>"Undoubtedly this is the most stupid, senseless and unnecessary war of modern times. It is a war not wanted by Germany, I can assure you, but it was forced on us, and the fact that we were so effectually prepared to defend ourselves is now being used as an argument to convince the world that we desired conflict." - Crown Prince Wilhelm, 1914
Was he correct?
*invades Belgium*
>I had to violate the Treaty of London in self-defense, we dindu nuffin
Eternal Anglo manoeuvred the Russians and Germans to destroy each other. All Europeans need to team up to destroy the Island Jew
I don't buy the entire argument but invading Belgium really was the best option for Germany to try and gain the advantage in a war on both fronts. It's fairly reasonable to think that occupying Belgium is a small price to pay for not being defeated in a conflict that would determine the course of the century.
It's pretty fucking ridiculous to paint yourself as a victim when you've violated a neutral state you signed a treaty to not violate
Suppose Germany is the victim of an international alliance out to destroy her prosperity and subjugate her people.
As the leader of Germany do you
A) Follow the Schlieffen plan to decisively strike at France through Belgium and quickly turn a potentially disastrous 2-front war into a much more winnable single front conflict
or
B) Try to win a war against a giant in the east and one of the traditional great European powers in the west
Of course in reality the Schlieffen plan didn't work and the Russian performance was pretty overestimated (though their initial mobilisation speed did catch the Germans off guard).
I choose C) don't go to war for Austria's Balkan bullshit
*Launches preemptive invasion of neutral country in self defense*
>implying the anglo wouldn't have joined anyways
>muh balance of power
Old European tactics of winning by speed and decisive battles.
Just proved how terribly outdated was that idea for that war
Read the quote in OP, the claim Germany was somehow "forced" to join WW1 is fucking fantasy, they could have stopped several times in the run up by telling Austria to pull its fucking head in but chose not to
But you guaranteed them and if you don't help the Austrians no one will trust you internationally anymore
*Gets millions senselessly slaughtered for national pride*
Only if by Germany he means some idealised notion of it and not the his Father and his ministry who literally pressured Austria into declaring war and then preemptively invaded France and Russia
>abandoning your one trust-worthy ally
Also another noted feature of German military thinking was fear of how the balance of power would shift over time. Russia was thought to only get stronger with time as she industrialised and as such there were considerations over forcing a war early when things still looked more favourable for Germany. Though that sort of aggressive pre-emptive war-making is definitely not innocent nor the actions of a victim.
From what I read Austria was doing everything on their own despite the agreements known by the diplomats, and almost made official, between Russia and Germany, Russia and France and Germany(some days after the war broke out) and that England was going to be a fucking pain in the ass.
+retarded railway system which destroyed any chances of a blitz in Serbia
+retarded chief of the army, passionated by exterminating everyone outsite of Austria in the empire
Germany would have won the war had they stuck to defense in the West (maybe occupying Luxembourg for the rail junction but leaving Belgium alone) while rapidly invading Russia with the bulk of their army.
Russia was not the objective, both state leaders had good relations, so mobilising a defence in the East and pushing boldly in the West was going to solve the problem.
Remember that they were used to quick wars and that was not going to be a quick one like the franco-prussian or the austro-prussian wars
The dual alliance only guaranteed Germany to join Austria in defensive wars.
Their image and honour would have been upheld just fine.
>Germany would have won the war had they stuck to defense in the West
When you're being slowly blockaded to death, just sitting around and letting the enemy literally starve your armies isn't going to help the situation. Going on the offensive was the only option.
First of all that's counterfactual and unknowable secondly it's not very relevant because the subject is what people actually did and thought. At the time people still feared the Russian giant and the manpower and resources it could potentially mobilise, despite the empire's embarrassments in Crimea and the far east. Experiences from the Franco-Prussian and Napoleonic wars (where Russia essentially came out as the top dog beside Britain) made a quick victory against France a reasonable goal.
A rapid advance into Russia in August probably wouldn't have been a sound idea. Also another front where Napoleon would have influenced the approach.
The invasion of Belgium was based on a series of debatable assumptions Germany firmly held:
>offense obviously superior to defense in all ways foreverially
>Britain will attack no matter what Germany does--German conduct is completely irrelevant to who gets involved
>France must be dealt with before Russia
If you believe those points as most of the German military did, then going through Belgium is the only answer to the situation of 1914.
Why did they think that France had to be dealt with first?
>>Britain will attack no matter what Germany does--German conduct is completely irrelevant to who gets involved
Do many people disagree with this? It seems obvious to me in hindsight
They thought France would be beaten easily like they were in 1871, and they believed the "Russia stronk" meme 100%
Because France actually can be dealt with quickly. It's far closer to Paris than to Moscow, and Paris was far more important to the French (not just sentimentally but as the centre for everything) than Moscow was to the Russians. In the Franco-Prussian war they had been able to decisively strike at France and end the war quickly. In the Napoleonic Wars when France invaded Russia they were simply denied decisive battle and when they came for the capital the Russians simply abandoned it and kept fighting.
*though Moscow wasn't actually the capital but it was an extremely important city
"A World Undone" makes a fairly convincing argument that the Liberal Party which controlled the British government at the time preferred complete neutrality up until Belgium entered the picture. The Conservatives definitely wanted to enter the war immediately, but they did not control the government at this point in time. And even after Belgium did enter the picture, it was a very close vote.
That is hindsight though. Germany was neither certain of her ability to win in a two-fronts war nor would they have been willing to sacrifice as many people as would have been necessary to do so.
The Schlieffen-Plan served the purpose of avoiding that kind of bloodshed.
In fact: all continental powers had offensive military planning because they all were under the impression that their societies would collapse and revolt before bearing the losses such a conflict would bring and thus had to end it quickly. And once the losses were approaching numbers never seen before the dead were the justification to carry on.
>And once the losses were approaching numbers never seen before the dead were the justification to carry on.
I've also read that the soldiers themselves lost that cheery Christmas truce spirit from the beginning of the war as it went on not just because of anti-fraternisation efforts from above but also because of the reality of the pressures war puts on you and seeing your comrades die. Basically soldiers became more hateful and dehumanised.
>You are teleported back in time to Germany, circa 1913
>You inform Willy that Germany is about to enter a war that Austria starts
>You warn him that the Central Powers are utterly crushed, losing an entire generation of men as well as substantial territory and production capacity, and are forced the demilitarize and pay outrageous amounts of money in tribute to France
>Tell him that despite this, Germany is very nearly able to conquer all of Western Europe a mere 30 years later by an innovative use of armored vehicles, aircraft, submarines, and small unit infantry tactics
What would happen if he chose to wait? What if the Russian Revolution didn't happen until 1930 or later?
It's not entirely unfeasible that Russia would have been able to reform. At least in the economic sphere, which is of course undivorcably interlinked with everything else, serious modernisation efforts were made under Witte and Stolypin and with the help of the French.
The only reason why Hitler got as far as he did is because Britain and France kept under-estimating him because of his low social status. To them, he was a mere corporal, practically an insect. They wouldn't have made the same mistakes with Wilhelm.
Reminder that Napoleon's disastrous invasion of Russia was still fresh in the mind of Europeans (only 100 years ago) and Russia had modernized a lot since 1812, German generals were terrified that the russians would be unstoppable once they improved their infrastructure. Before the war the French offered to loan the Russians up to 25 million francs for development of the railways.
France on the other hand isn't commonly viewed as a military threat now, but prior to 1871 it had been the dominant military of Europe since the middle ages, 100 years prior France pretty much took on the entire continent and almost won
2.5 billion francs*
>going through Belgium is the only answer to the situation of 1914.
there's also the don't let your retarded ally invade serbia for no reason option
You also forgot
>war is inevitable and the longer we wait the worse off we are
he looks kinda like Himmler
really makes you think huh
I would tell him to never use U-boats under any circumstances and to create an independent Luftwaffe.
I would have actually followed the Schlieffen Plan and raised the amount of troops he said it would take to accomplish
that way the tiny degree of success it did achieve wouldn't be contingent on Hidenburg annihilating the Russia army that already mobilized
No, he looks handsome. Himmler looks like a mutant.