Redpill me on Germany at the end of WW1

You got me. The French helped.

defeated? no

exhausted? yes

The writing was on the wall that Germany was going to lose in a matter of months. The Ottomans sued for peace, Bulgaria dipped out 3 weeks later, and the Austro-Hungarian Army was just crushed by the Italians in the first week of November.

Mutinies were flaring up in the German navy and a political revolution was in full swing calling for Wilhelm to abdicate in favor of a republic, there was no foreseeable way Germany could find victory by November 1918, so they called an armistice instead of a surrender, hoping for at least some leverage at the negotiating table, but once the Kaiser was overthrown and the Republic was in place, the armistice turned into a full surrender as the new republic had no method of raising an army call in resistance to the terms of the Versailles treaty.

Germany's call for an armistice is a mixed one, it saved Germany itself from outright destruction as Hitler brought it to in World War II, but the ability for Germany to leverage itself in the peace talks was nonexistent with the army in rebellion.

Britain barely contributed until 1917
The most important Entente countries were in that order

1. France
2. Russia
3. Britain

They weren't technically defeated, but all of their allies got btfo and the left a bottle of lube for Germany

Odd, since the victory at the marne in 1914 was caused by the British holding back the german army and allowing Joffe to reinforce that delirious numbskull Lanrezacs army.

No redpills to be had on this topic; the Kaiserriech was exhausted and starving. Ludendorff had utterly lost his nerve and essentially snapped under the pressure of managing the war and losing his son.The army was retreating to the German border under the successful 100 Day's Offensive. The other Central Powers were calling it quits or falling to pieces. Added American manpower rapidly negated then outmatched the German manpower freed from the Eastern Front.

That said, Germany maintained almost a million troops in the occupied eastern territories until the end of the war. One wonders if the Spring Offensive would have had more success if they'd been less afraid of the Bolsheviks.

theres an anecdote regarding the A-H how it was in 1918

>newply promoted officer arrives at his unit
>unit is nowhere to be found
>only 1 guy standing guard
>rest is inside the shelter
>they have no shoes, uniforms or ammo

the british shitposting need to stop seriously

They weren't so much defeated as doomed. They had enough men to fill the front, but they wouldn't in six months and everyone knew it.

A contributing factor to the sense of being backstabbed was that the German army played no role in the peace talks. A surrender was agreed upon solely by politicans and German soldiers occupying areas in the east felt completely betrayed by this act of Berlin.

What's with the dude on the far right's helmet? It looks like a chip bowl my friend has.

Then again, the army was extremely hypocritical in how it worked to burden the blame of the surrender to the government and politicians. By october of 1918, they'd surveyed that the war might be lost in coming days in the field, and they'd had to concede to the Kaiser that the Hindenburg line being breached spelled the end for them, so they requested the Parliament to reach out for peace negotiations, yet the Allies would only agree to a surrender from Germany. The army renneged this, which would've layed the blame for the defeat on them, and continued the war from then on.

And so in waiting out the war this much further, the Kaiser as overthrown, and the Weimar government themselves surrendered to the Allies, which the Allies couldn't be happier about since it meant that the politicians had surrendered without their acquiesance, which the army would soon fit to their narrative that Germany's army had never been defeated on the field and that "meanie politicians ;-; did".
> Quartermaster general Erich Ludendorff, probably fearing a breakthrough, claimed that he could not guarantee that the front would hold for another 2 hours and demanded a request be given to the Entente for an immediate ceasefire. In addition, he recommended the acceptance of the main demands of US president Woodrow Wilson (the Fourteen Points) including putting the Imperial Government on a democratic footing, hoping for more favorable peace terms. This enabled him to save the face of the Imperial German Army and put the responsibility for the capitulation and its consequences squarely into the hands of the democratic parties.

>the English aided their allies once in 1914 therefore this forever whisks away the fact that Britain never really mobilized until 1917
Then is the whole of the North African campaign owed to the French then, who won the day at Bir-Hakeim, and therefore prepared the Brits for El-Alamein?

Nice troll
1.5 million Germans, 1,01 million Frenchmen and barely 60,000 Brits fought at the First Marne
Britain barely contributed to the Western Front until the Somme in late 1916 (and even then, France still made up 75% of allied forces)

They weren't defeated yet, but victory was basically impossible once the USA entered the war. The German government wisely chose to surrender so that their country wouldn't be subjected to the same treatment they gave to France

They were starving

>Was their army really defeated by the end of the war?
Yes. But there is confusion.

The reason for the confusion is this.

The German army by the end of WW1 was very good, the remaining men were hardened veterans, the military was expert in trench warfare, they were pioneers of the assault tactics we'd see in WW2, they were probably the best army of WW1 in terms of actual fighting ability and skill.

But........ the food was running out, the supplies were running out, they'd always been behind on materiel, even mid war the allies could run about in the open and only face token artillery fire while if the Germans did it they'd be annihilated. The situation was fucked and could not continue.

>The German government wisely chose to surrender so that their country wouldn't be subjected to the same treatment they gave to France
Yeah, about that

>Britain barely contributed to the Western Front until the Somme in late 1916 (and even then, France still made up 75% of allied forces)
Britain was a massive power and major influence in WW1 you cheese eating surrender monkey.

>implying the blockade isn't what won the fucking war

>That nigga with the shovel

JUST

The blockade was only useful because Germany was exhausting itself in a land war, and that land was was only possible because of France
Had it only been Germany vs Britain, the German police would have arrested the British army upon landing near Hamburg and the rest of the "war" would have consisted in a British naval blockade rendered ineffective by the fact Germany could have easily sustained themselves without importing anything had it not been for the land war
Sure they would have been deprived of tea and coffee but that's about it

>I wish I was at home eating Bratwurst
>My feet hurt
>These bombs are too loud
>I wonder if Hans is still alive
>Why do I have to have the spade?

Dont be so mad at people calling you out on your delusion Nigel. Go be butthurt about France somewhere else.

>Then
How close was Bir-hakim to Paris?The marne sure was...

Yes, strategically.

The British contribution to the Marne was extremely minimal
Your best claim is the Somme (and even there, half the troops were French)

Best close quarter weapon they had, the bayonets had a habit of getting stuck.

Didnt they stop Von Klucks army for 24 hours?
Creating the gap between the german armies that the French exploited, thus stopping the charge on Paris

Your interpretation of minimal needs some educating

The diesel engine kind of made it impossible for them to win.

Are you refering to that?

>Meanwhile, as the German 1st Army (under General Alexander von Kluck) and 2nd Army (under General Karl von Bülow) approached Paris, they began to swerve to the south-east, away from Paris, to envelop the left flank of the retreating French armies, but exposing their own right flank to the Allies. By 3 September, Joffre had become aware of the positions of the German armies. On 3 September, Joffre replaced 5th Army commander General Charles Lanrezac (deemed too cautious and lacking in "offensive spirit") with General Louis Franchet d'Espèrey.

>On 4 September, he made plans to halt the French and British withdrawal and attack the German right flank with the Sixth Army (150,000 men) and the BEF (70,000 men). The attack was set to begin on the morning of 6 September.

>In this move against the French threat from the west, von Kluck ignored the Franco-British forces advancing from the south against his left flank and opened a 50-kilometre (30 mi) gap in the German lines between the 1st Army and the 2nd Army on its left (east). Allied air reconnaissance observed German forces moving north to face the Sixth Army and discovered the gap.[10]

Basically, the small ass BEF numbering 70,000 men did its fucking job while helped by 150,000 French, and all this meanwhile the 850,000 other French troops involved in the battle were also doing their fucking job
Only an insane ammount of self-importance can lead you Brits to believe you were the most essential piece (or even an essential piece at all) in that battle

Sure they were. In the last 2 years of the war, at that time they finally became a relevant fighting force

>they were probably the best army of WW1 in terms of actual fighting ability and skill.

I don't buy into that, I'd say 1916-17 was when the Germans were at their best. Following Operation Michael the German Army was falling apart. Rawlinson summed it up nicely when referring to the breakthrough of the Hindenburg Line

>"Had the Boche [Germans] not shown marked signs of deterioration during the past month, I should never have contemplated attacking the Hindenburg line. Had it been defended by the Germans of two years ago, it would certainly have been impregnable…."

By 1918 it was probably either the British or French who were the best army in the field. The French were by now incredibly experienced fighting the Germans (their commanders by 1918 were probably the best on the Allied side) and had managed to hold the majority of the Western Front for some time. Meanwhile the British Army had gone from being pretty much irrelevant until 1916 to being capable of conducting mass offensives coordinating and combining all aspects of modern warfare (infantry, artillery, tanks and air power). Compare this with Operation Michael, which although achieved successes on a tactical level, it was completely confused and misguided and achieved practically nothing strategic.

Yes, that

>‘Our first battles is a heavy, unheard of heavy defeat, and against the English, the English we had laughed at.’
-Walter Bloehm, a reserve officer in the German 12th Brandenburg Grenadier Regiment

>reserve officer

Exactly
Reserve units were pitted against the BEF (who covered like 5% of the front in that battle) while more serious units were pitted against the French

The leader of the Kiel Mutiny was Karl Artelt, who received his Maxist revolutionary instruction from Erich Weinert. Both were members of the socialist wing of the SPD and later Spartacus League which were founded and headed by Rosa Luxemburg (who was Jewish) and Karl Liebknecht (whose mother was Jewish and whose father was a friend of Karl Marx). So inadvertently yes, there is some truth to that statement.

