What the title says. Personaly I think the Nazis wont rise, and facism wont tke muh hold.
What the title says. Personaly I think the Nazis wont rise, and facism wont tke muh hold.
Glad to see that I'm not the only one who has a problem with the IPad auto correct feature
What the title says. Personaly I think the Nazis wont rise, and facism wont tke muh hold.
Considering that none of Germany was occupied by the end of the war, I think they should have been lighter. Something like compensating France for the damage to property caused by the Germans by ceded Alsace and Lorraine to them, and maybe turn over some colonies to Belgium to compensate them.
No chance of Clemenceau's death resulting in lighter terms, especially after the Germans flooded the occupied coal and iron mines.
Possibly a different French leader is able gain harsher terms through a more diplomatic approach towards Lloyd George and/or Wilson.
The German leaders may have known they’d lost the war, the German public did not (or liked to pretend otherwise) and in 1919 Hindenburg would stand in front of a government commission of enquiry and declare that the German army ‘had been stabbed in the back’ (Dolchstrosslegende). From that point on the people swallowed the myth that the German army had been betrayed by the civilian peacemakers; it fatally and permanently damaged the credibility of the democratic political parties in the Weimer Republic.How is Germany not being occupied at the time of the armstice relevant? The German leaders were well aware that they had lost the war, and were simply clever enough to surrender before the frontline rolled past its borders with all the fun it would entail.
The question is: who replaces Clemenceau? At a guess I’d say it would have been Pichon or Lebrun, but that really is a very wild and uneducated guess. But whoever it was, I doubt French demands at the Peace Conference would change, just how much sway they would have with the other members of the Big Four.What the title says.
The German leaders may have known they’d lost the war, the German public did not (or liked to pretend otherwise) and in 1919 Hindenburg would stand in front of a government commission of enquiry and declare that the German army ‘had been stabbed in the back’ (Dolchstrosslegende). From that point on the people swallowed the myth that the German army had been betrayed by the civilian peacemakers; it fatally and permanently damaged the credibility of the democratic political parties in the Weimer Republic.
Ah, I see. I misunderstood the previous.I did not mean the postwar political development of Germany. I was questioning the idea that Germany not being occupied had any direct impact on the terms of the treaty.