kham_coc
Banned
That's not the point - The point is the when, the who, and the how.
Hitler got it by threatening violence.
The time to do this was before, and instead of violence, be about national self determination.
What should the United States, Britain, and France, have done differently regarding Germany, and Europe, at the End of World War One?
Hitler got it by threatening violence.
The time to do this was before, and instead of violence, be about national self determination.
The point is Hitler wanted Poland, appeasing him would just mean giving up Poland in pieces. Nothing changes overall, Jews still end up in the ovens.
Poland and Germany had discussed this for years. Beck was in favour of it. The public had become opposed to it and the Polish government feared getting overthrown if they acceded to it.
Poland rejected turning their alliance with Romania from an anti-Soviet to also include Germany.
In 1939, the population of the Free City of Danzig was 400,000, of whom 17,000 (4.3%) were Polish and 3,000 (.7%) were Jewish, with the rest being German (95%).
In a thread about the ending/aftermath of WWI, what in the heck?!?!
All that you are describing are events that stem from the exact same causes of what was historically done by {ToV et al}, and all that followed from that.
Um, excuse me? Going from 3rd largest Empire, 2nd Greatest fleet 2nd largest industrial base (behind the USA, not UK), and you call this:
"preventing France from actually materially weakening Germany"
Just no.
Let's cover this a tiny little bit, shall we....?
1) Germany wanted it's own "Place in the Sun", and by 1914 had grabbed up the 3rd largest colonial empire in the world, all of which they loose as a result of French desire to break, humble, humiliate them for no reason other than their own desire (The French) to be able to keep telling themselves that they and not the Germans are the larger, stronger nation.
2) How many Battleships did the German navy have in early (Pre-war) 1914? And then they were supposed to like being reduced to 3 armored ships, of no more than 10,000 tons displacement, and with guns no larger than 11" and you think that this has nothing to do with German desire for revenge, and said desire for revenge can be entirely removed by NOT DISARMING GERMANY in the first place?
3) In 1913, Germany surpassed the UK as the world's 2nd largest Industrial base, and this is without Austrian population/Industry, they were building up a Fleet second only to the RN, and both the larger empires saw the writing on the wall, so to speak, and realized that their free ride on the backs of the conquered peoples of their own empires were going to come to and end, and soon, so what did they do? History tells us what they did, and what came of that decision to buy themselves a bit more time before they inevitably lost those empires anyway, and that was to make the largest, most powerful nation of the three of them into something less than a Great Power. One only need ask, where are the British and French Empires today... a song I love tells us that.
And you say this, as if this alone were not going to cause another war, and on top of all the other things done to Germany, just so the smaller and weaker nations can maintain their own empires, and thus their place sitting astride a house of cards that cannot last, long term?
Historically, we got the "Peace" that was the {ToV and all the other nonsense}, that in turn gave us WWII, and I have to ask, was it really worth it to go through all that rather than realizing they needed to make a "Just and Lasting Peace" and accept that their own power, wealth, and prestige were inevitably going to be reduced by their conquered people's gaining their independence?
What they could have done we don't know, but we do know what they did.
Last edited:
Yes, because Germany did not lose the means to get those things back, and in the case of industry, it never lost it in the first place. Alsace-Lorraine provided little in terms of resources or strategy, and neither did any of the territory it lost as a result of the war other than the polish corridor. The only way germany 'lost' its industry was because france occupied the rhine when germany, like a petulant child, drove itself into hyperinflation instead of paying the repirations in good faith so that france looked like the asshole for collecting what it was owed both morally and legally.
So, Germany was a revisionist power and that's okay, but France wanting compensation for the deadliest war in history to that point and to actually be secure in its place and power isn't?
Germany can have all the revenge fantasies it wants. because the country was always going to have them, it hadn't seen defeat since Napoleon. Germany was doing better before the depression, but there were still those little prodding at versailles to undermine the treaty and undo the loss. Because Germany was the main character of history after all.
I'm not aiming for a peace Berlin thinks is fair, I'm aiming for peace that gives France the power and confidence to enforce it and prevent Germany from starting another war. Unlike you, I am of the opinion that german nationalism and the myths of prussian military supremacy mean that Germany cannot be gracious in defeat at this point and needs to be prevented from starting round two by other means.
