First World War

Re: First World War

Hannah Wynne Richards — Mon, 11 Aug 2014 15:13:12 GMT

The dreadful slaughter which is currently occurring in Northern Iraq may be considered an ongoing effect of the First World War. This area used to be part of the Ottoman Empire. The Sultan may not have been the most enlightened of rulers - but he was light years ahead of either Saddam Hussein or ISIS.

Wynne

Re: First World War

J G Wray — Tue, 05 Aug 2014 19:24:42 GMT

bella detesta matribus - Horace ~ 2000 yrs before WW1 - has much changed since?

Re: First World War

Evelyn Barbour-Hill — Tue, 05 Aug 2014 18:42:05 GMT

[quote user="Malcolm Ness"] Remember that at that stage, the Saxe-Coburg-Gothas had yet felt the need to change their name to Windsor and start pretending that they were true-blue Englishmen [/quote]

Ahem.

No pretence involved.

The monarch's "surname" was Saxe-Coburg-Gotha because Queen Victoria married Albert. Albert did a great deal for this country and his loyalty to it is not in the slightest doubt, even though accusations of disloyalty and treachery were made in the populist press whenever things went a bit wrong for us internationally (as they were, in turn, made against George V, even by people who should have known better such as the nasty lecherous Welsh windbag Lloyd George). One of Albert's last acts even while he was horribly ill was to avert a war between us and the Union side of the USA. While we are playing at "What If" , it's interesting to speculate how different history might have been if Albert had lived. Such is the power of Typhoid Fever.

It's rather hard being a monarch. George V had to decide not to rescue his cousin and family from the Bolsheviks, for political reasons. Our own Queen had to smile and shake hands with the men who murdered Lord Mountbatten (and a good few other people).

[quote user="Malcolm Ness"]the majority of the "national" newspapers referred to "England's" declaration of war - a continuing attitude that I know stuck in the craw of some of the very many non-English Britons who fought.[/quote]

Ye-es... but it was commonplace to refer to this country as "England" rather than "Great Britain"

Personally I think Germany would have attacked France again sooner or later anyway; the Austro-Hungarian and Ottoman Empires would have collapsed in bloodshed sooner or later anyway. (I may be wrong, but I think it is only the British who have, relatively peacefully, dismantled an Empire and given independence to each part one by one).

Wynne: the Russian Revolution was taking place anyway . Yes, if there had been no War at all, the Germans would not have bothered to enable the takeover by the bloody (in every sense) minority Bolsheviks, but the participation of this country in the War would have had no influence on their decision to employ that tactic.

Meanwhile:

[quote user="Gillian Mostyn"]

We can all make decisions and come to conclusions with the benefit of hindsight.

In 1914 they didn't have that privilege. They couldn't even imagine what was ahead of them. Nobody would have anticipated the bloodshed, dreadful suffering and loss of life that followed.

It is only appropriate to remember those who made the ultimate sacrifice for their country - and give them our undying thanks. Saying it was a waste or unnecessary is disrespectful of what those men and women did for us.

[/quote]

Yes.

We will remember them.

Re: First World War

Hannah Wynne Richards — Tue, 05 Aug 2014 16:14:19 GMT

Bob and Mark

The Kaiser was a vast improvement on Hitler, and the Tsar a vast improvement on either Lenin or Stalin

Wynne

Re: First World War

Hannah Wynne Richards — Tue, 05 Aug 2014 14:44:56 GMT

Bob I have already said that Britain honoured it's treaty in coming to the defence of Belgium.

Malcolm Far from seeing the First World War purely through the eyes of the victors, I'm saying that Serbia (one of the victorious countries) was the one initially at fault.

Serbia gave support to evil criminals who assassinated the heir to the Austro-Hungarian throne.

Austro-Hungary over-reacted, in exactly the same way as Bush/Blair did after 9/11, and went to war with Serbia.

After that everyone acted honourably (with 1 exception - which brought us in)

Russia honoured it's treaty to protect Serbia (although, in the circumstances, Serbias initial bad behaviour surely justified not doing so)

Germany honoured it's treaty to protect Austro-Hungary

France honoured it's treaty to protect Russia

Germany invaded Brlgium (the only non-honourable act) so as to get into France via the side door

We honoured our treaty to defend Belgium

16 million dead people, and 10 million dead animals resulted

Wynne.

