I watched a programme on the driving factors behind WW1 last night and how it all began...it was basically, as far as I can make out, the (related) international elite playing a massive game!
What are your thoughts?
2007-02-20 22:08:39 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous in Arts & Humanities ➔ History
~My children are CRAZY about this game! They all say its like "crack" so I call them my "crack babies" now. teehee
And, I enjoy watching for the most part. The people they meet on the game are really nice, helpful, and funny!
We wish we had of thought of it first! :)
OH - my bad - I thought you said WOW... (World of War Craft...or something like that...) pc game... sorry...
2007-02-20 22:11:32 · answer #1 · answered by Kitten2 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Yes, there is a great deal of sense in that - the trouble is that they were playing games with millions of human lives. The socialist parties in the various countries concerned tried to get the working people to refuse to be drawn into the mess, before the war properly began. A German senior officer said something to the effect that once the bugles began to blow and the drums to beat, all would fall in behind them. Which is exactly what happened.
The irony is, however, that the related 'international elite' - basically the descendants of Queen Victoria - lost out in the end. The Tsar and his family were murdered and the German Kaiser lost his throne. Only the British Royal Family hung on - but that was only after the biggest bit of spin-doctoring in history, the changing of the family name from the German 'Saxe-|Coburg-Gotha' to 'Windsor'
WW2 was an entirely different matter - in response to previous answer.
Later - the answer under me is totally wrong to say that the Royal families were all against the war. In fact, the biggest warmonger was Kaiser Wilhelm of Germany, who for many reasons had been trying to pick a fight with Great Britain for a long time. The Tsar wasn't far behind him. It is interesting to consider, however, what would have happened if Edward VII had lived a few more years. He likely would have knocked some sense into him and other warlike relatives. Not for nothing was he known as 'the uncle of Europe'
2007-02-20 22:17:02 · answer #2 · answered by rdenig_male 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The problem was more a case of a HUGE blunder by the major powers over a small and naive act of terrorist agression by a minority (hmm sounds familiar here).
As we all know the Guns of August was set in motion to a prearranged plan and timetable that once started could not be stopped. The only major player that could have stepped back from the brink was The British Empire, as we had no formal treaty with any other power, and it was only because of the German thrust into Belgium which did have a solid treaty with the UK that made the politicians make war. If the Germans had only gone into Luxembourg and France, Britain would have delayed entry into the war, or stayed out of it totally.
2007-02-21 23:25:32 · answer #3 · answered by Kevan M 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, I don't agree.
All the traditional elite forces would have acted against the war - the Royal families, the capitalists too. Also the socialists. It just shows how weak all these forces really were.
It was the Austrians who wanted Balkan war, and the German power-brokers who wanted to expand it - attack Russia before the Russian railway building made the Schlieffen plan unworkable.
But the masses who were keen to get away from their jobs and their wives have to bear some of the blame too.
2007-02-20 23:31:49 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Are you intense??? this might't be for a Ph.D thesis!!! All baloney! the only shelling on American soil handed off whilst a sole jap sub lobbed numerous torpedoes onto an Oregon sea coast. incredibly! we'd all be speaking jap, if what you assert had occurred! Ever pay attention relating to the 1st 2 atomic bombings of cities? Hiroshima and Nagasaki, on August 6th and 9th, l945.. the jap Emperor at latest surrendered. i think of that prevalent Douglas MacArthur prevalent the Emperor's sword--yet in line with hazard my reminiscence is fautly.
2016-10-16 04:04:17 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
it was the 2nd biggest...the biggest being the election of George W. Bush
2007-02-21 01:46:59 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes and then we made the same mistake again in 1939. (WW11)
2007-02-20 22:12:09 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
No Aids is.
2007-02-20 22:10:21 · answer #8 · answered by Barbara Doll to you 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
yes its true
2007-02-20 22:10:12 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