Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why 1866 Set the Stage for Two World Wars

angrystaffofficer.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 221 posts

Re: Why 1866 Set the Stage for Two World Wars

#191

Post by Animats »

nickik wrote: post #186
Animats wrote: post #28

Germany: too big for Europe, too small for the world. It's worth reviewing the run-up to WWI. The pre-WWI model of Europe, an endless struggle between Great Powers which had gone on for a millennium, is Putin's model of the world. That's because it gives Russia a role in the world. As an economic power, Russia is in 12th place, behind S. Korea. In a peaceful, trade-based world, Russia is a bit player. Especially sinc…

Maybe you should get your history correct. Before WW1 we were not in a situation where there were constant great power wars. There were limited wars 1860-1870 (Crimea, Franco-Prussian) but thats all , the last large great powers war was Napoleon and that was 120 years before WW1. So from the Numbers one can argue that we are today still in a sitiation of endless struggle and we should expect a major war very soon. I…

In the years just before WWI, the Balkan Wars involved the Ottoman Empire and Austria-Hungary, which were great powers in their day. There was also that little problem in the Russian Empire in 1917. The latter part of the 19th century had the unification of Germany, the Austro-Prussian War, and the Franco-Austrian War of 1859. The United Kingdom managed to keep their wars far from home for the latter half of the 19th century, except for a problem with Ireland.

Re: Why 1866 Set the Stage for Two World Wars

#192

Post by nickik »

Animats wrote: post #191
nickik wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe you should get your history correct. Before WW1 we were not in a situation where there were constant great power wars. There were limited wars 1860-1870 (Crimea, Franco-Prussian) but thats all , the last large great powers war was Napoleon and that was 120 years before WW1. So from the Numbers one can argue that we are today still in a sitiation of endless struggle and we should expect a major war very soon. I…

In the years just before WWI, the Balkan Wars involved the Ottoman Empire and Austria-Hungary, which were great powers in their day. There was also that little problem in the Russian Empire in 1917. The latter part of the 19th century had the unification of Germany, the Austro-Prussian War, and the Franco-Austrian War of 1859. The United Kingdom managed to keep their wars far from home for the latter half of the 19th…

Yes the Balkan Wars involved Great Powers, but its not like we have no wars that 'involve' great powers now (looking at you Syria). So again, from 1870 until 1914 there were very few wars, the hole population of europe basically had not experienced war.

I would thus argue that the world of 1914 was not more inherently in a great power struggle then we are now.

Re: Why 1866 Set the Stage for Two World Wars

#193

Post by nickik »

Koshkin wrote: post #54
WalterBright wrote: post #34

PBS just ran a 3 part "The Great War" which is an interesting documentary on the American perspective of WW1. It did strongly argue that America's entry into the war ensured the defeat of Germany.

Oh well... From today's perspective, who knows, the world might have been better off if Germany had won that war...

Hard to argue that. It rest on the argument that WW2 only happened because of the peace treaty of WW1, and that argument really fails.

Re: Why 1866 Set the Stage for Two World Wars

#194

Post by nickik »

cynusx wrote: post #65

The need for Germany to secure their left flank to avoid a two-front war and France's realization that it has nothing to gain from war with Germany also led to the creation of the European union in response. The idea was to deeply intertwine their economies so neither nation would benefit from war with each other. As for the US, their only objective is to prevent the rise of a dominant european power that can compete…

Your explanation of US action fails the reality test. There is no evidence that the US acted to prevent a dominant power in Europe. They joined the war because Germany acted in a way that made it almost impossible for them not too.

Re: Why 1866 Set the Stage for Two World Wars

#195

Post by readittwice »

Steko wrote: post #161
oblio wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm guessing that the meaning is ironic?

It's an admonition that slowing down is ok i.e. 'you're going even faster than the (very fast) Prussian rifles'.

Thanks, much better explanation than I could give ;)

Re: Why 1866 Set the Stage for Two World Wars

#196

Post by dracht »

nickik wrote: post #185
tannhauser23 wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Germany's annexation of Alsace-Lorraine was a source of ongoing resentment by the French. As was France's loss of its status as the dominant land power in Europe. War was not inevitable, but the unresolved issues from the Franco-Prussian war ensured that the two dominant continental powers would be enemies. France's desire to be secure against Germany leads it to form an alliance with Russia, which then puts Germany…

I dont think this argument holds any water. You essentially argue that the alliamce system caused the WW1 but I don't think that argument works very well. An alliance system alone does not cause war. The questiom is why within a given international situation some people start a war. The reason the relation did not change was not just Alsace-Lorraine, there are other issues. So I really think it can not be called a ro…

I suppose it comes down to whether you're arguing what started the war or what started the world war. Without the alliances, Austria-Hungary would have invaded Serbia and that would have been it.

Re: Why 1866 Set the Stage for Two World Wars

#197

Post by veddox »

chiph wrote: post #76
WalterBright wrote: post #34

PBS just ran a 3 part "The Great War" which is an interesting documentary on the American perspective of WW1. It did strongly argue that America's entry into the war ensured the defeat of Germany.

This YT channel is broadcasting "the news from the front" as it happened 100 years ago. It's been fascinating. https://www.youtube.com/user/TheGreatWar

Oh wow! Thanks for sharing that!

Re: Why 1866 Set the Stage for Two World Wars

#199

Post by dagenleg »

I would advise people here to read 'The Sleepwalkers: How Europe Went to War in 1914'. It a wonderful book exploring the causes for WW1 and focusing on just that. I think the strongest part of the book is that it goes beyond reiterating the usual accepted causes (diplomatic isolation of Germany, push for war from the military circles) and explores the complexity of pre-war diplomacy without assuming inevitability of the war. I think this resulted into a more unbiased approach: instead of trying to explain what caused the war postfactum, the author instead tries to adopt the political outlook of the contemporary politicians which really helps with understanding why certain actions were made and why they made sense politically - like Austria-Hungarian ultimatum.

Re: Why 1866 Set the Stage for Two World Wars

#200

Post by m_developer »

nickik wrote: post #190
jcranmer wrote: post #94

When talking about the world wars, it's fairly obvious that WWII occurred as a result of the consequences of the WWI peace treaty. So the question about what caused both world wars is really a question of what caused WWI. I happen to have been going back through this history recently, so it's well been on my mind. There are many putative causes for WWI. Wilson, for example, favored the idea that secret treaties was w…

I strongly take issue with the idea that peace treaty of WW1 caused WW2. The treaty wwas dead in the water before Hitler ever came to power. WW2 happend because a fascist party managed to gain power after the greatest economic crisis in german history. This is somewhat related to WW1 and the Peace Treaty but saying the Peace Treaty is the reason is not substainable.

But wasn't that economic crisis in a large part caused by the reparations Germany had to pay, as specified in the peace treaty?
Post reply on HN