Germany was hardly generous in the peace terms it offered to its defeated foes. And if Germany lost the war, then they're the smaller and weaker nation relative to the Entente, aren't they? So frankly, France taking a strategically valuable region that makes it harder to invade them and gives them more fighting power against Germany, while also expanding Belgium so it has more defensible borders, is entirely reasonable.3) In 1913, Germany surpassed the UK as the world's 2nd largest Industrial base, and this is without Austrian population/Industry, they were building up a Fleet second only to the RN, and both the larger empires saw the writing on the wall, so to speak, and realized that their free ride on the backs of the conquered peoples of their own empires were going to come to and end, and soon, so what did they do? History tells us what they did, and what came of that decision to buy themselves a bit more time before they inevitably lost those empires anyway, and that was to make the largest, most powerful nation of the three of them into something less than a Great Power. One only need ask, where are the British and French Empires today... a song I love tells us that.
And you say this, as if this alone were not going to cause another war, and on top of all the other things done to Germany, just so the smaller and weaker nations can maintain their own empires, and thus their place sitting astride a house of cards that cannot last, long term?
We got that 'peace,' with mutilated victories and betrayed allies, because an American who only got involved because of Mexico was given more weight than most of the nations who actually fought most of the war and were still suffering german occupation at the 11th hour.
I was simply responding to the posts which I saw as an attempt to put the blame for ww2 on Poland, so I wrote what I think about it. And frankly, I'm quite positively surprised that the guy has turned out to be someone who simply seeks for a better fate for Poland. Because indeed, his scenario makes a lot of sense: the war breaks out, but in a way that forces the attacked west to take action when there's still Poland around (not to mention the lack of the german-soviet economic agreement from 19 August 1939). That is, if Germany does attack the west. Afterall, such attack on the west might not happen at all (the axis goes straightaway on the Soviet Union), or happens after some newer and newer demands on Poland.
Anyway, does it bother you that the western powers weren't as diabolically opposing the Germans as you'd like to present them?
Last edited:
I see. I don't disagree with any of that.
Oh, but they were indeed guilty as charged, because of what they historically did do, so no, they did what they did, and the history that we got is because of that. The Entente did manage to realize their mistake, and how they had gone too far in all the things they imposed upon Germany post WWI, and then when the German people were receptive to an angry rhetoric wielded by a madman who unfortunately had the "Gift of Gab" and was really a first rate orator, the excesses of ToV allowed his rise to power.
I have to ask, therefore, had those excesses never been, would it still be possible for someone like Herr Hitler to rise to power, given his own personal opinions, or would he have never made it beyond the beer hall level of power?
It's definitely possible for Hitler to rise to power with a more lenient Versailles, because the main reasons he rose to power were the bad economy (great depression) and fear of communism. I doubt these would be butterflied away with a more lenient Versailles. And having lost WW1, Hitler will still want revanche and lebensraum.
In fact it's very well possible that a more lenient Versailles improves Germany's chance to win WW2, because it will have a stronger starting position (economically, miltary and populationwise) than OTL.
I'm having some problems, and would ask how to be able to include nested quotes, so as to make our interchange more easily followable. I'll try it the only way I know how, but it is a very time consuming and tedious process, but I don't know any other way of doing this than manually inserting all the quotation portions into the sections of your reply.
Now for the part where you gave me an idea.
We can all agree that the Germans need to pay to rebuild the parts of Belgium and France that were torn up in the war, right? And that this reconstruction needs to be a separate and additional expense from the reparations, right?
How much did France pay to build the OTL Maginot Line? Why not bill the Germans for these fortifications? Do it at the same time as the reconstruction, and then the French can feel secure from future attacks by Germany (make this line extend all the way to the sea), without doing anything like historically demanding the Germans be disarmed. And what is good for the French, why not give to the Belgians as well, as they too were invaded, so too they should have seen a fortified border with Germany, and paid for by the Germans themselves!
After the Germans are done paying for these two fortified borders, and you don't disarm the Germans this time round, tie their military budgets to the size of the reparations payments, on a one for one basis, so that if the post war german military budget is 'X' amount of marks per year, then the same amount needs to be paid in total war reparations, year after year, until they pay them off entirely. If the Germans want to reduce the size of their military, temporarily, in order to reduce the strain of a big military and big reparations at the same time, then they would have that right, but at the cost of a weakened defense capability, and it would be their own choice, rather than something imposed from the outside.
This would have been a far and away better choice than what was historically done, and removed most of the anger that the Entente brought on themselves.
As far as taking German lands, and then trying to keep them forever, why not do the idea of fortifications of/on the existing, pre-war borders, paid for at German expense, as that way, it doesn't enable anyone later on saying. "hey, that is our land and our people", and instead taking a look at a now very heavily fortified border, and realizing that there is no fast and easy way to sweep through and outflank the French, what then for starting another war? This approach doesn't inspire a deep rooted (and justified) hatred and the desire for revenge that the ham-fisted 'peace' of OTL did, and might just work better.
I have to say, I think that you may just be missing the point. Was there NO alternative way the post war period could have been managed, where Germany is not whole sale cut off at the knees? No way to achieve any type of peace, that stops German bullying, but also takes into account all the other factors that were an issue, on all sides? I think there is, and I got an idea that I thinks is a brilliant idea, and you are the one that gave this idea to me, so...
How does this make sense as a reply to the quoted text? I am going to posit that the primary difference between German Empire building and that of the British and French activities, was that when the B/F were doing it, there was plenty of less developed peoples to be ruthlessly conquered and exploited, but by the time the Germans came to the game, they didn't have as much to grab as the others, and so started to take nibble and bites out of the French Empire. This has to be stopped, of course, but the method of doing so historically was far overdone and unneeded. Taking the whole of the Germans Empire was a mistake, as they then had nothing left, and therefore nothing left to loose. OTOH, leave them a colony or three, and they save face, and now still having something that they can (and know they will) loose, and this can serve as a wonderful incentive to "play nicely" with others. This also makes it possible for the Entente to come off as less the bad guys than they historically did, and deservedly so.
Now for the part where you gave me an idea.
We can all agree that the Germans need to pay to rebuild the parts of Belgium and France that were torn up in the war, right? And that this reconstruction needs to be a separate and additional expense from the reparations, right?
How much did France pay to build the OTL Maginot Line? Why not bill the Germans for these fortifications? Do it at the same time as the reconstruction, and then the French can feel secure from future attacks by Germany (make this line extend all the way to the sea), without doing anything like historically demanding the Germans be disarmed. And what is good for the French, why not give to the Belgians as well, as they too were invaded, so too they should have seen a fortified border with Germany, and paid for by the Germans themselves!
After the Germans are done paying for these two fortified borders, and you don't disarm the Germans this time round, tie their military budgets to the size of the reparations payments, on a one for one basis, so that if the post war german military budget is 'X' amount of marks per year, then the same amount needs to be paid in total war reparations, year after year, until they pay them off entirely. If the Germans want to reduce the size of their military, temporarily, in order to reduce the strain of a big military and big reparations at the same time, then they would have that right, but at the cost of a weakened defense capability, and it would be their own choice, rather than something imposed from the outside.
This would have been a far and away better choice than what was historically done, and removed most of the anger that the Entente brought on themselves.
This is to me, one of the main sticking points with what was done to Germany post WWI, and you didn't actually address the point of the quoted text at all, but just went on a bit of a rant. Too put things into perspective, what if the French had been the ones to have their navy cut down post war, as to just two armoured ships, of 10,000 tons displacement max, and guns no more than 11"? Would this not be fair in comparison to what Germany was forced to put up with, given that Germany is 1.5 France, and they were only allowed three such ships. If you can say that with a straight face, that France would just accept that, and be expected to do so with good grace...?
I'm assuming that you refer to the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk imposed upon the Russian Empire? Anyone want to take a challenge, and make a composite image, that shows the pre war borders of the Russian Empire and then the borders of B-L ones, and then impose those on modern borders? I have to ask, just what did Russia loose in the treaty of B-L, as opposed to lossed to their Empire, rather than to their nation?Germany was hardly generous in the peace terms it offered to its defeated foes. And if Germany lost the war, then they're the smaller and weaker nation relative to the Entente, aren't they? So frankly, France taking a strategically valuable region that makes it harder to invade them and gives them more fighting power against Germany, while also expanding Belgium so it has more defensible borders, is entirely reasonable.3) In 1913, Germany surpassed the UK as the world's 2nd largest Industrial base, and this is without Austrian population/Industry, they were building up a Fleet second only to the RN, and both the larger empires saw the writing on the wall, so to speak, and realized that their free ride on the backs of the conquered peoples of their own empires were going to come to and end, and soon, so what did they do? History tells us what they did, and what came of that decision to buy themselves a bit more time before they inevitably lost those empires anyway, and that was to make the largest, most powerful nation of the three of them into something less than a Great Power. One only need ask, where are the British and French Empires today... a song I love tells us that.
