Pfui. Propaganda might work on the uninformed but not on anyone with a modicum of knowledge.

Your final argument is even dumber. What anyone else has done does not relieve me of the responsibility of my own actions. If someone else robs five banks it does not mean I am not a bank robber for only holding one up.

It is good to see you have stopped with the insane argument that it was legal, a contention now thoroughly discredited.

There were many “great” plans in military history. The ones that work are lauded. The ones that didn’t are the subject of endless bickering. National pride means that Germans want to believe they were close to victory. Just a little bad luck stopped them. Nonsense.

It is in a way like the lie that five minutes was what doomed the Japanese Carriers at Midway. Carriers of the era could launch, or recover aircraft. They could not do both. We are told that there were fully armed and fueled aircraft on the deck waiting to take off. Or that some were being rearmed and bombs were stacked on the deck.

It never happened. The four Japanese Carriers were landing fighters to rearm them and refuel them. They were shooting down squadrons of torpedo bombers and aircraft from Midway. They needed ammunition. They could not land if planes were parked on the flight deck awaiting takeoff. Also, the weapons elevators did not go to the flight decks, but only up to the hanger deck. The aircraft were armed and fueled on the hanger deck.

Fuchida wrote the five minute lie, as a sop to National Pride. It was easier to believe a little bad luck doomed the Japanese than they were just beaten by a smaller force.

Your arguments are no less a sop to national pride. The Germans believed you could plan for every contingency. They did, except for one. They had no plan for the British and French retreating and refusing to obligingly die.

Your posts are infested with anti-German hatred and propaganda. This crosses the border of irrationality.

 

[SavannahMann]

Indeed. You might want to start editing history books then. As one example, The Guns of August by Barbra W. Tuchman. In it the decision of the French Government to leave Paris and prepare to depart to Algeria was discussed, and that was in the first month of the war.

A World Undone. In that one the failures of the Schlieffen Plan was laid bare for all to see.

The biggest problem with the war was that the weapons and machines were really suited for defense, not so much to the attack. Which is why the trench warfare became such a stalemate. But we’re getting off the failures of the Germans.

I like the Germans. I like the people, and I love the cars made there.

Now, let’s be honest about the “anti German Propaganda” you accused me of. The Germans DID take hostages in the town, and DID execute those prisoners regularly. This is Historical Fact. And even the Germans admitted that this was contrary to International Treaties, which they had signed, but their excuse was they were fighting for their very lives and had to take this action to subdue the population and allow the war to be won.

Germany DID invade Belgium after signing a treaty guaranteeing the sovereignty of Belgium in perpetuity. King Leopoldo DID withdraw to Antwerp and that fortified city held out for a year or so into the war.

Germany WAS on the brink of starvation at the end of the war. During Operation Michael, the last attack the Germans launched, there are many diary reports from German Soldiers about how shocked they were to see the quality, quantity, and variety of supplies the British had. The Germans had not seen Chocolate in more than two years by this point.

German cleverness is well known, as is the fact, fact mind you, that this cleverness never seemed to be quite clever enough. Take the German Ciphers. The codes used by Germany. They never changed the codes during the entire war. They were using the same Ciphers at the end of the war, as they were in the beginning. “The Zimmerman Telegram” as one example. Sent via a code the British had broken years ago. It was pure arrogance that led the Germans to believe that a code conceived in the mind of a German could not be broken by a lesser being. “Zimmerman Telegram Barbra W. Tuchman”.

German War preparations were lacking. They counted on a short war, and as such had only a sufficient supply of Nitrates for six months. Until they figured out how to pull nitrogen from the air, they were in danger of having to surrender within the first year because they would not be able to make Gunpowder. The French were similarly short sighted, surrendering the Iron Mine regions to the Germans early on with the expectation of being able to take it back easily in a couple weeks. That Mine fed Germany for the entire war.

The U-Boat war. When they decided in 1916 to resume Unrestricted Warfar with the Submarines, they had calculated that they could and would starve the British into submission before the Americans could affect the outcome of the war.

Obviously, History tells us that their calculations were wrong. All they accomplished was to create another enemy, one with deeper industrial capacity than Germany dreamed of.

Example after example. There are thousands of them. Verdun, the plan was to bleed the French White. Well, that did happen, but the Germans were also bled white. Yes, they took fewer casualties, but they took far more than they intended or planned on. You see, the one thing the German War Plans never took into account, is what happens when the Enemy does not do what you want him to?

Finally, the German ideal that the war would be paid for by the losers. As each month went by, the amount of money needed to compensate for losing under the term Reparations increased to astronomical amounts. Fate had it that the Germans were saddled with this insane requirement, and it did to their economy what they had intended to do to France’s economy.

When I read about the First World War, I am often struck by the impression that both sides were trying desperately to lose. Both sides did the same stupid thing time and time again, claiming that this time, it would work.

World Opinion was heavily against the Germans, not because of Anti-German propaganda. But because of German actions. Worse, their actions were not downplayed, but celebrated. The U-Boats sinking passenger ships for example. All it could do is enrage the population, but the Germans were convinced that it would terrify the enemies into surrendering. This by the way was the same insane theories that both sides used to justify the bombing of cities one war later. An effort to terrorize the population into forcing the government to capitulate. It didn’t work.

Germany was, and is, a net importer of food. When Britain, which had the largest Navy in the World, enacted the blockade, it hampered the German War effort rather badly.

This is not propaganda. It is historical fact. All of this happened. Now, we can learn from History, and strive to avoid the same mistakes over and over again, or we can pretend it never happened, and doom ourselves into repeating the mistakes, over and over and over again.

In War II, the French made the same mistake, again. They ignored the open door of Belgium, and sure enough the Germans blasted through it, and the Ardennes, and just like War One, surprised the French.

Ok, now we have learned. But we have not in reality. You see, this time it was the Americans and the British, who believed that despite the fact that German Trucks and Tanks had invaded France in 1940 through the Ardennes and Belgium, that the terrain was impossible for German Tanks to manage. So we got surprised a third time. And the Battle of the Bulge was briefly successful for the Germans, and ultimately a horrific failure costing Germany tens of thousands of trained troops they could not afford to lose at that stage of the war.

I love History. I read a lot of it. I watch documentaries. I just finished one on the Second War done by the Russians and translated by the BBC to English.

As an aside, it is a curious fact. In the beginning Stalin was more hands on in the defense, requiring the troops to die in place rather than retreat. As the war continued, Stalin learned to let his Generals, who were getting more experience about what worked and what did not, run the show. Stalin became more hands off, letting the Experts manage the plans, and the tactical decisions while he focused on Strategic goals.

Hitler became more hands on as the war progressed, Taking more and more authority and power from the Generals, believing himself to be the only one who could with is military brilliance, save Germany.

The Soviets won, and the Germans lost. We should start a thread about the Eastern Front during the Second War. My opinion, in short, is that there were no good guys in that war. Both were bad guys who brutalized their own people, and those who were conquered. You had the Gestapo on one side, and the NKVD on the other.

Shooting up to 100 random civilians for each soldier killed by civilians was legal and not only exercised by the Germans but by the allies as well. However, the propaganda was very grave, so expect vast exaggerations.
And you reason with civilian ships. You cannot expect during wartimes that there is a peaceful steamer cruising.

This is the Lusitania. A large ship. A single torpedo cannot sink it. It was either full of ammunitions or - as conspiracy theorists claim - full of explosives to create a reason to make America join the war.
The German embassy advertised in US newspapers and warned of the threats for civilian ships in the war zones but only one newspaper actually published the message.

As for the public opinion in America - they were against intervention.

As for the WWII eastern frontier, German traitors informed the Russians about every German plan.

Wow, talk about Revisionist History. You take the cake. First, it was not legal to shoot civilian hostages. It wasn’t legal to take hostages.

The First World War: International Law Mattered More Than You Think - Legal History

International Law and the Laws of War | International Encyclopedia of the First World War (WW1)

That was not propaganda. Germany signed the treaties.

Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907 - Wikipedia

It showed the world that you could not trust Germany to keep her word. She would lie, and she would dismiss any objection as irrelevant. It made Germany a pariah among nations. Remember, a century ago, honor was important among the world leaders.

The United States was against the intervention, and probably would have stayed out even after the resumption of unrestricted Submarine Warfare, if the Germans had given time to the ships to make port before resuming after their announcement that might have helped. But the Germans, again trying to be clever, hoped to ferment more war. They sent what is known as the Zimmerman Telegram. It showed the duplicity, the untrustworthiness of the Germans to a nation that had no choice but to believe.

Again, this is all History. It is not propaganda. Foreign Minister Zimmerman admitted that he had sent the Telegram. Thus showing how unclever the Germans really were. A denial might have muddied the waters by claiming it was a British Plant, a British Lie. But no, Zimmerman admitted it afraid that the Americans would have proof. Which of course, they did not, but the British did and were not about to admit they had broken the Codes.

Ships of the era were not made of fine steel as we have today. They were made of what we would consider scrap metal. Metallurgy of the Titanic demonstrates that beyond doubt. Flawed material rife with impurities. Making the metal brittle as well as being held together by Rivits.

One Torpedo was often all it took to sink many ships. Including Warships, which are built even stronger than civilian ships.

HMS Majestic (1895) - Wikipedia

One single torpedo sunk a Battleship in 9 minutes. Nine minutes. If a single Torpedo can sink a Battleship, what makes you think that it could not sink a passenger ship that is not built nearly as strongly as it is not expected to face combat? I mean, a ship constructed of armor plate was sunk, why not one made of normal steel?

That was not a fluke, or a one off. It was one of two Battleships sunk by Torpedos during World War One. HMS Triumph (1903) - Wikipedia

A single torpedo sunk HMS Triumph. Another Battleship down to a single torpedo. Tell me again how it was impossible? I think a few thousand dead sailors would like to debate the issue with you.

Sinking a metal ship is not that hard. It happens when they bump into rocks and other hard things. When the water entering overcomes the ability of the ship to evacuate the water, then it is going to sink.

Your arguments are not even revisionist really. They are a denial of reality and an embracing of Conspiracy Theory coupled with German Superiority, which was how Germany got into World War II. Actually it was because of a lot of things, like the never ending use of propaganda like you are posting, that led the public to believe they were wining the war, which was why the end of the war and the German Surrender was such a shock. Germany was winning just yesterday. It must have been a betrayal by some insidious people. Hello Hitler, here is a chance to go after your target, blame them.

I often wondered why the Germans between the wars believed that crap. I mean, Jews made up about 1/2 of 1% of the population of Germany. How the hell could so few people bring down the mighty Germany? Even the most radical of Americans claim that it was only 3% of the population that won the Revolutionary War. And that is less unbelievable than the insane claims of the Nazi’s that Germany would have won the First World War if not for the Jews and their perfidy.

Forget the propaganda man. Deal with reality. Germany was doomed from the time the war began.

Ships like the Lusitania have many chambers. If a torpedo hits one or two of them, the ship is not threatened (given there is no ammo stored in them).
Battleships are more endangered because they usually carry a lot of ammunitions and are way smaller.

The British Blockade During World War I: The Weapon of Deprivation

And if the Germans killed 10.000 Belgian and French civilians in WWI it is still far less then the Coalition killed only in the Libya war in 2011.

Warships have those same Chambers. In fact, they have many more chambers. Yet two Battleships were sunk with a single torpedo each. Pfui. Propaganda might work on the uninformed but not on anyone with a modicum of knowledge.

Your final argument is even dumber. What anyone else has done does not relieve me of the responsibility of my own actions. If someone else robs five banks it does not mean I am not a bank robber for only holding one up.

It is good to see you have stopped with the insane argument that it was legal, a contention now thoroughly discredited.

There were many “great” plans in military history. The ones that work are lauded. The ones that didn’t are the subject of endless bickering. National pride means that Germans want to believe they were close to victory. Just a little bad luck stopped them. Nonsense.

It is in a way like the lie that five minutes was what doomed the Japanese Carriers at Midway. Carriers of the era could launch, or recover aircraft. They could not do both. We are told that there were fully armed and fueled aircraft on the deck waiting to take off. Or that some were being rearmed and bombs were stacked on the deck.

It never happened. The four Japanese Carriers were landing fighters to rearm them and refuel them. They were shooting down squadrons of torpedo bombers and aircraft from Midway. They needed ammunition. They could not land if planes were parked on the flight deck awaiting takeoff. Also, the weapons elevators did not go to the flight decks, but only up to the hanger deck. The aircraft were armed and fueled on the hanger deck.

