Easy answer: the French.
Medium answer: France and Russia were allied against Germany + Austria (like a tag-team match). Serbia killed the Archduke of Austria and Austria stood up like a man and told Serbia to apologize or else... But the Serbs were sick of Austria's rule over them and refused to back down. So now, Austria's in a bind because they made a threat thinking Serbia would cower, but Serbia didn't. So, Austria has to "back it up".
Meanwhile, Germany was in a binding alliance with Austria, meaning anytime Austria got in a fight with whoever, Germany would fight with them - no ifs, ands or buts and no crossed fingers behind the back. This meant trouble for Russia because Russia feared that if Germany + Austria took control of the Balkans (a group of countries that includes Serbia, Yugoslavia, Slovenia, Albania, etc.), they'd also take the Bosphorous Straits (at Istanbul) which was the ONLY passage for the Russian ocean fleet (merchant and Navy) to the world's oceans. Germany tried to back Austria down, but prepared herself in case they wouldn't.
These preparations were seen by Russia as a threat of war and they started "bowing up" themselves. Meanwhile, France (on the other side of Germany) sees all of this as an opportunity to take real estate from southern Germany (who at that point was going to fight TWO wars) and starts preparing herself and goading Russia (who really didn't want to fight) into fighting.
Finally, Germany was bound by alliance to fight with Austria to her (Germany's) southeast and could see France threatening and taunting Russia to the south and Russia building to the north. So, instead of just waiting like a coward to get kicked, Germany "threw the first punch" and has been unfairly blamed ever since. But were it not for France poking Russia in the ribs, Germany would have kept her fighting limited to its alliance with Austria until the Serbs were dispatched.
"Origins of the World War" by Fay.
World War II was just a continuation of WWI after a long enough intermission for enough boys to be born and grow to fighting age.
2007-05-22 09:22:48
·
answer #1
·
answered by Jeffrey 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
The World War I started because of the gold standard.
Under the gold standard, a nation can expand its money supply only as far as its gold stock allows. To expand its gold stock, a nation must have a trade surplus. So expanding the money supply under the gold standard is only possible if a nation has a trade surplus.
Expanding money supply is the quickest way of ending recessions and thus keeping the population gainfully employed and reasonably happy. But under the gold standard, it is only possible if a nation has a trade surplus, so governments, instead of abandoning the gold standard, started working on ensuring that their nations always have a trade surplus.
In practice, this took the form of pressuring other countries into opening their markets for your exports while keeping imports off your domestic market. The pressure tactics gradually escalated from diplomacy to the threat or war, until everyone was threatening everyone else.
And that's when Gavrilo Princip fired his FN M 1910... So to say that Gavrilo Princip caused the World War I is, to put it mildly, silly. If he failed, another excuse to start the war would have been found...
2007-05-22 16:49:40
·
answer #2
·
answered by NC 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
Gavrilo Princip, a Serbian radical, assassinated Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria -Hungary and his wife.
2007-05-22 15:57:34
·
answer #3
·
answered by will5352 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Check out:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_I
http://www.firstworldwar.com/origins/causes.htm
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/worldwars/wwone/
2007-05-22 16:17:01
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