history of world war 1?

Answer 1

Try this site
http://www.worldwar1-history.com

Answer 2

READ THESE BOOKS:

1) The First World War, by A.J.P. Taylor
2) The First World War, by John Keegan
3) The First World War, by Martin Gilbert
4) The Pity of War, by Nial Ferguson

The Guns of August, by Barbara Tuchman, is a GREAT book about the first month of the war.

The best Novels are:
A Farewell to Arms, by Ernest Hemingway
All Quiet on the Western Front, by Erich Maria Remarque

Answer 3

Try reading "The Guns of August" by Barbara W. Tuchman. This book was quoted by John Kennedy during the Cuban Missle Crisis. Inclueds detailed descriptions of battles with maps and photographs. But the greatness of the book is Ms. Tuchman's narrative about this fascinating and true point in history. Expertly documented.

"In this Pulitzer Prize-winning history, Tuchman writes about the turning point of the year 1914--the month leading up to the war and the first month of the war. This was the last gasp of the Gilded Age, of Kings and Kaisers and Czars, of pointed or plumed hats, colored uniforms, and all the pomp and romance that went along with war. How quickly it all changed, and how horrible it became. Tuchman is masterful at portraying this abrupt change from 19th to 20th Century. And how she manages to make the story utterly suspenseful, when we already know the outcome, is the mark of a great writer, and a classic volume of history".

Answer 4

History
World War I

A war fought from 1914 to 1918 between the Allies, notably Britain, France, Russia, and Italy (which entered in 1915), and the Central Powers: Germany, Austria-Hungary, Bulgaria, and the Ottoman Empire. The war was sparked by the assassination in 1914 of the heir to the throne of Austria (see Sarajevo). Prolonged stalemates, trench warfare, and immense casualties on both sides marked the fighting. The United States sought to remain neutral but was outraged by the sinking of the Lusitania by a German submarine in 1915 and by Germany's decision in 1916 to start unrestricted submarine warfare. In 1917, the United States entered the war on the side of the Allies and helped to tip the balance in their favor. In full retreat on its western front, Germany asked for an armistice, or truce, which was granted on November 11, 1918. By the terms of the Treaty of Versailles, signed in 1919, Germany had to make extensive concessions to the Allies and pay large penalties. The government leaders of World War I included Georges Clemenceau of France, David Lloyd George of Britain, Kaiser Wilhelm II of Germany, and Woodrow Wilson of the United States. World War I was known as the Great War, or the World War, until World War II broke out. (See map, next page.)


German discontent over the terms of the Treaty of Versailles, and over the Weimar Republic that had accepted its provisions, led to the rise of the Nazis and Adolf Hitler, who pursued warlike policies not adequately opposed by the rest of Europe. Thus, barely twenty years after World War I was over, World War II began.
A huge number of books, songs, and poems have been written about World War I. (See All Quiet on the Western Front; A Farewell to Arms; and “In Flanders Fields”.)
“Over There” was among the popular songs produced in the United States during the war.
American foot soldiers in World War I were popularly called doughboys.
November 11, the day the fighting ended, is observed in the United States as Veterans' Day.

Answer 5

WWI1 started due to Austria,and Germany was in the help of Austria before England but Austria stab in the back of Germany and Germany has suffered too much loss in WWI2

Answer 6

existence replaced into alot harsher. human beings suffered from the excellent drepresion and there replaced into hyperinflation even beforehand that. In Germany a be conscious for 9 billion marks ought to no longer purchase you a espresso. loopy.

Answer 7

This was a time in history when things were different. But I believe problems existed then, as they do now.

Answer 8

wht do u want to know? be more spcific,it started w. d assassination of archduke ferdinand of the austria-habsburg empire.thr were other events leading up 2 this but this is d main event.

Answer 9

The First World War, also known as The Great War, The War to End All Wars, and World War I (abbreviated WWI) was a global military conflict that took place between 1914 and 1918. It was a total war which left millions dead and shaped the modern world.

The Allied Powers, led by Britain, France, Russia, and later also Italy and the United States, defeated the Central Powers, led by Germany, Austria-Hungary and the Ottoman Empire.
Much of the fighting in World War I took place along the Western Front, within a system of opposing manned trenches and fortifications (separated by a “No man's land”) running from the North Sea to the border of Switzerland. On the Eastern Front, the vast eastern plains and limited rail network prevented a trench warfare stalemate from developing, although the scale of the conflict was just as large. Hostilities also occurred on and under the sea and — for the first time — from the air. More than 9 million soldiers died on the various battlefields, and millions more civilians suffered; more people died of the worldwide influenza outbreak at the end of the war and shortly after than died in the hostilities.

The war caused the disintegration of four empires: the Austro-Hungarian, German, Ottoman, and Russian. Germany lost its overseas empire, and new states such as Czechoslovakia, Poland, and Yugoslavia were created.

Ultimately, World War I created a decisive break with the old world order that had emerged after the Napoleonic Wars, which was modified by the mid-19th century’s nationalistic revolutions. The results of World War I would be important factors in the development of World War II approximately 20 years later.

Causes
On June 28, 1914, Gavrilo Princip assassinated Archduke Franz Ferdinand, the heir to the Austrian throne, in Sarajevo. Princip was a member of Young Bosnia, a group whose aims included the unification of the South Slavs and independence from Austria-Hungary. The assassination in Sarajevo set into motion a series of fast-moving events that escalated into a full-scale war. However, the reasons behind the conflict are multiple and complex. Historians and political scientists have grappled with this question for nearly a century without reaching a consensus.

