English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories
0

4. Was World War I a preventable war, or were the nations of Europe committed to fight among themselves even before the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand?

2006-07-04 15:01:47 · 10 answers · asked by james s 1 in Arts & Humanities History

10 answers

The europe was committed to world war before world war one start. The tv show Blackadder Goes Forth -- Episode 6; Goodbyeee by Richard Curtis and Ben Elton Edmund: You see, Baldrick, in order to prevent war in Europe, two superblocs developed: us, the French and the Russians on one side, and the Germans and Austro-Hungary on the other. The idea was to have two vast opposing armies, each acting as the other's deterrent. That way there could never be a war. Baldrick: But this is a sort of a war, isn't it, sir? Edmund: Yes, that's right. You see, there was a tiny flaw in the plan. George: What was that, sir? Edmund: It was bollocks.

2006-07-11 05:52:58 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

Once a nation builds up its armed forces, it HAS to flex its military muscles. The assassination of Franz Ferdinand was just an excuse for the Europeans to go to war.

2006-07-04 15:18:27 · answer #2 · answered by im_smart 3 · 0 0

The system of alliances and the requirements of the military probably made World War I all but inevitable.

Mass armies and wide spread belief in the strategic offensive meant that intricate plans had to be made to call up, organize, transport and deploy armies.

It was assumed that "the best defense is a good offense" and so their plans were not just to defend their borders but to immediately attack their presumed enemies.

At the first hint of war these plans had to be put in motion. Failure to do so meant that the enemy would streaming over your border before you were ready and, it was believed, that spelled defeat.

So every general staff of each Great Power was on a hair trigger. Once one Great Power began talking war, everyone sprang into action, fearful that a failure to mobilize and attack would be fatal.

They anticipated a short war that would be won by the country which mobilized first. "Home before the leaves fall" was the cry heard in every capital. Fifteen million dead (9 million soldiers and 6 million civilians) attest to the particular folly of that age.

2006-07-04 15:09:14 · answer #3 · answered by Rillifane 7 · 0 0

I would say that WWI would have been fought sooner or later irregardless of the assasignation of the Archduke. The rulers of Europe were proud men with big powerful armies and they wanted to play with them. France and Germany definately, they were looking for any little reason to fight with each other after the Franco-Prussian War.

2006-07-04 15:10:58 · answer #4 · answered by aurelie_moineau 3 · 0 0

Every 50-150 years, if you look back through history, Europe has to go through a good blood letting. Think about it, a continent roughly the same size as the US, with countries about the size of various states, all trying to be the top dog. Plus, Czar, the King of England, and the Kaiser were all cousins. King William and Czar Nicholas (Willy and Nicky in correspondence) were getting mad at the Kaiser's actions, so they decided to just go and teach him a lesson.

2006-07-04 17:21:14 · answer #5 · answered by Emily 2 · 0 0

WW1 in many senses disrupted the successful flow of the Renaissance that began arguably in 1450.
Wars numbered and labeled as "World Wars" can be perceived as crisis points in the steady flow of history - an indication that all the best people (historians, tacticians, strategists) seem to be running out of ideas.

2006-07-11 14:56:41 · answer #6 · answered by blake 2 · 0 0

It was not a preventable war at all. We all know that in Europe, everyone was in the race for colonies. They will imperialize and dominate as much as they can. It's survival of the fittest. You cant prevent that. The alliance could have been prevented and it wouldnt have been a totalitarian war.

2006-07-04 16:34:32 · answer #7 · answered by frostysw33ti 3 · 0 0

No the worl war one was not commendable,actually the countries were waiting for a chance to go at each others throat.It was the ecnomic reasons coupled with pride and ego that led to world war one.even if arch duke frdinand was not assanitaed it would have taken place

newly unified germany ,italy the so called neo imperialists,due to industrialization wanted to sell their products.but allmost all the overseas market was controlled or ruled by old world imperialists like britain, france,portugal ,spain etc.this is was ultimately what led to world war one

2006-07-04 15:19:58 · answer #8 · answered by anoop_pattat 3 · 0 0

The assassination was just a pretext. Kaiser Wilhelm was spoiling for a fight.

2006-07-04 15:09:48 · answer #9 · answered by johnslat 7 · 0 0

international conflict one million: one million)Franc Ferdinand Asassinated by way of Serbian Sparking international conflict one million 2)Germany march into Belgium, Britain declare conflict on Germany 3)German's U-2 submarines sink united statesS Lusitania 4)Zimmerman notes delivered the united statesinto conflict 5)Treaty of Versaille ended international conflict one million international conflict 2: one million)Germany invade Poland sparking international conflict 2 2)Japan attack Pearl Harbor bringing the united statesinto WW2 3)eastern Internment camp, All eastern in u . s . have been despatched to camp in the process the conflict 4)D-Day Allies wreck into Europe 5)Atomic Bomb dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki thoroughly destroying the citys.

2016-12-14 04:20:55 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers