Because they needed to repeat their lessons on how to salute properly.
Posted on 07/21/2023 10:40:19 AM PDT by DallasBiff
Under the Treaty of Versailles, the German emperor was supposed to be tried as a war criminal. Why wasn't he?
The accusations were explosive: a head of state had not only begun an illegal war but egged his troops on to a series of horrific atrocities that left thousands dead and an entire continent in ruins. By then, the accused was one of history’s most hated and debated figures, a monarch known for making erratic decisions and doubling down on his sometimes inexplicable actions.
There was just one problem: The accused, Wilhelm II of Germany, couldn’t testify. The accused had been dead for 75 years
It could have been the trial of the century—if it had been conducted a century before. The trial of Wilhelm II, Germany’s emperor between 1888 and 1918, was a moot one, conducted by historians and legal experts grappling with one of the great mysteries of 20th-century history. Was Wilhelm II guilty of war crimes?
It’s a question that was never answered during Wilhelm’s lifetime. Though the Allies accused him of starting one of history’s bloodiest wars and violating international law, and his troops of committing barbaric acts, he never stood trial. Today, these accusations are remembered as the first stirrings of a modern conception of war crimes. But at the end of World War I, Wilhelm’s responsibility for the bloodshed was a hotly contested—and ultimately unresolved—issue.
(Excerpt) Read more at history.com ...
Something was going to set it off.
Austria-Hungary wanted war with Serbia, period. It was just a matter for finding the right casus belli.
Likewise, you had a lot of pressure from the German military to take on Russia, while they still could.
My big question is, outside of that, why was it Britain’s (and subsequently our) problem?
If Britain wasn’t obliged to defend Belgium, it could have changed the entire course of history.
I would add at last 8 months of the war...the death rate was a major topic. The SPD party said ‘no’ around August to another draft, and ordered peace talks. At this point, the Kaiser was a non-player.
The Kaiser would exit to the Netherlands under a protective deal, which the Brits, French and US were bitter about.
The war ended on 11 November in a unclear way, with German soldiers walking home, with their weapons....creating the path for civil conflict.
> An interesting “What If”, had we allowed the German Monarchy to continue. <
Wilhelm II made the same mistake as did Russia’s Tsar Nicholas II and Italy’s King Victor Emmanuel III. All three became tainted by wartime losses. And all three refused to abdicate until it was too late.
Earlier abdications in favor of more popular royals might have saved the thrones. Then maybe no Hitler and no Lenin. But those guys just couldn’t pull the trigger. Ego above all.
What did Serbia give Austria-Hungary?
To wit: the Black Hand was a Brown Shirts-like organization directly funded by Serbia, and organized by Serbian militia, and promoted heavily by Serbian media.
Serbia replied that it would turn over anyone for which proof existed that they conspired against the Archduke Ferdinand, but claimed that there was no such proof, that any anti-Austrian-Hungarian propaganda was the free speech of private individuals and could not be legally suppressed (even when it came openly from the Serbian military).
Serbia also said it was willing to stop propagandizing against Austria-Hungary in its schools, but only after any specific incident was somehow witnessed and proven; Serbia didn’t even make any promises to direct any teachers or school officials not to propagandize.
Serbia promised to remove from the military anyone fomenting violence against A-H if any proof could be found.
Even if A-H provided actual proof of propaganda, Serbia literally promised to explain away what was meant, making it quite clear that Serbia would not prosecute, suppress or correct propaganda even when it was proven to come directly from official, Serbian sources.
And that’s the tragedy of it all.
And if Annie Oakley had been a worse shot, she could have prevented WWI.
And then there’s the fact that A-H annexed Bosnia-Hercegovina in 1908. I see why that would have angered the Serbs.
I just disagree that A-H was somehow an “innocent victim” here.
Which reminds of something a FR poster wrote a few weeks ago.
“If diversity is our strength, then Austria-Hungary would have won WWI!”
Because he didn’t start it anymore then George IV did!
And if Annie Oakley had been a worse shot, she could have prevented WWI.
> Everybody’s missing the big question: why did the Germans have those pointy things on the tops of their helmets? <
I am a famous historian. And like Jill Biden, I have many useless, pretend degrees. So I’ll field that question. The point is there to keep pheasants, ostriches, and other large birds from sitting on the helmet.
Such birds can be quite a nuisance otherwise.
Perfidious Albion!
There’s a quote from Churchill, paraphrasing: - If a Hohenzollern, Hapsburg or a Wittelsbach had been allowed to stay on their respective thrones, there would have been no Hitler.
Clemenceau and Company had a lot to do with that disaster.
A lot like us and the Chinese.
Damn Woodrow Wilson for his Anglophilia and the true beginning of the “special relationship.” Germany under the Kaiser was far superior to both the Nazis and Weimar.
Because they needed to repeat their lessons on how to salute properly.
I know the above is a joke, but I don't understand the punchline. I know I'm dense, but could you explain it to me.
The Kaiser’s words on Hitler in 1938:
“There’s a man alone, without family, without children, without God... He builds legions, but he doesn’t build a nation. A nation is created by families, a religion, traditions: it is made up out of the hearts of mothers, the wisdom of fathers, the joy and the exuberance of children... For a few months I was inclined to believe in National Socialism. I thought of it as a necessary fever. And I was gratified to see that there were, associated with it for a time, some of the wisest and most outstanding Germans. But these, one by one, he has got rid of or even killed... He has left nothing but a bunch of shirted gangsters! This man could bring home victories to our people each year, without bringing them either glory or danger. But of our Germany, which was a nation of poets and musicians, of artists and soldiers, he has made a nation of hysterics and hermits, engulfed in a mob and led by a thousand liars or fanatics.”
The “leaders” of WW1 were all practically chums and family members. They are above the law and if a few million have to die for their egos so be it. The USA should have stayed out of it.
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.