Who was the right side of WW1 -

[verissimus]

Nigger, there's a spike in his hat.

I hate to be that guy...but actually.... In all seriousness though, and I know this is TMI,

1) the "spikes" were for show on those helmets with them and
2) more importantly the "spikes" weren't meant for all helmets. I have an image somewhere on another account on my computer, but the short of it is that I believe only the infantrymen's version of the helmet had the spike. The artillerymen specifically had a knob...(would that be the best was to describe it) instead.

On another note, who gives a crap how "ominous" German uniforms looked. Would you rather they fought the war wearing Lederhosen?

Britain and France should at least get another point for willfully violating Greek neutrality and occupying the north of the country to open a front against Bulgaria while creating a second pro Entente government in the North

Agreed.

 

[Rafal Gan Ganowicz]

no body. War of empires. Bullshit.

 

[PrussiansMarchingOn1819]

Everyone forgets Japan fought in WW1 on the side of the allies, got fucked by the League of Nations, which led to changing sides in WW2.

They wanted to be treated as equals, but they were disregarded at the table while the Europeans were carving up territories in Turkey and the Middle East and creating borders in Eastern Europe and such.

 

[Emperor Julian]

I'd go with the guy behind the machine gun instead of in front of it.

 

[Samson Pumpkin Jr.]

Like the Crimean War, the only real immediate result was the pointless loss of life and the breakdown of empires.
The overall result planted the seeds for the Second World War (If not the Cold War, if the rise of the Soviet Union is to be considered).

I hear this take all the time and it's the worst opinion to hold about WW1. it wasn't a "pointless war," there were a lot of reasons why each nation participated in the conflict. Do you think Romania or Italy joined for no reason? Romania got a lot out of the war but Italy was cucked by the USA in the peace conference. Germany wanted to destroy Russian industry before it got too powerful, Russian industry was growing exponentially and threatened the well being of Germany. France wanted German Alsace and a secure border, Austria Hungary wanted to secure their borderlands and quell ethnic tensions, Italy wanted to incorporate Italians which were living outside their border, the United Kingdom wanted to curb stomp Germany so they wouldn't surpass them in naval power, and Germany wanted a place in the sun.

Everyone forgets Japan fought in WW1 on the side of the allies, got fucked by the League of Nations, which led to changing sides in WW2.

Japan almost got everything they wanted out of the war. The only notable thing they didn't get was the German port in China (which rightfully belonged to China). The reason Japan flipped sides was that all the territories they wanted in south Asia belonged to the Entente and the Netherlands.
And the league of nations was pointless anyways and the Japanese knew this. The league of nations didn't stop the invasion of Manchuria or the invasion of China

 

[Samson Pumpkin Jr.]

My impression is that there was no real "right side" in WW1, the whole thing was just a clusterfuck.

The only right side in war is the side that wins, we have no idea how the world would end up if the Central Powers won the war and I prefer the reality we live in now.

Honestly? I think one of the reasons the war happened was there was all this new military technology and the leaders in Europe simply wanted to use it.... because it was cool, because they just wanted to see what would happen.

This is not true at all. There were tons of regulations put in place by international commissions. The Tsar of Russia himself held a conference that regulated which types of firearms were to be permitted by nations of the world. Shotguns weren't used in WW1 because they were considered barbaric (no joke), and gas attacks were used sparingly after 1914. However some generals, namely Conrad Von Hotzendorf, pushed for war a lot, he sent letters to the king of Austria no less than 27 times asking for war with Serbia. So I guess there's some truth in this statement.

Not to mention the usual phenomenon of war as business which pushes governments towards getting their hands dirty over pursuing peace.

If anything it shows how little the elites of the world really care for the common man that they would allow such a massive loss of life to happen for no real good reason.

I think it's similar reasons to the later US Vietnam and Iraq wars, an opportunity to use new toys and make profit

War happens because of the free market, in other words God's hand is involved in the appearance of war. Eternal peace is a dream and not even a pleasant one. And of course the "elites," who you cannot name and therefore know nothing about, don't care for the common man, but it's apparent that war can sometimes benefit the common man. WW2 brought the USA out of the great depression

 

[Brain.exe]

Pretty much everyone, for the reasons the thread stated.
Russia for declaring war on Austria-Hungary which pretty much made the war something larger than the standard Balkan clusterfuck.
Germany for being the first to use mustard gas and invading Belgium. Also the entire submarine warfare and Zimmermann note thing.
All of the Entente for making such a harsh treaty. "It isn't peace, but a 20 year ceasefire." - Some guy I forgot the name of.

I'd say the most "good" country in the war was the US, who just wanted to fuck off and do their own thing until they were shown the Zimmermann note. Though even they did some bad shit with the Sedition and Espionage acts.

 

[Get_your_kicks_with_30-06]

Germany was treated relatively well by the war. The inflation crisis was caused by bad monetary policy, not war debts. Those debts were also justified due to them actually invading other countries. Their borders were left relatively untouched and the USA even offered them generous loans to finance their ruined economy.

Good list of villainy, but Germany's border left relatively untouched?

Germany lost tens thousands of square miles of land, they had to give up Danzig, they had to recognize Poland and Czechoslovakia that they had to cede land to and they pretty much lost control of the Rhineland.

This forced secession of land was one of, if not the, biggest reasons why Hitler could mobilize the German Army and populace to start WW2.

 

[King Ghidorah]

Everyone forgets Japan fought in WW1 on the side of the allies, got fucked by the League of Nations, which led to changing sides in WW2.

All that important fighting they did on those pissant islands and treaty ports with token military presence at best where they lost a grand total of 415 people

 

[Samson Pumpkin Jr.]

Pretty much everyone, for the reasons the thread stated.
Russia for declaring war on Austria-Hungary which pretty much made the war something larger than the standard Balkan clusterfuck.
Germany for being the first to use mustard gas and invading Belgium. Also the entire submarine warfare and Zimmermann note thing.
All of the Entente for making such a harsh treaty. "It isn't peace, but a 20 year ceasefire." - Some guy I forgot the name of.

I'd say the most "good" country in the war was the US, who just wanted to fuck off and do their own thing until they were shown the Zimmermann note. Though even they did some bad shit with the Sedition and Espionage acts.

What was Russia going to do? Serbia was defacto under the protection of Russia, and if Russia did nothing they would look weak.
Germany wouldn't have used gas attacks that early if Britain didn't blockade them. Germany needed to win the war fast and because Britain put a deadly blockade on their country Germany had to resort to devilish means to win the war. Submarine warfare was a fair counterattack on the blockade. There's no way you can have a double standard saying that the blockade on Germany was good while also saying submarine warfare bad. The Zimmerman telegram was justified in that the Entente clearly wanted the US to join the war so if Germany wanted to win they'd need more allies.
The treaty of Versailes was harsh, but if you take into account the geopolitical goals of each country in the Entente it served most of them well. Of course the treaty needed better enforcement after the war but we can agree that at the time it appeared to be reasonable.
And the US was the worst country in the war, they got into Europe, fucked around a bit and then left. They messed with the natural balance and indirectly made Italy join the axis in WW2 by not allowing them to annex Dalmatia.

 

[Brain.exe]

What was Russia going to do? Serbia was defacto under the protection of Russia, and if Russia did nothing they would look weak.
Germany wouldn't have used gas attacks that early if Britain didn't blockade them. Germany needed to win the war fast and because Britain put a deadly blockade on their country Germany had to resort to devilish means to win the war. Submarine warfare was a fair counterattack on the blockade. There's no way you can have a double standard saying that the blockade on Germany was good while also saying submarine warfare bad. The Zimmerman telegram was justified in that the Entente clearly wanted the US to join the war so if Germany wanted to win they'd need more allies.
The treaty of Versailes was harsh, but if you take into account the geopolitical goals of each country in the Entente it served most of them well. Of course the treaty needed better enforcement after the war but we can agree that at the time it appeared to be reasonable.
And the US was the worst country in the war, they got into Europe, fucked around a bit and then left. They messed with the natural balance and indirectly made Italy join the axis in WW2 by not allowing them to annex Dalmatia.

Yeah, I forgot about the British blockade. Obviously pretty shitty of them to do. Russia could have done something other than declare war on Austria. The telegram might have been justified but it was still asking Mexico to invade the US. Didn't know that the US prevented Italy from annexing Dalmatia but considering their focus it makes sense. The fact that they fucked around a bit and weren't really involved makes them less "bad" in my eyes. And to be fair the entire war was messing with the natural balance.

 

[Samson Pumpkin Jr.]

Yeah, I forgot about the British blockade. Obviously pretty shitty of them to do. Russia could have done something other than declare war on Austria. The telegram might have been justified but it was still asking Mexico to invade the US. Didn't know that the US prevented Italy from annexing Dalmatia but considering their focus it makes sense. The fact that they fucked around a bit and weren't really involved makes them less "bad" in my eyes. And to be fair the entire war was messing with the natural balance.

Russia couldn't really do any economic damage to the Central Powers, Russia relied on her military to deter enemies and when that failed they had nothing to back up on other than their military.
The Zimmerman telegram wasn't asking Mexico to do a preemptive strike on America, it was asking for Mexico to attack America if America attacked Germany. This isn't really a big difference but it's notable.
And in my eyes America is the bad guy because they made the Italian prime minister, Orlando, cry. When Orlando was in a conference with Woodrow Wilson, Clemenceau and George, because Wilson kept rejecting the requests of Orlando, he became furious and stormed out of the conference crying, this was when the big four became the big three. At the time Orlando was under a lot of pressure by the Italian government to get territories Italy wanted, Woodrow Wilson is literally the worse president of America ever; he made orlando cry

 

[King Ghidorah]

America had 0 buisness dictating the territories of Europe and it was basically a power play to try and put an American foothold in Europe by proxy under the guise of benevolence
T. American

 

[Dom Cruise]

The only right side in war is the side that wins, we have no idea how the world would end up if the Central Powers won the war and I prefer the reality we live in now.

