Which makes the whole 'who started it' pointless. Everyone wanted the war and no 'major' power was forced to take part in it. Bismarck wuz right.
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
- Status
Which makes the whole 'who started it' pointless. Everyone wanted the war and no 'major' power was forced to take part in it. Bismarck wuz right.
I think there are two points of view here.
One says, that the war was inevitable, because of the policies, so it doesn't make sense to ask who caused it (although we can still dissect this and for example analyze whose fault it was, that Germany was so isolated) and it makes sense.
The other focuses on why the war started specifically. What was the chain of events, that caused this particular scenario to turn into war. And this one also makes sense.
the war was inevitable, everyone was aware of that
but germany chose the date to start. they realized germany would lose arms race after 1914 so they seized the opportunity
but germany chose the date to start. they realized germany would lose arms race after 1914 so they seized the opportunity
1p to Morocco for Morocco
2p to Italy for Libya
3p to Bulgaria for Balkan wars
4p to Turkey for Goeben und Breslau
5p to Serbia for Trolling A-H
6p to UK for not taking it seriously
7p to France for revanchism and triple entente
8p to Russia for Triple Entente and Balkan interference
10p to Germany for Blank Cheque
12p to Austria-Hungary for Bosnia, Serbia and starting it all
2p to Italy for Libya
3p to Bulgaria for Balkan wars
4p to Turkey for Goeben und Breslau
5p to Serbia for Trolling A-H
6p to UK for not taking it seriously
7p to France for revanchism and triple entente
8p to Russia for Triple Entente and Balkan interference
10p to Germany for Blank Cheque
12p to Austria-Hungary for Bosnia, Serbia and starting it all
Who started ww1 probably did not matter much, however it ended up being a war to the Death and when it ended the Austrian-Hungarain Empire, the Russian Empire, the Ottoman Empire and the German Empire was gone or would be gone in a few years. So ww1 was an destroyer of empires.
Russia was even on the side that would win but still they lost so even picking the side that eventually won don't guarantee victory.
Russia was even on the side that would win but still they lost so even picking the side that eventually won don't guarantee victory.
On other hand it got rid of several authoritarian governments and maybe had an influence of the spread of democracy so the end result was not completely bad, however then you have ww2.
I'm no fan of authoritarian governments but in hindsight I think the world might have been better off with them remaining in power than the alternatives we got after they were toppled.
Maybe but we don't know, the chances are a later war would break out which may end up as bad or even worse than ww2. Also there is a risk that colonialism survives for longer and leave much of the World poorer and less developed than now.
Also much of rules of war and such was developed due to how terrible ww1 and ww2 had been and other stuff like UN also come from this.
Yeah I guess so. Though I doubt colonialism would've left nations less developed than they are now if it had continued longer. Probably more developed. No point in having a colony if you're not going to develop it so it makes more money for the motherland.
My ranking:
1. Austria
2. Russia
3. Germany
Basically in the order that general mobilization was ordered. Austria could have prevented any war, Russia could have prevented a great war, Germany could have respected Belgian neutrality.
1. Austria
2. Russia
3. Germany
Basically in the order that general mobilization was ordered. Austria could have prevented any war, Russia could have prevented a great war, Germany could have respected Belgian neutrality.
I have a theory that works fairly well when applied to history that suggests the first individual to fire a shot in a war usually loses in the long run.
i don't recall an Austro-Serbian War being a World War either.
The Kaiser declared war on, and invaded, France and Russia. That's what started the World War.
Colonies were more often a money pit that never paid off for the motherland. They did succeed in making a lot of money for certain individuals and secured funding for certain bureaus, offices, and armed forces.
German colonialism would have been interesting to see if it continued. They were really big on sinking money into developing public infrastructure which made most of their colonies huge money pits but actually did seem to make the local population better off*. The Kiautschou Bay concession (Which was under the authority of the Navy rather than the Reichskolonialamt) was so successful that Sun Yat Sen put the system there at the center of his revolutionary agenda (And to this day the tax structure in place in Taiwan has its origins in the reforms of a Kaiserliche Marine officer named Schrameier.) The Reichstag voted in spring of 1914 roll out the same system to Togo, but then "war were declared".
*Once you got past the genocide and social darwinism.
Last edited:
Germany declared war on Russia, and then 2 days later declared war on France and Belgium.
That's what started the world war. It's pretty simple.
- Status