Re: First World War

Hannah Wynne Richards — Tue, 05 Aug 2014 14:30:41 GMT

I admire the courage of the individuals. I deplore the terrorists who caused the mess, and the folly of the politicians who weren't able to find a diplomatic solution.

Wynne

Re: First World War

Malcolm Ness — Tue, 05 Aug 2014 14:25:45 GMT

[quote user="Gillian Mostyn"]It is only appropriate to remember those who made the ultimate sacrifice for their country - and give them our undying thanks. Saying it was a waste or unnecessary is disrespectful of what those men and women did for us.[/quote]

It is more than enough in my eyes that they were prepared to give up their lives for something they believed in. That is awesome and something that can not be enhanced or diminished by any kind of post-hoc analysis that might suggest that their beliefs were not well-informed or even the whole truth. History is written by the rich, the powerful, the victors and our current understanding of the events leading up to that war and the events of the war itself are coloured by that fact. The trouble with "our" version of the rights and wrongs of wars we have won is that it necessitates the losers being the bad guys and while an argument can be made for that in terms of geo-politics, anyone who has read Erich Maria Remarque's novel All Quiet on the Western Front (written by and about German foot soldiers in the first world war trenches) will struggle to recognise in the characters doing the fighting on the German side anything significantly different from Sapper Davies and his kind.

Re: First World War

Gillian Mostyn — Tue, 05 Aug 2014 12:58:16 GMT

We can all make decisions and come to conclusions with the benefit of hindsight.

In 1914 they didn't have that privilege. They couldn't even imagine what was ahead of them. Nobody would have anticipated the bloodshed, dreadful suffering and loss of life that followed.

Re: First World War

Bob Russell — Tue, 05 Aug 2014 12:48:48 GMT

[quote user="Hannah Wynne Richards"]

George. If Sapper Davies had died in the Second World War, I'd be in total agreement with you - National-Socialism was evil,and had to be stopped. If he'd died in the First World War, I've got mixed feelings. Britain acted correctly in honouring a treaty with Belgium - but, at the same time we were fighting on the same side as Serbia - which was the country originally at fault.

Still, this one soldier deserves our respect.

Wynne

[/quote]

Do you not believe a free Belgium was worth fighting for? The German army invaded an independent country that had done it no harm. A massive number of Belgians became displaced.

Sadly aggressors tend to listen to strength and need to be fought.

The world was a different place and King and Country was considered worth fighting and dying for. Perhaps Britain learned from WW1 that King was less important than country. National Socialism was evil but the Kaiser was hardly the most benign of people.

Re: First World War

Hannah Wynne Richards — Tue, 05 Aug 2014 12:35:12 GMT

Still, this one soldier deserves our respect.

Wynne

Re: First World War

Malcolm Ness — Tue, 05 Aug 2014 12:25:53 GMT

[quote user="Evelyn Barbour-Hill"]The Germans saw a perfect chance to give the Schlieffen Plan[/quote]

Not disagreeing but it is easy to lose sight of the fact that "The Germans" were not the masses of German people but rather a select few aristos and politicos who, to a very large extent were in fact "their" Germans rather than "Our" Germans. Remember that at that stage, the Saxe-Coburg-Gothas had yet felt the need to change their name to Windsor and start pretending that they were true-blue Englishmen (that came later when "our" proles started killing Dachshunds!!) and despite the fact that the declaration of war came some very long time after the political union of this island, the majority of the "national" newspapers referred to "England's" declaration of war - a continuing attitude that I know stuck in the craw of some of the very many non-English Britons who fought. History, to a very large extent, is written and filtered by the wealthy and the powerful and at best it is only ever partly true.

