Was World War I inevitable

OORAH

OORAH

Active member
I think so, but not really sure. Even if the archduke had not been assassinated, I think something else would have eventually sparked a semi-global confict
 
The Empires vere tense at the time and it would have happened sooner or later, if the Archduke wasnt killed by that lucky chance
 
IMO, no. We were taught otherwise in World History, but given the prevailing attitudes of the time I don't think so. Competition between the nations was too intense and all five of the "major powers" of Europe were itching for a war. As my teacher told me, "WWI was the avoidable war that nobody tried to avoid. WWII was the unavoidable that everyone tried to avoid." IMO it is the other way around, since France wanted that harsh peace of Germany so badly they needed to enforce them, keep a foot on their neck at all times and if they try something increase the pressure a little.
 
Your teacher is right. WWI came about because of the arms race between Britain and Germany - the Dreadnaught brought that to flame but it had been burning before that. The Kaiser longed to make Germany as great a naval power as Britain and Britain would have none of it. They couldn't allow Germany to have both the largest land army in Europe and be an equal player on the seas. Their entangling alliances snared all Europe into the meat grinder. All it needed was the spark at Sarajevo.

WWII, on the otherhand, was made inevitable by the victors at Versailles themselves. It was really a continuation of WWI in a sense and a direct result of the flawed peace of 1919 (when the Versailles Treaty was signed). The Washington Naval Treaties of the 1920s added to the burning embers and had much to do with Japan's role in WWII.

Of course greed, tyranny and evil took advantage of these lapses in judgement.
 
Rather like in WW2 Germany had built up a very large and efficient army and there treaties with Austria gave them the chance to bring them into play. France had also had treaties with other parties in that area which pledged them support, we had a treaty with France to support them. So the whole thing was like a pack of cards. Germany for many years was quite happy just being Germans, but later on they were looking to expand and wanted an Empire rather like Britain, but had found that it had all gone to other interested parties.
 
Quite correct, LeEnfield. Germany's lust for empire was largely spurred by having formed late in the 19th century (prior to that being a collection of kingdoms and principalities) long after the other European players had staked out their colonial claims. It was "keeping up with the Joneses" on a national level.
 
Ok, when people say that WWI was inevitable this is what I hear, "If things had been different 70, 50 or even 20 years before WWI started it might have been avoidable." But it still wasn't. Everyone in Europe wanted a fight, everyone in Europe was getting arming to the teeth and everybody hated each other. Technically, WWI was avoidable, but only if the plague came through and wiped everyone out first. It was going to happen sooner or later, everyone wanted this, especially since most nations thought it would be over in three months.
 
Not every one wanted to fight every one as suggest by Damien 435, Germany and Britain had been allies for a large number years and had fought many a European war as Allies. All the Royal Houses in Europe were related some how or other, there was not hatred as suggested. It was one of those unfortunate things that got out of hand. The problem arises that when you have built up a huge Army at a huge cost then some people will look to put that Army to use, and the only the only thing an Army is trained to do and that is to fight.
 
My grandparents were taught geopgraphy at school with maps that marked out the British empire - and this was in Australia. (These maps were still around in the 60s) The official toast, even after WW1, was made "King, England, Australia". It says someting about Australian priorities back then and the importance of "empire".

As others have pointed out, I think the prevailing influence at the time was this thought that the empire, who's ever empire it was, should prevail. When war did break out, it was greeted with enthusiasm rather than dread.

I guess that in that type of environment, war is inevitable.
 
world war one had to happen

wy1 one had to happen for the reasons that if wy1 hadn't happened wy2 wouldn't have either and that means that britain would be much more powerful than the usa. No offenst to you yanks but britain would still be the major world power if wy1 or wy2 hadn't happened. So just thank yourself that britain spent all its money in both wars. and if wy1 hadn't happened the united nations wouln't be around. but it was bound to happen and be greatfull it isn't happening now
 
WW1 was inevitable.Europe with all it alliances was like a keg of gunpowder waiting to go off and the assassination of the archduke was the spark. Because of all the alliances a small conflict could easily turn into a much larger one (thats how WW1 started)WW2 howver could have been avoided if Britain attacked Germany when it was weak instead of trying to please it.
 
good ideas people, but, consider this. Britain didn't want a World War, neither did France or any of the other allied countries that had participated in the First WW, and the United States wanted no part of it. So, could it have been possible for the allies to turn a deaf ear/eye to the Germans? Maybe they thought that if they attacked first, they would make world war I happen. maybe they thought that if they let things start by others hands, they would not feel that they started it.

the same can be said about WWII. Britain, France and the other Allies didn't want to start another WW, even though, they could have easily squashed Hitler when he started to break the Versailles treaty. Maybe they figured that if they let Hitler take back his precious small pieces of Germany he would stop. Britain and France and America certainly didn't want another WW, less than 20 years after the first.
 
Both Britain and France were still reeling from a the death of a million men apiece from WW1 and that did not count the maimed and badly wounded. Now just how do you think a politician is going to approach the Electorate and tell them that you are going to go to war again with the country that you have only just defeated. Some small towns had lost every male between 65 and 16, now just look at the fuss there is in America casualties in Iraq and then add in the total of deaths by the million and say that war is a good thing, do you think that any one would have listened to him.
 
Damien435 said:
As my teacher told me, "WWI was the avoidable war that nobody tried to avoid. WWII was the unavoidable that everyone tried to avoid."
Click to expand...


That is not true it is the other way around
WW1 was unavoidable because of all the alliances between countries in europe. therefore a small conflict could easily turn into a much larger war.
WW2 could have been avoided if britain had attacked germany when it was still weak instead of trying to please them
 
Peterminator.....Why is that Britain should have taken on the task of bringing Germany to heel, why not America, they set up the League of Nations then washed their hands of it.
 
LeEnfield....if not britain than who else.
america did not want any more part in future european wars so they set up the league of nations , why they left i have no idea
Mabe the french,dutch,poles,ect.
Your right-america,britain and all the other countries should have joined together and killed hitler while they had a chance
 
Peterminator said:
LeEnfield....if not britain than who else.
america did not want any more part in future european wars so they set up the league of nations , why they left i have no idea
Mabe the french,dutch,poles,ect.
Your right-america,britain and all the other countries should have joined together and killed hitler while they had a chance
Click to expand...

Jesse Owens should have had a go at him when Hitler refused to present him the gold medal. It would have stopped a war and made for some great TV!! :twisted:
 
LeEnfield said:
Peterminator.....Why is that Britain should have taken on the task of bringing Germany to heel, why not America, they set up the League of Nations then washed their hands of it.
Click to expand...

Because it was Britain and France who forced the harsh terms on Germany that ensured that if those two nations did not keep Germany on a short leash there would be another major war. If you remember correctly Woodrow Wilson tried to push for a peace more similar to post WWII than the unfairly cruel peace France and Britain wanted against Germany. And it is France AND Britain who should have kept the pressure on Germany, not just Britain.
 
It was inevitable for the reasons Charge 7 said.

Also the French were just begging for an excuse for revenge on Germany for the Franco-Pussian war.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top