Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Reasonable overview, but for Germany I would add the nagging fear within the German military high command that Russia was becoming militarily stronger and that soon Germany would be unable to win any two front war, which lead to the view, when the situation started escalating, that 'now' would be better than 'later'.I'll try to make a list of possible motives to go to war as I see it as a kind of summary.
A bit simplistic, but here goes:
- France: revenge for 1870 and to get The Elzas back
- Russia: Getting more influence in the Balkan and get free passage to the Mediterranean
- UK: Setting the balance of power in Europe favorable for them, stem the German economical threat.
- Austria-Hungary: Maintain their superpower status, keeping grip on the Balkan and deny the Russians expansion of influence in the Balkan
- Germany: Becoming an imperial power and trying to compete with the UK. Keeping the Elzas.
- Italia: trying to get parts of Austria-Hungary territory.
- Serbia: trying to get a pan-slavic country on the Balkan, in which Serbia would be the main power.
I did not mention the already known alliances, but tried to find the deeper, 'personal' motives per country to strive for war at that time. I think I got the main culprits here, but if I forgot any, please say so.
True, I agree that should be added. That fear was a big motive.Reasonable overview, but for Germany I would add the nagging fear within the German military high command that Russia was becoming militarily stronger and that soon Germany would be unable to win any two front war, which lead to the view, when the situation started escalating, that 'now' would be better than 'later'.
Actually I think the germans were right to think so. The 'nagging' sounds a bit insulting, but I think the fear of the germans was well founded. It would have been much more difficult to beat the Russians a few years later. Unfortunately for them they did not anticipate the trenchware in the west. On the other hand, who did?I want to add, that in general the german high command overestimated the Russians so the point is valid.
But this nagging and excessive overestimation of the Russians came from one man.
Helmuth von Moltke the Younger - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
And he was mainly chief of the General Staff, because Wilhelm II wanted his "own von Moltke".
He was far far away to be at eye level with this von Moltke, his Uncle:
Helmuth von Moltke the Elder - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Sp please don't mix this two, that's very different persons and personalitys.
It wasn't meant in an insulting way. I just used it as a way of describing a fear that was preying on the minds of the high commandThe 'nagging' sounds a bit insulting,
It seems to me far more likely that the General Staff manipulated the report, they had very good political and propaganda reasons to do so.After some research in my private documents I have found the original report of the german 8. Army
"Meldung AoK 8 (heute 4 Uhr a.m. 2. August 1914) Bahnzerstörungsversuch und Vormarsch zwei Schwadronen Kosaken auf Johannisburg. Dadurch tatsächlicher Kriegszustand."
Report of the 8. Army (today 4.00 a.m. 2. August 1914) Trying do destroy railways and two squadrons Cossacks on the rise to Johannisburg. Through this now actual state of war
An other report was from the General Staff:
"Nach Meldung AoK 8 (heute 4 Uhr p.m. 1. August 1914) Bahnzerstörungsversuch und Vormarsch zwei Schwadronen Kosaken auf Johannisburg. Dadurch tatsächlicher Kriegszustand."
After the report of the 8. Army (today 4.00 p.m. 1. August 1914) Trying do destroy railways and two squadrons Cossacks on the rise to Johannisburg. Through this now actual state of war
Here was some controversy, if the General Staff has manipulated the original report of the AoK 8 about twelve hours or if the AoK did report a wrong time.
The attack to Johannisburg is from KTB and primary sources and also confirmed.
Johannisburg at East Prussia!
One of the problems with any documentation, even (or especially) official documents is that people lie, and they lie in writing as much (or more) than in speaking. This is (probably) especially true of documents that governments, particularly non-democratic governments, deign to release to the public. Of course, government officials also lie to other government officials, either directly or by deliberate omission of information that doesn't support an action that one group of officials deem desirable.
This is, of course, a big problem with historical research: nothing is entirely reliable.
particularly non-democratic governments
I'm sure the U.S. wasn't very popular with the German government in the early/mid 1940's, eitherthe atmosphere against the USA in Germany, wasn't as any time as bad as now.
I can type 100wpm but I dont claim that stuff is mine...its called cut and paste. I didnt reference the stuff, because it does have some bits of my own as well, plus I lost the source material
I can only speak for the Bundesrepublik Deutschland!
My Grandfather went over with the U.S. Army cavalry in 1917, made it almost to the end before having having his horse shot out from under him during a battle, losing most of his foot in the process.I don't know who started it but do know my Grandfather was sent off to France with the BEF in 1914 and came back in 1919.