Re: First World War

George Cooper — Tue, 05 Aug 2014 11:33:48 GMT

Our customary night time constitutional takes us (that's the Dawg, and a few cats) around the lanes among cattle and sheep, by the hard-working farm, and back through the neighbouring church's graveyard. It is largely filled with centuries-old headstones, often covered in ivy, leaning at crazy angles and sometimes so weather-beaten that the inscriptions from generations ago are unreadable, as well as graves that have current links, occasionally tended and fresh flowers laid - and a single simple stark sobering silent memorial to a young man from the parish who gave his life for his country. Wrapped in my own thoughts as the midnight hour approached, I became aware that both cats and the dog were pulling me in a different direction, towards a yellow light. Someone, bless them, had not forgotten, and had taken the trouble to negotiate the obstacles in order to light a candle on Sapper E Davies' solitary grave. That guttering candle somehow affected me powerfully, and for a few moments this odd tableau of a 65 yo VS, with the objects of his life and work beside him gave pause for thought - and as I reflected, I gave thanks that this 31 year old soldier, and countless like him, had ensured that we could live the life we wanted, where we wanted. Whatever the grand origins of either conflict, this young man from a remote village in the mid-Welsh hills and his simple white headstone brought it home to one who is too young to know anything about either war, personally.

Re: First World War

Hannah Wynne Richards — Tue, 05 Aug 2014 11:09:48 GMT

I still thinkthat without the trigger factor of Franz Ferdinand's assassination it might have been prevented.

Wynne

Re: First World War

Bob Russell — Tue, 05 Aug 2014 09:25:41 GMT

It was inevitable considering the political environment of the time. I suppose in the long run it was worth it because we live in a pretty civilised Europe which has (eventually) learned a lot of lessons.

Of course it could all have evolved without such bloodshed but that is not how the human mind works. The Ukraine shows we are not there yet and the middle east shows some cultures still behave in a similar way to Europe in the middle ages.

At some point perhaps people will learn to talk (ad nauseam as in the EU) at least this keeps them from fighting!

The ceremony at Westminster Abbey last night was heart breaking because it brought everything down to a personal level which is where the real tragedy is. It was not countries fighting and dying, it was real, ordinary people.

Without WW1 I would not be here so perhaps I have a degree of bias. My grandfather survived the second battle of Ypres and the battle of Amiens (fighting for the Canadians) and was very badly injured. Whilst in hospital he met my grandmother who was nursing! This is the war for me, not politicians bickering. My biggest regret was we only got him talking about it once and I was really too young to understand the importance of the conversation, both for us but to him!

I did learn that he could be hilariously crude and the facts of life were the same then as now!!

We will be off to see the Tower of London poppies and I will be ordering one.

Re: First World War

Mark Hedberg — Tue, 05 Aug 2014 08:53:46 GMT

I agree that the war wasn't worth it - but the Russian revolution was a question of time. The Tsars had spent the previous thirty years since the assassination of Alexander II trying to stamp out unrest and discord. If the revolution hadn't happened in 1917 it would have happened sooner or later.

Re: First World War

Hannah Wynne Richards — Tue, 05 Aug 2014 07:46:45 GMT

16 million people, 10 million animals killed.

Were the results worth it?

In my opinion definitely not.

Without the War the Russian revolution, and 70 years of brutal communist oppression might not have happened.

Without the War, Germany might not have elected the evil National-Socialists - so the Holocaust, and the Second World War might not have happened.

Wynne

Re: First World War

Evelyn Barbour-Hill — Mon, 04 Aug 2014 18:23:26 GMT

Wynne:

The Germans saw a perfect chance to give the Schlieffen Plan a light dusting-off (it was sitting ready on a shelf) and invade France – violating Belgium in the process.

Tragic? Yes. Ghastly, awful? Yes.

Futile? No. Utterly intolerable? No.

Re: First World War

Hannah Wynne Richards — Mon, 04 Aug 2014 18:14:56 GMT

Micheal. Despite the Kaiser's determination to expand his navy, it might have remained empty posturing, if Serbia hadn't behaved most unethically in training/equiping evil terrorists to assassinate a neighbouring royal. Everything escalated from that.

TRAGIC, TRAGIC, TRAGIC.

Wynne

Re: First World War

Arlo Guthrie — Mon, 04 Aug 2014 16:05:51 GMT

Not normally a big fan of art installations, but this is incredible:

The Tower of London pours 888,246 poppies from a window to honour WWI's British deaths. Stunning. pic.twitter.com/D7xcHNjHI6
— Historical Pics (@HistoricalPics) August 3, 2014

Re: First World War

Michael Woodhouse — Mon, 04 Aug 2014 15:50:42 GMT

I agree with you a terrible waste of life. I think it was necessary in a way as I don't speak German and without the world wars I guess I would.