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

I need to know what started world war 1, the Great War
I need to know who or what started it

2007-01-26 05:50:28 · 12 answers · asked by amandaco45 2 in Politics & Government Military

12 answers

On June 28, 1914, Gavrilo Princip shot and killed Archduke Franz Ferdinand, the heir to the Austrian throne, and his wife, in Sarajevo after purchasing a sandwich. Princip was a member of Young Bosnia, a group whose aims included the unification of the South Slavs and independence from Austria-Hungary (see also: the Black Hand). The assassination in Sarajevo set into motion a series of fast-moving events that escalated into a full-scale war. However, the ultimate causes of the conflict were multiple and complex.


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.

President of the United States Woodrow Wilson and other observers blamed the war on militarism.[2] 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.

2007-01-26 06:00:31 · answer #1 · answered by Brite Tiger 6 · 1 1

The assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand who was an Austro-Hungarian duke. He really wasn't that important at all. Basically the alliances had already been formed and the powers were just looking for an excuse to start the war. This caused Austria-Hungary to declare war on Serbia and all hell broke out from that.

2007-01-26 06:00:47 · answer #2 · answered by ubbriggs 2 · 0 0

A Serbian anarchist assassinated the Austrian arch duke Ferdinand and his wife while they were in a parade. The Austrians used this tragedy to force Serbia to rejoin the Austrian Empire. The Serbs said no and called on the Russians with whom they had a treaty to come to there defense. The Russians declared war on Austria and Austria called on there defense treaty with Germany to defend Austria and so it went until all of Europe except Switzerland was at war on one side or the other.

2007-01-26 06:08:33 · answer #3 · answered by brian L 6 · 0 0

The assasination of Austrian Archduke Francis Ferdinand started it. Austria attacked Serbia and Russia came to their aid. England and France got involved. Germany had been waiting for a war for a while and attacked France and Beligium.

2007-01-26 06:17:38 · answer #4 · answered by Damn Good Dawg 3 · 0 0

The actual trigger that started it was the assassination of Austrian Archduke Franz Ferdinand by a Serb, Gavirlo Princip. in Sarajevo in 1914. It appeared that he was paid to do it, and there were disputes over Territory's, especially Morroco and the Agadir crisis. Many of the tensions in that area have recently boiled over between the Serbs in that same Bosnia-Herzegovina area, populated by Serbs and the neighboring Austria and Hungary.
Most of the countries of Europe were tied with mutual defense treaties between different countries. If one country goes to war,
then all of it's allies are treaty bound to support it! But most of the countries concerned were involved with an arms build up and Imperialism, Nationalism, Militarism, and above mentioned treaties binding them together.!
The US entered the war because of Germany's unrestricted U_Boat attacks on neutral shipping. Germany even made talks with Mexico to join it's war with and against the USA. Germany
offered to Mexico, if they would help them, Germany would help Mexico recapture territory taken by the US. Texas, CA. Arizona and New Mexico!
New weapons on the battlefields, especially the machine gun,
made the war in France particularly costly in lives lost!
Germany also, used WMD in WW1 .. poison gas, (mostly mustard gas). Saddam (Iraq) used the same gas on the Kurds in his own country, along with nerve gas! History repeating it's self?

2007-01-26 07:43:44 · answer #5 · answered by Edward C 2 · 0 0

i will't see Germany commencing yet another conflict. you fairly can't choose by skill of historic previous. Their government ha exchange maximum of situations for the reason that (being divided, etc). in case you want to circulate by skill of historic previous, you ought to look lower back at what motivated Germany to start the two wars. It rather started with the French Revolution. Napolean rose as much as potential and walked throughout Germany. The German people lost their delight in united states, nationalism, and identity. This grew to become into considered one of a number of motives for the international wars. i do no longer think any international conflict would be fought lower back any time quickly. countries and their populations are very linked now by using firms, social media, and the information media. Civilians don't have the tummy for conflict. each and every conflict broken out for the reason that Vietnam creates great protests over the violence seen on television. somebody reported china, China might by no skill attack the U. S.. the U. S. owes them too lots funds and that they make greater off the activity on my own they pay lower back. Wars are very costly, extraordinarily with each and all the popular technologies.

2016-09-28 00:39:32 · answer #6 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

The assasination of Francis Ferdinand

2007-01-26 05:58:36 · answer #7 · answered by bigdan6974 3 · 0 0

the assasination of the arch duke ferdinand by a serb -

the austro hungarians and germans lined up together and invaded serbia - the russians backed the serbs - the french and british backed the serbs - there you go

the assasination ignited the powderkeg

2007-01-26 05:57:13 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Basically ethnic cleansing again and it took our dough boys to a foreign shore as did WW2 we don't want it brought to our shores but i think it coming too

2007-01-26 08:03:34 · answer #9 · answered by L J 4 · 0 0

Franz Ferdinand. I'm sure he's in the wikipedia.

but also, rabid nationalism, arm races, you knowk the whole, "our county's dick is bigger than your country's dick" idea.

2007-01-26 06:35:34 · answer #10 · answered by serious troll 6 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers