World War 1

[Michael]

As mentioned in another thread, I've always held that the Allied 'victory' in WW1 is a rather tenuous affair.

As far as I understand the war on the ground (on the western front), Ludendorf and the German Army did in fact prove themselves to be the most impressive fighting army as they were the ones to break out of the trenches and overrun the Allied lines in 1918.

Due to this breakout, the whole Allied line had collapsed and was in retreat while the German Army was racing towards Paris.

Unfortunately for the German Army, an army can only move as fast as its supply line and for the German Army in France, the supply lines had to cross 'no-man's-land' where no rail, road or bridge was still standing after four years of trench-warfare.

Thus, the German Army, on the verge of victory, was forced to surrender inside France - strangled by a lack of food and ammunition.

Now that constitutes an Allied victory. I don't have a problem with that. But the point is, the Germans were the more impressive and more successful army. The Allies won this one by default (they got real lucky).

I am always amazed how little is known about this episode of history. This issue also calls into question the attitude of France in pushing so hard to blame Germany for the war (evidence suggests that it was France & Russia that started the war, not Germany). Germany didn't start the war, Germany almost won the war. Any wonder that Germany felt 'betrayed' by the Versailles Treaty?

World War II was pretty much guarenteed with the Versailles Treaty - Hitler or no Hitler, the Germans were going to want revenge for the Versailles Treaty.

[Greendruid]

You left out the part about 20 million people plus (a conservative estimate) dying of the worst pandemic in documented history - the 1918-1919 influenza pandemic. This is, in my opinion, what stopped the war, and the world, in that fateful year. Incidentally, it was "caused" by an American. Camp Funston, Kansas to be specific. There was no way to continue a war from either side of the battle. The supply lines of the Germans happened to collapse before the Allies probably because they were moving the fastest. The fact that the Allies had not given the surrender order already was ... luck. No comment on the rest of it, just wanted to make clear another very important, if not most important part of this conflict. Disease is always stronger in war it seems.

[bug]

I think he who controls supply controls the war, regardless of army strength. From what I understand, the British were in charge of all the passages that Germany could have gotten food and supplies through. The fact that they had such a little piece of the pie as far as world colonization goes was one of the reasons the Germans were salty in the first place, partially spawning the arms race. Perhaps if they had more territories they would have won the war, or wouldn't have been so inclined to even take such a big part in the war in the first place. A country unhappy with their lot and feeling like everything's unfair is much more likely to fight with great fervency. I also think Versailles was unfair to them, but it was probably more as a result of fear than a giant "screw you." After seeing what Germans army was like, Allies wanted to get the most assurance they could that this nation couldn't ever do exactly what they wound up trying to do (and, arguably could have done if it weren't for a few poorly calculated maneuvers)--take over the world.
Okay, Canadians....why does there seem to be such a pact of silence in America when it comes to your part in world affairs? It drives me crazy, you're right above us and totally ignored. What was your part in WWI? Were you fighting with Britain from day one of their war declaration? Neutral?

[partofme]

You left out the part about 20 million people plus (a conservative estimate) dying of the worst pandemic in documented history - the 1918-1919 influenza pandemic. This is, in my opinion, what stopped the war, and the world, in that fateful year. Incidentally, it was "caused" by an American. Camp Funston, Kansas to be specific. There was no way to continue a war from either side of the battle. The supply lines of the Germans happened to collapse before the Allies probably because they were moving the fastest. The fact that the Allies had not given the surrender order already was ... luck. No comment on the rest of it, just wanted to make clear another very important, if not most important part of this conflict. Disease is always stronger in war it seems.

Imagine if that pandemic happened now. Back then it was worse than normal because troops from different countries traveled to others but now international travel is much bigger to more places.

[Michael]

I think he who controls supply controls the war, regardless of army strength.
Yes, this is very true, though it is a very modern concept. Napoleon famously asserted that an army travels on its stomach. Ancient armies needed virtually no supply lines, but modern armies can't last more than a day or two on the battlefield without supply connections (if not hours).

From what I understand, the British were in charge of all the passages that Germany could have gotten food and supplies through. The fact that they had such a little piece of the pie as far as world colonization goes was one of the reasons the Germans were salty in the first place, partially spawning the arms race. Perhaps if they had more territories they would have won the war, or wouldn't have been so inclined to even take such a big part in the war in the first place. A country unhappy with their lot and feeling like everything's unfair is much more likely to fight with great fervency.
I'm not sure about this. Italy also failed to have a colonial empire and their 20th century fighting history is laughable. Nobody will ever accuse the modern Italian army of being 'ferocious'. :lol:

Germany's key supply problem that I alluded to in the OP was moving ammunition across 'no-man's-land' into France in 1918 without railroads, bridges or even roads. This is one of the first lessons of learning how to play modern 'blitzkrieg' warfare (Germans invented it, Americans have perfected it).

And I don't think its correct to describe Germany pre-WW1 as an 'unhappy people'. Germany was a the top of her game then, being taken very seriously around the world - competing in the 'top tier' in a naval arms race with the Royal Navy. I'd argue Germany was a rather unhappy (bitter) nation during the 1920's, but certainly not pre-1914.

I also think Versailles was unfair to them, but it was probably more as a result of fear than a giant "screw you." After seeing what Germans army was like, Allies wanted to get the most assurance they could that this nation couldn't ever do exactly what they wound up trying to do (and, arguably could have done if it weren't for a few poorly calculated maneuvers)--take over the world.
Yes, fear is what probably drove the Allies at Versailles. That's understandable. My point is that the Allies bear some substantial blame for WW2. It was pretty much guarenteed to follow because of the Versailles Treaty. One can't treat a nation like a child and expect it not to eventually react in violence.

But my primary point with this thread is to address the contemporary view of Germany losing WW1 due to a superior Allied war-effort as an article of faith. That just wasn't the case. Many modern commentators seem to believe that not only did Germany start WW1 as an act of aggression but the Allies also outfought Germany in WW1 as well. Both facts are fallacies - and extremely common ones. All sides bear blame for WW1 - they all marched to it gladly with great expections of crushing each other swiftly. Austria, France, Russia and Great Britain are as blameworthy as Germany (in many cases, far more so) for actually causing WW1. Germany doesn't really deserve blame for 'causing' WW1. They lost it certainly, but all wars require winners and losers.

*Just to note that I consider the situation to be entirely different for WW2 where I believe that Germany clearly did commit aggression and Germany was totally and completely defeated by a much superior 'Allied' war-effort, most notably by the Russians. The Russian feat of arms against the Nazi invasion was beyond incredible.

I also believe that a true understanding of the great wars of the 20th century is necessary in order to A) understand nation-states, and B) prevent more wars.

Okay, Canadians....why does there seem to be such a pact of silence in America when it comes to your part in world affairs? It drives me crazy, you're right above us and totally ignored. What was your part in WWI? Were you fighting with Britain from day one of their war declaration? Neutral?
Canada is quite used to being 'overlooked' by Americans as well as the Brits. Though it is to be noted that the Dutch and the Belgians never seem to forget Canada's contributions to their freedom in both world wars. I suppose it is part of Canada's character to take our pride quietly.

And yes, Canada fought in WW1 from day one. Indeed, it is to be noted that Australia and Canada both fought in WW1 in proportionally huge numbers. Canada's casualties in WW1 (on a per capita basis) are about five or six times as large as those of the USA. Australia's are even higher than that.

It is generally understood that Canada 'came of age' as a nation fighting in WW1 - Canadian troops taking Vimy Ridge is legendary in Canadian history and probably one of the key defining moments of Canadian history and character. Several French and British armies failed to take Vimy Ridge - one of the greatest and bloodiest battle-sites of WW1. Canadians take strong pride in our collective ability to 'keep going' in tough conditions - and keeping up a sense of humor while doing it!

Btw, our Aussie cousins earned their nationhood at the Battle of Gallipoli, aka 'Churchill's folly'. War seems to have a way of defining the character of a nation.

Canada earned her honour with blood on Flanders Fields - and Canadians are usually very proud of this point. Our only wars have been fought, voluntarily, and in defense of other nations. That's the Canadian way.

Btw, that famous poem was written by a Canadian, Lieutenant Colonel John McCrae...

In Flanders Fields the poppies blow
Between the crosses row on row,
That mark our place; and in the sky
The larks, still bravely singing, fly
Scarce heard amid the guns below.

We are the Dead. Short days ago
We lived, felt dawn, saw sunset glow,
Loved and were loved, and now we lie
In Flanders fields.

Take up our quarrel with the foe:
To you from failing hands we throw
The torch; be yours to hold it high.
If ye break faith with us who die
We shall not sleep, though poppies grow
In Flanders fields.

That poem sends shivers down my spine and a tear to my eye every time I hear it, see it or read it.

I firmly believe that WW1 (aka 'The Great War') does teach some very real lessons about ourselves as humans, and as western-nations. They are important to take note of and learn from. Lest we forget!

[Michael]

You left out the part about 20 million people plus (a conservative estimate) dying of the worst pandemic in documented history - the 1918-1919 influenza pandemic. This is, in my opinion, what stopped the war, and the world, in that fateful year. Incidentally, it was "caused" by an American. Camp Funston, Kansas to be specific. There was no way to continue a war from either side of the battle. The supply lines of the Germans happened to collapse before the Allies probably because they were moving the fastest. The fact that the Allies had not given the surrender order already was ... luck. No comment on the rest of it, just wanted to make clear another very important, if not most important part of this conflict. Disease is always stronger in war it seems.
Yes, that was a huge event, but I've not seen the timelines for the influenza pandemic that would actually affect the war situation in any substantial way. It pretty much began as the war was already ended.

The big dates are March 1918 in the USA, and August 1918 the new strain appears at Brest in France. So, this flu hits France in August/September 1918 - and the war's over in October/November 1918 - before the flu reached the battlefield in northeastern France.

[Americano]

It magnified the logistics involved with a 'world' war, a major consideration in the US tooling up industry for WW2 in 1938.

[bug]

I had no idea it was a Canadian who wrote that poem. It's certainly spine chilling, and beautifully written. I'd never heard the whole thing before. Thanks for giving me a bit of education, it's nice to hear what I probably can't hope to in a classroom. We never hear anything about the Austrailians either...such a shame that so many die without the mention they deserve.