>Exactly
>Reserve units
Oh dear oh dear, you obviously have no idea about the composition of the imperial german army do you?
Not that im surprised, every one of your posts has shoed crass ignorance French army had taken 1 million casualties and was in full retreat, do you know who handed the germans their first defeat (and in the words of an eye-witness, a "heavy defeat")

the BEF
the mad minute rifle fire

I think that guy was trolling (either that or he's retarded), but still you're an imbecile if you think that the 70,000 Brits who fought at the First Marne under the direction of French high command were more important the the victory that the 1 million and 10,000 French soldiers who also fought in that battle
And that anecdotal quote from a literally-who officer who happened to be part of the random unit that was fighting in the very small part of the battle that was covered by the BEF and didn't realize they were taking their strategic orders from the French doesn't change that fact

>under the direction of French high command
The BEF was not under the command of the French, but they were commanded by General French

Sorry, but your wrong

There were enough soldiers to rush back home and slaughter the workers who had the gall to represent their political interests

>do you know who handed the germans their first defeat

The Belgians, at the Battle of Haelen
And you mean about the first relevant defeat, then the French (with minor British assistance) at the First Marne
And if you mean who first defeated the Germans during the First Marne, it was the French Sixth Army at the Ourcq

No matter how you look at it, your delusions and self-importance are unwarranted

General French was following orders from the French high command, thus ultimately putting the BEF under their order

See the greentext there , General Louis Franchet d'Espèrey (and Joffre) is the one who decided what the BEF had to do and where they had to go

I just realized that, ironically, the British have a Napoleon complex when it comes to war records.

...

No
The French did not command the BEF, wiki is wrong

And they're incredibly butthurt about France for some reason (pic related)
So of course when the topic links both warfare and France, it quickly becomes a shitfest of British rage

>wiki is wrong

Top kek
It's okay Nigel, it's okay

Nice failure at proving me wrong

Stabbed in the back,young men sent to die by queens and kings,only to be dragged into a even worse war later on
Rip yermany

Did you yourself prove anything beside saying "wiki is wrong"?
The French high command ordered an attack on German positions by the French Sixth Army and the BEF, and they attacked
Therefore, they followed French orders (not that they could do anything else, being a small irrelevant force of 70,000 in a battle involving millions)
The end

Nice photoshop
But in reality...

If you actually read about the war in 1914, you would know the BEF was not subordinate to the French army, French and Joffe had meeting where they ended up cursing at each other, French acted independently and ended up at Mons while the French army retreated around him,does that sound like he was following French orders?

The army was falling apart by the end. Even if the country hadn't surrendered when it did, the next major offensive by the Entente would almost certainly have broken through and ended the war anyway.

>If you actually read about the war in 1914, you would know the BEF was not subordinate to the French army

Not officially, but technically, they ended up following French orders a lot of times (like for exemple at the First Marne) due to the fact their ridicously small size didn't allow them to do anything worthwhile alone

Oh yeah, those two old fat jewish dudes are totally shirking their duties.

>A contributing factor to the sense of being backstabbed was that the German army played no role in the peace talks. A surrender was agreed upon solely by politicians
Deliberately so in order to shift blame to the socialists.

Holy shit, that fucking butthurt. Fuck Anglos tbqh

Thats very western front focused.

The Brits fought on more fronts than any other of the allied nations and had a bigger influence on the outcome of the war than any other nation. Whilst the french undoubtalbly carried the weight of the fighting on the weastern front for the first two years they would have been completely defeated without the assistance of the british. By the last year of the war the brits where conducting more operations than the rest of the allies on the western front combined.

In the east they were also primarily responsible for the defeat of the Ottomon Empire and also conducted operations in africa.

Anything that doesn't fit my world view is shit posting.

The Western Front was by far the most important one, followed by the Eastern Front where neither Britain nor France fought and then by the Balkans theater where France contributed more than Britain

Yes, Britain contributed more than France on the Middle Eastern and African theaters, but fact is that these theaters were barely relevant to the big picture

Says the uncultured swine

Wow are British really trying to claim that chasing the Germans and losing every battle in Africa is actually useful. Britain has only won wars as part of a coalition (where other nations did the heavy lifting) or by beating up tribals. Get fucked britain you are the most pathetic european country today. Even Belgium is more relevant and useful

>Even Belgium is more relevant and useful
This is your brain on /int/.

Britain was able to attack defenseless colonies and they raised the specter of islamic nationalists to rise up against the Ottoman empire, which is winning by the dirtiest tricks possible.

It was the turks who foolishly declared war on the allies, and lost their empire for it

Way to sidestep the issue. You created ISIS. You created the Mahdi, you created Saudi Arabia, you created modern militant islam.

>Way to sidestep the issue
heh, and thought this thread was about WW1

And Ronald Regan made the conditions for Al Queda to cause 9/11 so what?

The blockade was useful in that Germany imported 15-20% of its food before the war. As long as France didn't collapse, Germany was unlikely to win.

The purpose of learning history is to prepare for the present. Islam will take everything you hold dear.

>the largest being the will of German people to even fight.
This x1000. For a more modern example look at France in World War II- despite some of the most numerous armoured vehicles in Europe and a strong defensive line the French submitted to Germany fairly swiftly in the Battle of France simply because their will was crushed by early German victories.

God damn that photo is depressing
Even the candles are drooping