As far as taking German lands, and then trying to keep them forever, why not do the idea of fortifications of/on the existing, pre-war borders, paid for at German expense, as that way, it doesn't enable anyone later on saying. "hey, that is our land and our people", and instead taking a look at a now very heavily fortified border, and realizing that there is no fast and easy way to sweep through and outflank the French, what then for starting another war? This approach doesn't inspire a deep rooted (and justified) hatred and the desire for revenge that the ham-fisted 'peace' of OTL did, and might just work better.
With respect, the so-called peace that the British and French imposed historically was a hot mess, the USA didn't have anything to do with it, and never ratified/signed off on that, so no, it isn't the fault of the USA that Britain and France when overboard when trying to make the world safe for their empires, by taking Germany's, and then trying to disarm them on top of that.
Last edited:
A stronger Germany wouldn't need to fear communism, because they could just crush them without need for the Nazi's at all. Only the restrictions on the German army to 100,000 men could have allowed the communists any chance at sizing power in Germany, and without Versailles we wouldn't see Germany so weak that they couldn't stop both the Nazi and Communist parties from ever gaining enough power to make a grab.
Also, if the Entente had allowed the German to keep a colony or three in Africa, these could have improved the German economy, if they had been invested in to become paying propositions, and such investments take away money that could otherwise be used for armaments and military forces, and also these hypothetical colonies, that had cost the Germans much, and were now paying off nicely, make damn good hostages to good behavior on the Germans part.
I'm sure he will, but would that matter at all, if he cannot gain power in the first place.
I wonder if the things I just posted today would make a difference in this thinking?
Last edited:
If the great depression hits, the economy will go bad, maybe not as bad as OTL, but bad enough for people to vote for nazi's and for communists. And with the USSR fairly near to Germany, and communism in Germany to rising (where it can't 'just be crushed') the right will fear it. Maybe not as much as OTL, but it still might be enough for the nazi's to gain power.
Mussolini got into power in Italy, which was on the winning side (but not happy with the peace), and didn't have military restrictions. So it's possible for HItler to get into power. It may even be easier, because a lenier ToV might prevent the inflation in the 20s, meaning Germany is more stable and there is no Beer Hall putsch, no ban of the naziparty, and no Hitler in jail (also no Mein Kampf, meaning he never put his ideas in writing beforehand). This could mean that the naziparty is better established in the 20s and has a broader base when the depression hits.
Now you can disagree about how likely it is, but it's not impossible, and your question was if it's possible for the nazi's to rise into power with a lenier ToV.
But he still can, so it does matter.
I doubt it.
I've started three new threads, to start some focused discussion of/on alternatives to what we historically got at the end of WWI. Here are the three threads.
1) Reparations tied to German defense budgets.
2) Border Fortification as reparations, rather than disarmament?
3) German Empire in post WWI.
Let me know what you think, and sorry I had a case of the dumbasses, and didn't make a poll for the last thread. Getting tired, and need a nap.
1) Reparations tied to German defense budgets.
2) Border Fortification as reparations, rather than disarmament?
3) German Empire in post WWI.
Let me know what you think, and sorry I had a case of the dumbasses, and didn't make a poll for the last thread. Getting tired, and need a nap.
Great song and good pointOne only need ask, where are the British and French Empires today... a song I love tells us that.
...
What they could have done we don't know, but we do know what they did.
Germany 16 Wars Since 1870
North German Confederation (1867-1870/71)
- Franco-Prussian War (1870–1871) declared by France
- Nauruan Civil War (1878–1888)
- First Samoan Civil War (1886–1894)
- Abushiri Revolt (1888–1889)
- Hehe Rebellion (1891–1898)
- Bafut Wars (1891–1907)
- Cretan Revolt (1897–1898)
- Second Samoan Civil War (1898–1899)
- Boxer Rebellion (1899–1901)
- Adamawa Wars (1899–1907)
- Venezuelan Crisis (1902–1903)
- Kavango Uprising (1903)
- Herero Wars (1904–1908)Hereros As many as 65–70,000 deaths,including civilians Germany 1,541 dead - Bridgman, Jon M - Revolt of the Hereros
- Maji Maji Rebellion (1905–1908)
- Sokehs Rebellion (1910–1911)
- World War I (1914–1918)
List of 95 wars involving guardian of the peace United Kingdom 1891 onward **
*First French Republic (1792–1804):
- War of the First Coalition (1792–1797)
- War of the Pyrenees (1793–1795)
- Haitian Revolution (1791–1804)
- French invasion of Switzerland (1798)
- War of the Second Coalition (1798–1802)
- Peasants' War (1798)
- Quasi-War (1798–1800)
- War of the Oranges (1801)
- War of the Third Coalition (1803–06)
- Franco-Swedish War (1805–10)
- Siege of Santo Domingo (1805)
- War of the Fourth Coalition (1806)
- Peninsular War (1808–1814)
- War of the Fifth Coalition (1809)
- Tyrolean Rebellion (1809)
- French invasion of Russia (1812)
- War of the Sixth Coalition (1813–1814)
- Hundred Days (1815)
- Hundred Thousand Sons of Saint Louis (1823)
- Greek War of Independence (1821–1829)
- Franco-Trarzan War of 1825 (1825)
- Irish and German Mercenary Soldiers' Revolt (1825)
- Liberal Wars (1828–34)
- French conquest of Algeria (1827–1830–1857)
- Belgian Revolution (1830–31)
- First Carlist War (1833–1840)
- First Franco-Mexican War (1838–1839)
- Uruguayan Civil War (1839–1851)
- First Franco-Moroccan War -1844
- Franco-Tahitian War (1844–1847)
- Bombardment of Tourane -1847
- First Italian War of Independence (1848–1849)
- French invasion of Honolulu (1849)
- Taiping Rebellion (1850–1871)
- Bombardment of Salé (1851)
- Crimean War (1853–1856)
- Second Opium War (1857)
- Siege of Medina Fort (1857)
- Cochinchina Campaign (1858–1862)
- Second Italian War of Independence (1859)
- Second Franco-Mexican War (1862–1867)
- Shimonoseki Campaign (1863–1864)
- French campaign against Korea (1866)
- Garibaldis Expedition to Rome 1867
- Franco-Prussian War (1870–71)
- Annexation of the Leeward Islands (1880–1897)
- French conquest of Tunisia (1881)
- Mandingo Wars (1883–1898)
- First Madagascar expedition (1883–1885)
- Sino-French War (1884–1885)
- Tonkin Campaign (1883–1886)
- First Franco-Dahomean War (1890)
- Second Franco-Dahomean War (1892–1894)
- Franco-Siamese War (1893)
- First Italo-Ethiopian War (1894–1896)
- Second Madagascar expedition (1894–1895)
- Cretan Revolt (1897–1898)
- Boxer Rebellion (1899)
- Rabih War (1899–1901)
- Uprising in Madagascar 1904–1905
- Ouaddai War (1909–1911)
- French conquest of Morocco (1911–1934)
- Zaian War (1914–1921)
- First World War (1914–1918)
- Volta-Bani War (1915–1917)
- Kaocen revolt (1916–1917)
- Thái Nguyên uprising (1917–1918)
- Occupation of Constantinople (1918–1923)
- Hungarian-Romanian War (1918–1919)
- Franco-Turkish War (1918–1921)
- Allied intervention in the Russian Civil War (1918–1920)
- Luxembourgish rebellion (January 1919)
- Bender Uprising (1919)
- Franco-Syrian War (1920)
- Rif War (1920–1927)
- Great Syrian Revolt (1925–1927)
- Kongo-Wara rebellion (1928–1931)
- Yên Bái mutiny (1930)
**
Kingdom of Great Britain (1707–1801):
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (1922–present):
- Anglo-French War (1778–83)
- Anglo-Spanish War (1779–83)
- 4th Anglo-Dutch War (1780–83)
- War of the First Coalition (1793–1797)
- War of the Second Coalition (1797–1802)
- Ibn Ufaisan's Invasion -1793
- Second Maroon War (1795–1796)
- Hawkesbury and Nepean Wars (1795–1816)
- Anglo-Spanish War (1796–1808)
- Kandyan Wars (1796–1818)
