This is just an interesting question that I've found white washed, and what I perceive as the white was is generally accepted, so I'm curious - who do you think is to blame for WWI? This, of course, doesn't mean 'who is 100% to blame' (there's always some idiot who thinks he's a genius by pointing out no one is entirely to blame), but who is deserves more of the blame than anyone else?
the stupid alliances between the British, French, Austro-Hungarians, Germans, Ottomans....and their business supporters.
I was playing a WWI version of axis and allies, and somehow we got on the topic of how the war ended and I said how badly the Germans were treated at Versailles, and one of the players said, "well it's probably to punish them for starting the war." I was shocked people, especially in my group of friends, still believe that/are that ignorant. You can't really believe the Germans started the war and know that they entered the war when called upon by a defensive alliance. And so many people actually think they are to blame.
The Russians. The war started as a localized conflict between the Austro-Hungarians and the Serbs until Russia decided to get involved and bring her alliance with her.
No matter how you want to cut it German support for Austria was always the key. No support, no war. It is as simple as that
Seems to me there were many players to the event, the easiest is to blame the Germans of course. But as i see it they were after their German lands taken from them in the Versailles treaty - and the No1 country that wanted to inflict pain on them was France. The French marched in the Germany when they fell behind in payments while Germans starved. If those lands never taken Germany had no reason march into Poland to get Danzig back. Of course one cant dismiss the role of communism/ Marxism either, shortly after the Bolshevik revolution in Russia they started in Germany. Leading to the rise of the nationalism to counter the culture destroying ideology of international socialism and its murderous ways. But again if Germany wasnt brought to its knees via the Versailles treaty its less likely any revolution wouldve gained traction. As for the start of WW1 i believe there are many parties equally as bad as one another, but for WW2 it starts at the unworkable and brutally unfair Versailles treaty.
It's hardly that simple. The tale of the entangled alliances is accurate and valid. Had England not dithered and outright declared it's support of the French before, the Germans would have been unlikely to have to taken the actions they did. The Scheiffen plan counted on the British staying out in order to protect their commercial interests (the British actually didn't have a real alliance with the French). And, again, Russian intervention was key. No Russian intervention, no need for German support, no British war effort.
Na you are just throwing to much history out the door to get your answer. The Austro-Hungarian empire knew exactly how the Russians would act. Without support from Germany the Austrians would not have pushed their claim
nah you are just saying the same thing that's already been acknowledged and incomplete over and over again. The Germans didn't believe that the British would get involved, and that they would only be fighting the Russians and the French, an integral fact to the Schleiffen plan.
The Germans knew the British were in play the moment they crossed either the Dutch or Belgium border. All they had to do was say yes at the end of July to Britain's request for assurances and the British are out of the game
No. I'm not going to go dig it up, but German plans and correspondence showed that they didn't think the Brits would get involved, and they were actually surprised when the Brits got involved over Belgium because of how old the treaty was (it was older than 'Germany'). It was older than the lifespan of Communist Russia. The German battle plans made no account for the British.
The treaty between the Serbs and Russia was older than Germany. That aside in the last week or so of July the British asked directly will the Germans respect Belgium and Dutch neutrality. The Germans never gave an answer. In the first week of August German troops crossed the Belgium border and the British declared war. What the Germans 'thought' anyone would do is immaterial. Everyone played it as they saw it. Germany does not support the Austro- Hungarian empire, there is no Russian involvement. Germans dont cross the Belgium border there is no British involvement. Without Austro-Hungarian aggression both Italy and Romania stay out of the war. Without German influence the Ottoman empire stays out of the war. Seeing a common trend developing yet?
Wasn't the Kaiser, the King of Austria-Hungary, the King of Britain, and the Czar all cousins? looks like WW1 was a family affair.
Slavic nationalism was the main cause of the outbreak of the First World War and Serbian nationalists provoked Austria-Hungary into declaring war on Serbia by assassinating Archduke Franz Ferdinand, heir to the Austro-Hungarian empire. The Austro-Hungarian government had to react militarily in order to curb Serb agitation within the Habsburg Empire and settle the problem of Slavic nationalism once and for all and it declared war on Serbia.
The one common denominator most historians agree on is imperialistic ambition was the root cause. The conflict between the Austro-Hungarians and the Serbs should have played out like many of the previous Balkan wars. But suddenly everyone decided to run with this and turn it into the nightmare of total war. I remember a funny piece of graffiti I saw a few years back. "It was a mistake, the Duke lived"
An alliance treaty is a piece of paper dipped in blood. Let the treatymakers fight their wars themselves. Germany should have sat back and let Russia and Austria-Hungary destroy each other, selling arms and supplies to both sides.
Queen Victoria, for having so many grandkids that they allo decided they had to fight it out to see who was ultimately her favorite.
You left out the Russians. In fact I would blame Russia and France and their alliance (Franco-Russian Alliance) for the First World War. The Second World War in Europe was just a continuation of the First World War, again you can lay blaim to the French.
On the whole, I would argue that Germany was the pivotal actor here. It was the German government that pushed the Austrians to escalate their demands and I believe the German government hoped that this would lead to a war in which it would be able to defeat France and Russia, before they became too strong for her. This misfired.
I'd say almost every European Royal shares responsibility for WW1. They all had their shinny new war machines, and where spoiling for a fight.
The Jews were behind it. In 1911 they were trying to stir up trouble between the US and the czarist regime in Russia. http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?res=F10D15FB385517738DDDA90A94D9405B818DF1D3
Yep, everybody knows it was the Jooz, just like they sunk the Titanic, (Iceberg-Goldberg, what's the difference?) Actually it was the Japanese. The insidious yellow peril had decided it was time to seize the possessions of the Superior Master Race in the Pacific. It was only a moment of naïve trust that made the innocent Germans trust them later on. Of course it had nothing to do with the Entangling Alliances of all the Great Powers, nor the prevalent idea that war was actually good for the youth, and that they needed one to clear the air after a century of all this stifling peace had turned them weak. (Which was actually said on BOTH sides)
