Schweet! You've switched sides and joined me, and I didn't even have to pay you!
"We intend to begin on the first of February unrestricted submarine warfare. We shall endeavor in spite of this to keep the United States of America neutral. In the event of this not succeeding, we make Mexico a proposal or alliance on the following basis...
The resumption of unrestricted submarine warfare has to do with strangling Britain, not any response to Wilson's alleged mishandling of the Lusitania sinking.
Wilson declared that sinking of any ships, including those flying flags of combatant nations, would be deemed an act of war if so much as one American were on board. Germany knew they could not win a protracted war involving the US, and so they decided that all-out war, and the rapid submission of England, was their only hope. I explained it, and you went and found the proof for me (good boy!). Does that mean you get it now?
Now, let's get back to your argument. You've got a large and militarily extremely powerful nation torpedoing any ship it sees...
Yeah, if you ignore Wilson's efforts to get America into the war, then it becomes quite obvious that Germany is entirely to blame. Similarly, if you poke both your eyes out, it will look like night-time.
Hardly. I merely posted the telegram, and interpreted it differently from you.
Of course, I've got actual history on my side, and all you've got is some cloud-cuckoo version of events that ignores the real reasons why Germany was returning to unrestricted submarine warfare. In Hindenburg's words:
On the other hand, in view of England's economic situation, the Imperial Admiralty promises us that by the ruthless employment of an increased number of U-boats we shall obtain a speedy victory, which will compel our principal enemy, England, to turn to thoughts of peace in a few months. For that reason, the German General Staff is bound to adopt unrestricted U-boat warfare as one of its war measures, because among other things it will relieve the situation on the Somme front by diminishing the imports of munitions and bring the futility of the Entente's efforts at this point plainly before their eyes. Finally, we could not remain idle spectators while England, realising all the difficulties with which she has to contend, makes the fullest possible use of neutral Powers in order to improve her military and economic situation to our disadvantage.
Where's Wilson in this? Why, he's not even in the picture: the Germans' strategic reasoning was bent on taking England out of the war. They were also hoping to break the very effective British blockade of Germany.
It's obvious that Germany meant to resume this policy regardless of anything Wilson may or may not have done. Wilson was left with a need to respond somehow -- either by doing nothing, or by striking back.
You, apparently, would have had him do nothing.