- Irish Rebellion of 1798 -1798
- 4th Anglo-Mysore War (1798–1799)
- Temne War (1801–1807)
- Second Anglo-Maratha War (1802–1805)
- First Kandyan War (1803–1805)
- Civil War: Emmet's Insurrection
- British Expedition to Ceylon -1803
- War of the Third Coalition (1803–1805)
- War of the Fourth Coalition (1806–1807)
- Ashanti–Fante War (1806–1807)
- Anglo-Turkish War (1807–1809)
- Gunboat War (1807–1814)
- Anglo-Russian War (1807–1812)
- Peninsular War (1807–1814)
- Travancore rebellion (1808–1809)
- War of the Fifth Coalition -1809
- Persian Gulf campaign of 1809 -1809
- 4th Xhosa War (1811–1812)
- War of 1812 (1812–1815)
- War of the Sixth Coalition (1812–1814)
- Second Kandyan War -1815
- Hundred Days -1815
- Third Anglo-Maratha War (1817–1818)
- Greek War of Independence (1821–1829)
- First Ashanti War (1823–1831)
- First Anglo-Burmese War (1824–1826)
- British attack on Berbera -1827
- Revolt of the Mercenaries -1828
- Baptist War (1831–1832)
- First Carlist War (1833–1840)
- The 6th Xhosa War (1834–1836)
- Rebellions of 1837 (1837–1838)
- Pastry War (1838–1839)
- First Anglo-Afghan War (1838–1842)
- First Opium War (1839–1842)
- Second Egyptian-Ottoman War (1839–1841)
- Battle of Tenggarong (1844)[33]
- First Anglo-Sikh War (1845–1846)
- The 7th Xhosa War (1846–1847)
- Caste War of Yucatán (1847–1901)
- Second Anglo-Sikh War (1848–1849)
- Battle of Tysami -1849
- The 8th Xhosa War (1850–1853)
- Taiping Rebellion (1850–1864)
- Second Anglo-Burmese War (1852–1853)
- Crimean War (1853–1856)
- Second Opium War (1856–1860)
- Anglo-Persian War (1856–1857)
- Indian Rebellion of 1857 (1857–1858)
- Bombardment of Kagoshima -1863
- British Expedition to Abyssinia (1867–1868)
- Klang War (1867–1874)
- Third Ashanti War (1873–1874)
- Second Anglo-Afghan War (1878–1880)
- Anglo-Zulu War -1879
- ‘Urabi Revolt (1879–1882)
- Basuto Gun War (1880-1881)
- First Boer War (1880–1881)
- Mahdist War (1881-1899)
- Third Anglo-Burmese War -1885
- Sikkim Expedition -1888
- Anglo-Manipur War -1891
- First Matabele War (1893–1894)
- Anglo-Zanzibar War -1896
- Second Matabele War (1896–1897)
- Cretan Revolt (1897–1898)
- Boxer Rebellion (1899–1901)
- Second Boer War (1899–1902)
- Mahsud Waziri blockade (1900–1902)
- Anglo-Aro War (1901–1902)
- British expedition to Tibet (1903–1904)
- Bazar Valley campaign -1908
- First World War (1914–1918)
- Estonian War of Independence (1918–1920)
- Latvian War of Independence (1918–1920)
- Allied intervention in the Russian Civil War (1918–1920)
- Turkish War of Independence (1919–1923)
- Third Anglo-Afghan War -1919
- Kuwait–Najd War (1919–1920)
- Irish War of Independence (1919–1921)
- Great Iraqi Revolution of 1920 -1920
- 1922 Burao Tax Revolt -1922
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (1922–present):
- Adwan Rebellion -1923
- Ikhwan Revolt (1927–1930)
- Great Arab Revolt in Palestine (1936–1939)
Last edited:
I agree on this. Brest-Litovsk looks much harsher than Versailles - until you stop taking for granted that Russia is owed colonial rule over Ukraine and the Baltics. The Treaty of Bucharest was brutal though.
By 1919 the Entente had captured all of Germany's pre-war colonies in Africa. I really don't think them returning anything of this to Germany in the peace conference is plausible.
Why would they? They were irate about Germany and had it to their feet. Germany getting back even a small fraction of its transmarine empire in the Versailles peace deal is ASB territory in my opinion.
Stealing all their patents cost Germany more than the reparations. Having their merchant marine and funds stolen was icing on the cake.
Last edited:
Actually it wasn't all that different from most other WW1 treaties - strip off all the aras inhabited by ethnic minorities, unless of course this would benefit the defeated party, in which case some other consideration was conveniently found to be more important than ethnicity.