Sole responsibility of Germany and Austria
This “official” explanation appeared in Article 231 of the Treaty of Versailles in 1919, often referred to as the War Guilt Clause. The argument was based on the fact that Austria attacked Serbia on July 29, 1914 and Germany invaded Belgium on August 3.[2]Thus, the Austro-Hungarian and German Empires were seen to be the initial aggressors and therefore, held responsible for the war. German academics such as Fritz Fischer, Imanuel Geiss, Hans-Ulrich Wehler, Wolfgang Mommsen and V.R. Berghahn have all promoted this thesis in the post-World War II period. Fischer contended that Germany wanted to control most of Europe or, at the very least, unite it economically through Germany. However, as he points out, diplomatic efforts to do so had often centered around Anglo-Germanic cooperation, not war.

Arms races
The naval arms race that developed between Britain and Germany was intensified by the 1906 launch of HMS Dreadnought, a revolutionary warship that rendered all previous battleships obsolete. (Britain maintained a large lead over Germany in all categories of warship.) Paul Kennedy has pointed out that both nations believed in Alfred Thayer Mahan's thesis that command of the sea was vital to a great nation.

David Stevenson described the armaments race as "a self-reinforcing cycle of heightened military preparedness", while David Herrman viewed the shipbuilding rivalry as part of a general movement towards war. However, Niall Ferguson argues that Britain’s ability to maintain an overall advantage signifies that change within this realm was insignificant and therefore not a factor in the movement towards war.

Plans, distrust and mobilization
Closely related is the thesis adopted by many political scientists that the war plans of Germany, France and Russia automatically escalated the conflict. Fritz Fischer and his followers have emphasized the inherently aggressive nature of Germany’s Schlieffen Plan, which outlined German strategy if at war with both France and Russia. Conflict on two fronts meant that Germany had to eliminate one opponent quickly before taking on the other, relying on a strict timetable. Germany’s strategy called for a strong right flank on the attack on Belgium, and to conquer and crush French mobilizations to cripple the French army. After the attack, the German army would then be rushed to the eastern front through railroads and quickly destroy the slowly-mobilizing military of Russia. However, things did not end up as planned and early mistakes would cost Germany the war. France’s well defended border with Germany meant that an attack through Belgian (and possibly Dutch) territory was a necessity, creating a number of unexpected problems. In a greater context, France’s own Plan XVII called for an offensive thrust into Germany’s industrial Ruhr Valley, crippling Germany’s ability to wage war. Russia’s revised Plan XIX implied a mobilization of its armies against both Austria-Hungary and Germany. All three created an atmosphere where generals and planning staffs were anxious to take the initiative and seize decisive victories. Elaborate mobilization plans with precise timetables had been prepared. Once the mobilization orders were issued, it was understood by both generals and statesmen alike that there was little or no possibility of turning back or a key advantage would be sacrificed. Furthermore, the problem of communications in 1914 should not be underestimated; all nations still used telegraphy and ambassadors as the main form of communication, which resulted in delays from hours to even days.

Militarism and autocracy
President of the United States Woodrow Wilson and other observers blamed the war on militarism. The idea was that aristocrats and military elites had too much control over Germany, Russia and Austria, and the war was a consequence of their desire for military power and disdain for democracy. This was a theme that figured prominently in anti-German propaganda, which cast Kaiser Wilhelm II and Prussian military tradition in a negative light. Consequently, supporters of this theory called for the abdication of such rulers, the end of the aristocratic system and the end of militarism—all of which justified American entry into the war once Czarist Russia dropped out of the Allied camp. Wilson hoped the League of Nations and universal disarmament would secure a lasting peace. He also acknowledged variations of militarism that, in his opinion, existed within the British and French political systems.

Economic imperialism
By 1903 Germany planned a rail link to the Persian Gulf through Ottoman territories that would have expanded German trade with the Middle East. The railroad reflected the peaceful economic rivalries of the era, and was not intended as a prelude to war. However Lenin asserted that the worldwide system of imperialism was responsible for the war. In this he drew upon the economic theories of Karl Marx and English economist John A. Hobson, who had earlier predicted the outcome of economic imperialism, or unlimited competition for expanding markets, would lead to a global military conflict. This argument proved persuasive in the immediate wake of the war and assisted in the rise of Marxism and Communism. Lenin made the argument that large banking interests in the various capitalist-imperialist powers had pulled the strings in the various governments and led them into the war.

Nationalism and romanticism
The civilian leaders of the European powers found themselves facing a wave of nationalist zeal that had been building across Europe for years, as memories of war faded or were convoluted into a romantic fantasy that resonated in the public conscience. Frantic diplomatic efforts to mediate the Austrian-Serbian quarrel simply became irrelevant, as public and elite opinion commonly demanded war to uphold national honor. The patriotic enthusiasm, unity and ultimate euphoria that took hold during the Spirit of 1914 was full of that very optimism regarding the postwar future. Also, the Socialist-Democratic movement had begun to exert pressure on aristocrats throughout Europe, who optimistically hoped that victory would reunite their countries via the consolidation of their domestic hegemony. However, Lord Kitchener and Erich Ludendorff were among those who predicted that modern, industrialized warfare would be a lengthy excursion. Others, such as Theobald von Bethmann-Hollweg, were concerned by the potential social consequences of a war. International bond and financial markets entered severe crises in late July and early August reflecting worry about the financial consequences of war. Nevertheless, spurred on by propaganda and nationalist fervor, many eagerly joined the ranks in search of adventure

Answer 10

what do u want to know?