Fuchida wrote the five minute lie, as a sop to National Pride. It was easier to believe a little bad luck doomed the Japanese than they were just beaten by a smaller force.

Your arguments are no less a sop to national pride. The Germans believed you could plan for every contingency. They did, except for one. They had no plan for the British and French retreating and refusing to obligingly die.

Your posts are infested with anti-German hatred and propaganda. This crosses the border of irrationality.

My posts are based upon established historical fact. If you want my objections to American actions, I’ll be happy to give them. Not just the obvious racism. I could wax eloquently for a while on the immoral insanity that had thousands of sailors exposed to radiation at Bikini Atol to study the effects of exposure. One among many subjects where I would and always will object to Americans.

If you want my opinion on Britain, then the failure to live up to the Balfor declaration would be pretty high up on the list. In fact you can trace today’s extremist jihadi crap the Britain promising everything to everyone during War One.

You only learn from history when you deal in truth. Try it sometime.

 

[Bleipriester]

Shooting up to 100 random civilians for each soldier killed by civilians was legal and not only exercised by the Germans but by the allies as well. However, the propaganda was very grave, so expect vast exaggerations.
And you reason with civilian ships. You cannot expect during wartimes that there is a peaceful steamer cruising.

This is the Lusitania. A large ship. A single torpedo cannot sink it. It was either full of ammunitions or - as conspiracy theorists claim - full of explosives to create a reason to make America join the war.
The German embassy advertised in US newspapers and warned of the threats for civilian ships in the war zones but only one newspaper actually published the message.

As for the public opinion in America - they were against intervention.

As for the WWII eastern frontier, German traitors informed the Russians about every German plan.

Wow, talk about Revisionist History. You take the cake. First, it was not legal to shoot civilian hostages. It wasn’t legal to take hostages.

The First World War: International Law Mattered More Than You Think - Legal History

International Law and the Laws of War | International Encyclopedia of the First World War (WW1)

That was not propaganda. Germany signed the treaties.

Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907 - Wikipedia

It showed the world that you could not trust Germany to keep her word. She would lie, and she would dismiss any objection as irrelevant. It made Germany a pariah among nations. Remember, a century ago, honor was important among the world leaders.

The United States was against the intervention, and probably would have stayed out even after the resumption of unrestricted Submarine Warfare, if the Germans had given time to the ships to make port before resuming after their announcement that might have helped. But the Germans, again trying to be clever, hoped to ferment more war. They sent what is known as the Zimmerman Telegram. It showed the duplicity, the untrustworthiness of the Germans to a nation that had no choice but to believe.

Again, this is all History. It is not propaganda. Foreign Minister Zimmerman admitted that he had sent the Telegram. Thus showing how unclever the Germans really were. A denial might have muddied the waters by claiming it was a British Plant, a British Lie. But no, Zimmerman admitted it afraid that the Americans would have proof. Which of course, they did not, but the British did and were not about to admit they had broken the Codes.

Ships of the era were not made of fine steel as we have today. They were made of what we would consider scrap metal. Metallurgy of the Titanic demonstrates that beyond doubt. Flawed material rife with impurities. Making the metal brittle as well as being held together by Rivits.

One Torpedo was often all it took to sink many ships. Including Warships, which are built even stronger than civilian ships.

HMS Majestic (1895) - Wikipedia

One single torpedo sunk a Battleship in 9 minutes. Nine minutes. If a single Torpedo can sink a Battleship, what makes you think that it could not sink a passenger ship that is not built nearly as strongly as it is not expected to face combat? I mean, a ship constructed of armor plate was sunk, why not one made of normal steel?

That was not a fluke, or a one off. It was one of two Battleships sunk by Torpedos during World War One. HMS Triumph (1903) - Wikipedia

A single torpedo sunk HMS Triumph. Another Battleship down to a single torpedo. Tell me again how it was impossible? I think a few thousand dead sailors would like to debate the issue with you.

Sinking a metal ship is not that hard. It happens when they bump into rocks and other hard things. When the water entering overcomes the ability of the ship to evacuate the water, then it is going to sink.

Your arguments are not even revisionist really. They are a denial of reality and an embracing of Conspiracy Theory coupled with German Superiority, which was how Germany got into World War II. Actually it was because of a lot of things, like the never ending use of propaganda like you are posting, that led the public to believe they were wining the war, which was why the end of the war and the German Surrender was such a shock. Germany was winning just yesterday. It must have been a betrayal by some insidious people. Hello Hitler, here is a chance to go after your target, blame them.

