Posted on 07/27/2014 2:07:46 PM PDT by afraidfortherepublic
One hundred years ago this week, Tsar Nicholas II of Russia and Kaiser Wilhelm of Germany exchanged a series of telegrams to try to stop the rush to a war that neither of them wanted. They signed their notes “Nicky” and “Willy.”
Cousins who vacationed together, hunted together and enjoyed dressing up in the uniforms of each other’s military officers when sailing on their yachts, these two great-great-grandsons of Paul I of Russia wrote to each other in English, affirming their mutual interests and outlining an agreement that would have resolved the crisis on terms acceptable to both rulers.
Yet only three days after the tsar and kaiser’s initial exchange, Germany declared war on Russia, and World War I was underway. Tragically, these leaders were caught in what Henry Kissinger has called a “doomsday machine”: a network of interlocking alliances and military mobilization timetables that allowed the march of events to overcome their best efforts.
The telegrams between them were discovered by an American journalist in the Russian government archives in 1919 and caused a sensation when they were first published in 1920. A century after they were written, they are vivid reminders of the perils of crisis management — and the wisdom of preventive diplomacy to resolve challenges like today’s territorial dispute in eastern Ukraine before they become crises that suck great powers into confrontations.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
WaPo agitprop in motion.
Next article : How Hussein could have prevented WWIII, “if only those damn Jews would march into the sea.”
The reality was that both Germany and Russia were governed by short sighted politicians. Neither royal family had absolute power. The Russian Czar had more influence but could not contradict the politicians unless he had a working consensus .Russia was doomed after Stolypin was assassinated.
Kaisher still was a***hole to his personal family
The reality was that international banking elites knocked off the Tsar, never returning money in his foreign accounts to Russia. Hundreds of millions.
The Russian revolution was engineered and funded by UK/US financial elites.
Just look up American International Corporation at 120 Broadway in NYC.
Jacob Schiff: millions to the Bolsheviks.
Rockefeller: bigtime supporter of Soviet Russia.
etc.
Nicholas, Wilhelm and George were cousins through Victoria. All three were totally incompetent to rule. George is saved by history as a constitutional monarch who was well served by his ministers
Inbred degenerate disasters each
Stolypin’s agrarian policies were proving so successful that a despairing Lenin wrote from exile,
“Do not say with certainty that reformed capitalism in Russia is impossible. It IS possible!!”
How ironic that Stolypin’s name was later applied to the railcars that carried tens of thousands of political prisoners into the Gulag.
“caught in what Henry Kissinger has called a “doomsday machine”: a network of interlocking alliances and military mobilization timetables “
Not only were the Kaiser and Czar cousins, George V or Britain was the Kaisers first cousin. The house of Windsor was founded by King George V by royal proclamation on 17 July 1917, when he changed the name of the British Royal Family from the German Saxe-Coburg and Gotha (a branch of the House of Wettin) to the English Windsor.
Back then we weren’t in these retarded alliances. We listened to George Washington. We managed to stay out of the meatgrinder and moneysuck for most of the war.
Today we seek alliances everywhere. They do nearly nothing for us except ensure that we get to play in every war someone decides to throw. And new world order types love them. But our “allies”, including the Brits, are generally without value to the USA. They provide nothing to us and entangle us in all kinds of garbage.
Though they are good quality here and there, they simply do not carry the load.
Today, alliances let the world decide when Americans must go to war. Like in Ukraine, Syria, Libya, Somalia, etc etc etc...
Hell, even Vietnam and the Philippines wants to ally with us again now so we can fight their wars with China over the Spratleys and other oil islands.
Prince Charles??? Thankfully Prince Charle's son Prince William, married a commoner and not someone of royal blood. He and his wife have been a class act despite the media.
The reality is WW1 was a family squabble between cousins.
No country has allies, only ‘’interests’’.
In truth, nobody wanted World War I in the form it ended up assuming. Nobody could even have imagined it. Too many wanted just enough conflict to satisfy their needs and assumed that it could be stopped when those were satisfied. The most ambitious of these intentions were those of Germany, whose leaders (not just the Kaiser) felt that a smashing victory in France would allow them to redeploy eastward in time to face the Russians in a one-front war. That, of course, presupposed a smashing victory in France along the lines of the Schlieffen Plan, whose execution they blew. And so they got what they wanted least, a two-front war with a growing list of combatants.
Christopher Clark describes the diplomatic dance leading up to the war in (tedious, I'm sorry) detail. What impresses me is that the actual cast of diplomats was (1) very small, (2) entrenched and self-preserving, and (3) entirely unavailable at critical moments. Barbara Tuchman has pointed out that mobilization, once started, tended to be an all-or-nothing proposition. Could the war have been prevented? Possibly. Could it have been stopped at a more manageable stage than it assumed? Once the invasion of Belgium began, I doubt it. Could Britain have stayed out, accepting the results in France come what they may? Yes, I think they might have done that, but it was a runaway train at that point and it is doubtful if only one brakeman could have stopped it.
Could the United States have stayed out? Absolutely. Unfortunately, at that point in the war (1917) the result would likely have been years more of bloody stalemate rather than the Armistice that ensued. Did the United States have diplomatic clout or presence sufficient to have stopped the thing in 1914? Absolutely not.
There is, incidentally, more literature on WWI in more languages and from more viewpoints than any human being can read in a lifetime. But I get the strong feeling that if one could ask any of the principals in 1914 how it would work out nearly everyone would describe it as a temporary descent into yet another of the recurring European wars instead of the plunge off a cliff it turned out to be.
He and his wife have been a class act despite the media.
***
Well, now that they have cleaned up their act by not shacking up anymore.
But Woodrow Wilson wanted it.
“The most ambitious of these intentions were those of Germany, whose leaders (not just the Kaiser) felt that a smashing victory in France would allow them to redeploy eastward in time to face the Russians in a one-front war.”
Germany didn’t want war any more than anyone else; they knew they were in the most precarious position of the major belligerents. Ironically, today they have what Hitler (not the Kaiser) had as his goal - domination of the European continent.
that is so sad
“Could the United States have stayed out? Absolutely. Unfortunately, at that point in the war (1917) the result would likely have been years more of bloody stalemate rather than the Armistice that ensued.”
Before our entry into the war, Germany had practically won. Russia had surrendered (freeing a million+ troops for the western front), and French troops had mutinied. The impending Central Powers’ victory was WHY WE COULDN’T STAY OUT.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.