This is not true at all. There were tons of regulations put in place by international commissions. The Tsar of Russia himself held a conference that regulated which types of firearms were to be permitted by nations of the world. Shotguns weren't used in WW1 because they were considered barbaric (no joke), and gas attacks were used sparingly after 1914. However some generals, namely Conrad Von Hotzendorf, pushed for war a lot, he sent letters to the king of Austria no less than 27 times asking for war with Serbia. So I guess there's some truth in this statement.

War happens because of the free market, in other words God's hand is involved in the appearance of war. Eternal peace is a dream and not even a pleasant one. And of course the "elites," who you cannot name and therefore know nothing about, don't care for the common man, but it's apparent that war can sometimes benefit the common man. WW2 brought the USA out of the great depression

WW2 brought the USA out of the great depression but Vietnam ruined our trajectory towards utopianism that we've never regained since and Iraq helped ruin what little we had been able to rebuild by that point and now almost 20 years later the country is totally falling apart, maybe sometimes war can be a benefit to the common man but sometimes it can be the exact opposite.

When I say elites I mean politicians, businessmen, bankers, the media etc.

 

[LazarusOwenhart]

Nah, England was going to find a reason, Belgium just gave them a convenient excuse. Their long-term strategy was to keep continental Europe weak and divided, and Germany was the biggest threat to that, as Germany demonstrated that they were miles ahead of the rest of the continent militarily by spanking France in the Franco-Prussian War.

The war was a complete mess, but the part that I think was the most misrepresented was the Lusitania incident. The version I learned in high school was something along the lines of "evil Germans torpedoed innocent Americans on a pleasure cruise to England", but it turns out they were actually also carrying hundreds of tons of undeclared war munitions. Was it justified? I don't know, but that looks an awful lot like the Palestinian strategy of launching mortars out of hospitals and then crying foul when they get drone striked.

The biggest moral issue with the Lusitania is that whilst yes, the US and UK governments were using the ship as a way to try and covertly smuggle munitions into the country, the innocent civilians aboard the ship were just that. The Germans have never shown conclusively that they had enough actual, solid intel that the ship was carrying munitions to justify treating it as a target and therefore they technically fired without cause on a civilian ship.

 

[inception_state]

The biggest moral issue with the Lusitania is that whilst yes, the US and UK governments were using the ship as a way to try and covertly smuggle munitions into the country, the innocent civilians aboard the ship were just that. The Germans have never shown conclusively that they had enough actual, solid intel that the ship was carrying munitions to justify treating it as a target and therefore they technically fired without cause on a civilian ship.

Why would the Germans reveal their intelligence sources and methods during wartime? It seems like a bit of a weird complaint to make when the fact is that they were absolutely right on that point, even if it took until the 1980s for the British government to admit it.

I'm not trying to present it as Germany being entirely in the right either. Just that it's a much more morally gray situation than was presented in high school history class. You obviously shouldn't kill civilians, but you also shouldn't use them as unwitting human shields for your munition smuggling.

 

[Stoneheart]

the Central powers were in the right without a question. just one side supported terrorists who killed a leading political person of the other side...

 

[The 3rd Hooligan]

The one with the most open mind

 

[WonderWino]

The only right side in war is the side that wins, we have no idea how the world would end up if the Central Powers won the war and I prefer the reality we live in now.

This is not true at all. There were tons of regulations put in place by international commissions. The Tsar of Russia himself held a conference that regulated which types of firearms were to be permitted by nations of the world. Shotguns weren't used in WW1 because they were considered barbaric (no joke), and gas attacks were used sparingly after 1914. However some generals, namely Conrad Von Hotzendorf, pushed for war a lot, he sent letters to the king of Austria no less than 27 times asking for war with Serbia. So I guess there's some truth in this statement.

War happens because of the free market, in other words God's hand is involved in the appearance of war. Eternal peace is a dream and not even a pleasant one. And of course the "elites," who you cannot name and therefore know nothing about, don't care for the common man, but it's apparent that war can sometimes benefit the common man. WW2 brought the USA out of the great depression

Shotguns were used quite a bit in ww1, they even designed versions specifically for use in the trenches

 

[Slap47]

Good list of villainy, but Germany's border left relatively untouched?

Germany lost tens thousands of square miles of land, they had to give up Danzig, they had to recognize Poland and Czechoslovakia that they had to cede land to and they pretty much lost control of the Rhineland.

This forced secession of land was one of, if not the, biggest reasons why Hitler could mobilize the German Army and populace to start WW2.

I'd say the biggest reason was the German nature. These people fall in line. Hitler was elected to office but he was never elected to rule the country.

The Rhineland issue was to repay reparations and it was ditched rather quickly. They just had to keep their army out of it.

Danzig was an international city. Without the war it would have likely been allowed to join Germany via popular vote.

The world was perfectly willing to give Germany the Sudetenland. Hitler took the whole damn country and doomed any chance of getting the Polish lands without a major war.