I often wondered why the Germans between the wars believed that crap. I mean, Jews made up about 1/2 of 1% of the population of Germany. How the hell could so few people bring down the mighty Germany? Even the most radical of Americans claim that it was only 3% of the population that won the Revolutionary War. And that is less unbelievable than the insane claims of the Nazi’s that Germany would have won the First World War if not for the Jews and their perfidy.

Forget the propaganda man. Deal with reality. Germany was doomed from the time the war began.

Ships like the Lusitania have many chambers. If a torpedo hits one or two of them, the ship is not threatened (given there is no ammo stored in them).
Battleships are more endangered because they usually carry a lot of ammunitions and are way smaller.

The British Blockade During World War I: The Weapon of Deprivation

And if the Germans killed 10.000 Belgian and French civilians in WWI it is still far less then the Coalition killed only in the Libya war in 2011.

Warships have those same Chambers. In fact, they have many more chambers. Yet two Battleships were sunk with a single torpedo each. Pfui. Propaganda might work on the uninformed but not on anyone with a modicum of knowledge.

Your final argument is even dumber. What anyone else has done does not relieve me of the responsibility of my own actions. If someone else robs five banks it does not mean I am not a bank robber for only holding one up.

It is good to see you have stopped with the insane argument that it was legal, a contention now thoroughly discredited.

There were many “great” plans in military history. The ones that work are lauded. The ones that didn’t are the subject of endless bickering. National pride means that Germans want to believe they were close to victory. Just a little bad luck stopped them. Nonsense.

It is in a way like the lie that five minutes was what doomed the Japanese Carriers at Midway. Carriers of the era could launch, or recover aircraft. They could not do both. We are told that there were fully armed and fueled aircraft on the deck waiting to take off. Or that some were being rearmed and bombs were stacked on the deck.

It never happened. The four Japanese Carriers were landing fighters to rearm them and refuel them. They were shooting down squadrons of torpedo bombers and aircraft from Midway. They needed ammunition. They could not land if planes were parked on the flight deck awaiting takeoff. Also, the weapons elevators did not go to the flight decks, but only up to the hanger deck. The aircraft were armed and fueled on the hanger deck.

Fuchida wrote the five minute lie, as a sop to National Pride. It was easier to believe a little bad luck doomed the Japanese than they were just beaten by a smaller force.

Your arguments are no less a sop to national pride. The Germans believed you could plan for every contingency. They did, except for one. They had no plan for the British and French retreating and refusing to obligingly die.

Your posts are infested with anti-German hatred and propaganda. This crosses the border of irrationality.

My posts are based upon established historical fact. If you want my objections to American actions, I’ll be happy to give them. Not just the obvious racism. I could wax eloquently for a while on the immoral insanity that had thousands of sailors exposed to radiation at Bikini Atol to study the effects of exposure. One among many subjects where I would and always will object to Americans.

If you want my opinion on Britain, then the failure to live up to the Balfor declaration would be pretty high up on the list. In fact you can trace today’s extremist jihadi crap the Britain promising everything to everyone during War One.

You only learn from history when you deal in truth. Try it sometime.

You have proven to be ignorant to the thread´s topic.

 

[SavannahMann]

Wow, talk about Revisionist History. You take the cake. First, it was not legal to shoot civilian hostages. It wasn’t legal to take hostages.

The First World War: International Law Mattered More Than You Think - Legal History

International Law and the Laws of War | International Encyclopedia of the First World War (WW1)

That was not propaganda. Germany signed the treaties.

Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907 - Wikipedia

It showed the world that you could not trust Germany to keep her word. She would lie, and she would dismiss any objection as irrelevant. It made Germany a pariah among nations. Remember, a century ago, honor was important among the world leaders.

The United States was against the intervention, and probably would have stayed out even after the resumption of unrestricted Submarine Warfare, if the Germans had given time to the ships to make port before resuming after their announcement that might have helped. But the Germans, again trying to be clever, hoped to ferment more war. They sent what is known as the Zimmerman Telegram. It showed the duplicity, the untrustworthiness of the Germans to a nation that had no choice but to believe.

