“...WW1 was nothing like WW2 in terms of righteous crusades —there really was no true evil side (unless it was the Ottoman Empire) . We certainly should have stayed out of it and more than likely the worst thing that could have happened for the west was a long and bloody, weakening affair that ended in the defeat of Germany with an unjust peace treaty ensuring another world war in 20 years...” [Phoenix8, post 13]
Pat Buchanan’s historical sense is about as meager as was that of Joe Kennedy Sr (a verbal formulation I’ve borrowed from the late Anton Myrer, an author whose political proclivities I never had use for otherwise).
Try not to join them in your spotty interpretations & analysis.
Winston Churchill had no influence on Britain’s 1914 declaration of war against Imperial Germany. That was driven entirely by treaty obligations: the treaty co-signed by France, Britain, and Germany guaranteeing Belgian neutrality, which Germany violated that summer.
Germany frightened all the European powers (big & little) for a couple generations - more than once. After the heir to the Imperial Austrian throne was killed in June 1914, the German foreign affairs establishment buffaloed Austria-Hungary into attacking Serbia, while deliberately lying to other European diplomats about what it was doing. At the last moment, Kaiser William got cold feet and tried to stop the German attack; staffers simply threw up their hands and said that stopping was impossible.
Britain’s military capabilities on land were so small that Imperial German General Staffers deliberately ignored their impact; they miscalculated the impact of British maritime capabilities.
Even so, by 1917 the Kaiserliche Marine’s submarine campaigns came within a few weeks of knocking Britain out of the war. American naval capabilities, and changes in organization and tactics, saved the Allied cause.
The United States declared war only after Imperial Germany began unrestricted submarine warfare, early in 1917. German subs repeatedly sank British-flagged merchant vessels, killing American noncombatants - despite repeated German promises not to do it again.
President T Woodrow Wilson explicitly pointed all this out in his request to Congress for a declaration of war. Congress agreed.
The Versailles Treaty of 1919 was in no way remarkable compared to treaties previously made between European nations for centuries. It’s a dishonest sleight of historical hand to complain about its “injustice” - that comes from presentist moral absolutists who arose after the war and now dominate much postmodern “orthodox” discourse on history and international affairs, among academics, moralists, and intellectuals. Oh yes, it also has been influenced by German propaganda.
These aspects are supported by documented historical fact, not by wishful thinking about American exceptionalism and isolationist sentiment.
A good place to start expanding one’s perspective are two volumes by the late Robert K Massie: _Dreadnought_ and _Castles of Steel_. He covered the rise of German power in maritime and naval capabilities during most of the 19th century, the naval arms race, and World War One at sea. And he did so in incontrovertible detail.
I said “ I guess I missed the one on WW1.”. So I was not referring to that war, I was mostly speaking of Churchill warmongering in WW2.
The Versailles treaty was unfair and blamed the Germans and even ordered them to pay reparations. This helped create the miserable economic conditions which allowed the rise of Nazism:
“ The treaty’s so-called “war guilt” clause forced Germany and other Central Powers to take all the blame for World War I. ”—National Geographic
Russia, an Ally mobilized first before Germany, this a war like threat that caused Germany to mobilize in defense on July 30. France and Belgium both mobilized on August 1, 1914 setting the stage for world war. Germany requested permission to transfer forces across Belgium territory with a guarantee to withdraw them after the hostilities with France ended. Belgium refused thus in some ways choosing a defacto alliance with France/Gb. So no your view is too simplistic imo, Germany was not the single primary aggressor you would have me believe.
Germany of WW1 ≠ Germany of WW2.
The defeat of Germany IMO was a disaster for western civilization. It kept European powers weak and divided (a strategy GB had been following since Napoleon) while allowing her maintaining Naval dominance which allowed it to continuing subjugating vast swaths of the world population in its slave-like colonies.
A WW1 German victory would have brought a golden age of western resurgence. Eliminating the twin future scourges of communism and Nazism and allowing Europe to continue its expansion Imo. Instead we have the rot we see today.
PS please read up on German U-boat warfare in WW1 , their chance was long gone by 1917. They almost certainly could have won with that new super weapon in 1914-1916 if not for the machinations and interference of Theobald von Bethmann Hollweg the inept German Chancellor.