Again, this is all History. It is not propaganda. Foreign Minister Zimmerman admitted that he had sent the Telegram. Thus showing how unclever the Germans really were. A denial might have muddied the waters by claiming it was a British Plant, a British Lie. But no, Zimmerman admitted it afraid that the Americans would have proof. Which of course, they did not, but the British did and were not about to admit they had broken the Codes.

Ships of the era were not made of fine steel as we have today. They were made of what we would consider scrap metal. Metallurgy of the Titanic demonstrates that beyond doubt. Flawed material rife with impurities. Making the metal brittle as well as being held together by Rivits.

One Torpedo was often all it took to sink many ships. Including Warships, which are built even stronger than civilian ships.

HMS Majestic (1895) - Wikipedia

One single torpedo sunk a Battleship in 9 minutes. Nine minutes. If a single Torpedo can sink a Battleship, what makes you think that it could not sink a passenger ship that is not built nearly as strongly as it is not expected to face combat? I mean, a ship constructed of armor plate was sunk, why not one made of normal steel?

That was not a fluke, or a one off. It was one of two Battleships sunk by Torpedos during World War One. HMS Triumph (1903) - Wikipedia

A single torpedo sunk HMS Triumph. Another Battleship down to a single torpedo. Tell me again how it was impossible? I think a few thousand dead sailors would like to debate the issue with you.

Sinking a metal ship is not that hard. It happens when they bump into rocks and other hard things. When the water entering overcomes the ability of the ship to evacuate the water, then it is going to sink.

Your arguments are not even revisionist really. They are a denial of reality and an embracing of Conspiracy Theory coupled with German Superiority, which was how Germany got into World War II. Actually it was because of a lot of things, like the never ending use of propaganda like you are posting, that led the public to believe they were wining the war, which was why the end of the war and the German Surrender was such a shock. Germany was winning just yesterday. It must have been a betrayal by some insidious people. Hello Hitler, here is a chance to go after your target, blame them.

I often wondered why the Germans between the wars believed that crap. I mean, Jews made up about 1/2 of 1% of the population of Germany. How the hell could so few people bring down the mighty Germany? Even the most radical of Americans claim that it was only 3% of the population that won the Revolutionary War. And that is less unbelievable than the insane claims of the Nazi’s that Germany would have won the First World War if not for the Jews and their perfidy.

Forget the propaganda man. Deal with reality. Germany was doomed from the time the war began.

Ships like the Lusitania have many chambers. If a torpedo hits one or two of them, the ship is not threatened (given there is no ammo stored in them).
Battleships are more endangered because they usually carry a lot of ammunitions and are way smaller.

The British Blockade During World War I: The Weapon of Deprivation

And if the Germans killed 10.000 Belgian and French civilians in WWI it is still far less then the Coalition killed only in the Libya war in 2011.

Warships have those same Chambers. In fact, they have many more chambers. Yet two Battleships were sunk with a single torpedo each. Pfui. Propaganda might work on the uninformed but not on anyone with a modicum of knowledge.

Your final argument is even dumber. What anyone else has done does not relieve me of the responsibility of my own actions. If someone else robs five banks it does not mean I am not a bank robber for only holding one up.

It is good to see you have stopped with the insane argument that it was legal, a contention now thoroughly discredited.

There were many “great” plans in military history. The ones that work are lauded. The ones that didn’t are the subject of endless bickering. National pride means that Germans want to believe they were close to victory. Just a little bad luck stopped them. Nonsense.

It is in a way like the lie that five minutes was what doomed the Japanese Carriers at Midway. Carriers of the era could launch, or recover aircraft. They could not do both. We are told that there were fully armed and fueled aircraft on the deck waiting to take off. Or that some were being rearmed and bombs were stacked on the deck.

It never happened. The four Japanese Carriers were landing fighters to rearm them and refuel them. They were shooting down squadrons of torpedo bombers and aircraft from Midway. They needed ammunition. They could not land if planes were parked on the flight deck awaiting takeoff. Also, the weapons elevators did not go to the flight decks, but only up to the hanger deck. The aircraft were armed and fueled on the hanger deck.

Fuchida wrote the five minute lie, as a sop to National Pride. It was easier to believe a little bad luck doomed the Japanese than they were just beaten by a smaller force.

Your arguments are no less a sop to national pride. The Germans believed you could plan for every contingency. They did, except for one. They had no plan for the British and French retreating and refusing to obligingly die.

Your posts are infested with anti-German hatred and propaganda. This crosses the border of irrationality.

My posts are based upon established historical fact. If you want my objections to American actions, I’ll be happy to give them. Not just the obvious racism. I could wax eloquently for a while on the immoral insanity that had thousands of sailors exposed to radiation at Bikini Atol to study the effects of exposure. One among many subjects where I would and always will object to Americans.

If you want my opinion on Britain, then the failure to live up to the Balfor declaration would be pretty high up on the list. In fact you can trace today’s extremist jihadi crap the Britain promising everything to everyone during War One.

You only learn from history when you deal in truth. Try it sometime.

You have proven to be ignorant to the thread´s topic.

I’ve spoken truth. Knowledge is an inoculation against ignorance.

You have denounced my arguments, even when backed up by links proving the point, as propaganda or anti German bias. To date, you have not offered anything other than disproven conspiracy theory that the Lusitania was carrying munitions. A CT that I was able to disprove with evidence of other, better manufactured ships suffering the same fate off of a single torpedo. The Kaiser had a new idea every minute, and each one was supposedly brilliant. But we are still talking about a man who was so full of himself that he had his daily news printed in gold. He only wanted gold plated news, and only good news.

Germany could never win the war. So long as Britain with the largest navy in the world controlled the seas around Europe, and they did, then vital materials that Germany needed for survival, not just victory, were denied.

The Naval Balance of Power in 1914

The Germans had the second largest, and the Americans came in third. Germany tried to get the message across to Britain that if the war went, then the Americans would be left in undisputed control of the sea after Britain and Germany destroyed themselves in useless battle. Britain responded by increasing the rate of building of the warships. Shying away from battle was worse than losing control of the seas, because the Navy existed to fight.

Britain made a lot of really stupid mistakes in the war. So did France, Russia, Italy, as did Germany and especially the Austria-Hungary empire. Read The Guns of August. It is a great book, and shows the folly of both the French/British/Russian war plans, as well as the folly of the German plans. Nobody was studying Sun Tzu at this point, and they should have been. Nobody was thinking. The French marched off to war wearing Blue Jackets and Red Pants as their field uniforms. They had rejected the Howeitzer Cannon of large caliber, claiming that the French 75MM was superior in every way, and best of all could be moved fast enough to keep up with the advancing armies. The French Soldiers were not issued entrenching tools. The officers were afraid it would make the men “sticky” on attack.

What saved France was the fact that Sir John French of the British did not want to fight a pitched battle and risk his army. When he pulled back, it exposed the flank of the French, and they had to pull back, and it began a series of movements that ended with the stand at the Marne. When the Army of Paris marched out in direct violation of the German order of Battle. Armed Camps, like fortified cities, did not have their armies march out to fight beyond the ramparts.

But in the Schlieffen Plan, the Army was supposed to be eliminated before they got to Paris. The Germans believed the French would not leave Paris exposed, they would stand and fight because losing the city was unthinkable.

The French on the other hands were willing to lose a city, to save the nation.

The French learned, the survivors of the first few days learned to dig in. They got shovels, and pickax’s, and they dug in when they had to fight. The British already knew this trick to survival. They had learned it during the Boer Wars.

The German plan did not account for everything. For example they never had any problems with communications during war games. But the French put the Eiffel Tower to use jamming German signals, and with disruptions to the phone lines, messages which did get through, were usually late, often too late to prevent a mistake.

I honestly doubt if Schlieffen himself could have saved the war and won it on his own timetable. Not if the Government of France had evacuated to Algeria, home of the Foreign Legion, and refused to capitulate. Germany did not have enough troops to occupy France and face the Russians. It is a truth in warfare, if the enemy won’t surrender, you have to destroy them to the last. See Defense of Bastogne by the 101st Airborne for proof of that. By any logic, the Americans should have surrendered, but they did not.

Get off the conspircy theory websites, and start to read, and watch documentaries. It will serve you well in the long run. Later, I’ll explain why the 1903 Springfield Rifle was chambered in a cartridge that wasn’t invented when the rifle was starting production, the 30-06 Springfield.