Thus Russia at B-L suffered worse than Germany at Versailles because she had more minority areas to lose, whilst A-H and Turkey suffered worse still because they had even *more* such areas.
Great song and good point
Germany 16 Wars Since 1870
List of 78 wars involving peace loving France since 1792 *North German Confederation (1867-1870/71)
German Empire (1871-1918)
- Franco-Prussian War (1870–1871) declared by France
- Nauruan Civil War (1878–1888)
- First Samoan Civil War (1886–1894) 16 dead
- Abushiri Revolt (1888–1889)
- Hehe Rebellion (1891–1898)
- Bafut Wars (1891–1907)
- Cretan Revolt (1897–1898)
- Second Samoan Civil War (1898–1899)
- Boxer Rebellion (1899–1901)
- Adamawa Wars (1899–1907)
- Venezuelan Crisis (1902–1903)
- Kavango Uprising (1903)
- Herero Wars (1904–1908) 1,541 dead - Bridgman, Jon M. (1966) Revolt of the Hereros University of California Press. p. 164 (KIA: 676, MIA:76, WIA: 907, died from disease: 689, civilians: 100)
- Maji Maji Rebellion (1905–1908) 397 dead
- Sokehs Rebellion (1910–1911) 5 dead
- World War I (1914–1918)
List of 95 wars involving guardian of the peace United Kingdom 1891 onward **
*First French Republic (1792–1804):
First French Empire (1804–1814, 1815):
- War of the First Coalition (1792–1797)
- War of the Pyrenees (1793–1795)
- Haitian Revolution (1791–1804)
- French invasion of Switzerland (1798)
- War of the Second Coalition (1798–1802)
- Peasants' War (1798)
- Quasi-War (1798–1800)
- War of the Oranges (1801)
Bourbon Restoration (1814–15, 1815–1830):
- War of the Third Coalition (1803–06)
- Franco-Swedish War (1805–10)
- Siege of Santo Domingo (1805)
- War of the Fourth Coalition (1806)
- Peninsular War (1808–1814)
- War of the Fifth Coalition (1809)
- Tyrolean Rebellion (1809)
- French invasion of Russia (1812)
- War of the Sixth Coalition (1813–1814)
- Hundred Days (1815)
July Monarchy (1830–1848):
- Hundred Thousand Sons of Saint Louis (1823)
- Greek War of Independence (1821–1829)
- Franco-Trarzan War of 1825 (1825)
- Irish and German Mercenary Soldiers' Revolt (1825)
Second French Republic (1848–1852):
- Liberal Wars (1828–34)
- French conquest of Algeria (1827–1830–1857)
- Belgian Revolution (1830–31)
- First Carlist War (1833–1840)
- First Franco-Mexican War (1838–1839)
- Uruguayan Civil War (1839–1851)
- First Franco-Moroccan War -1844
- Franco-Tahitian War (1844–1847)
- Bombardment of Tourane -1847
Second French Empire (1852–1870):
- First Italian War of Independence (1848–1849)
- French invasion of Honolulu (1849)
French Third Republic (1870–1940):
- Taiping Rebellion (1850–1871)
- Bombardment of Salé (1851)
- Crimean War (1853–1856)
- Second Opium War (1857)
- Siege of Medina Fort (1857)
- Cochinchina Campaign (1858–1862)
- Second Italian War of Independence (1859)
- Second Franco-Mexican War (1862–1867)
- Shimonoseki Campaign (1863–1864)
- French campaign against Korea (1866)
- Garibaldis Expedition to Rome 1867
- Franco-Prussian War (1870–71)
- Annexation of the Leeward Islands (1880–1897)
- French conquest of Tunisia (1881)
- Mandingo Wars (1883–1898)
- First Madagascar expedition (1883–1885)
- Sino-French War (1884–1885)
- Tonkin Campaign (1883–1886)
- First Franco-Dahomean War (1890)
- Second Franco-Dahomean War (1892–1894)
- Franco-Siamese War (1893)
- First Italo-Ethiopian War (1894–1896)
- Second Madagascar expedition (1894–1895)
- Cretan Revolt (1897–1898)
- Boxer Rebellion (1899)
- Rabih War (1899–1901)
- Uprising in Madagascar 1904–1905
- Ouaddai War (1909–1911)
- French conquest of Morocco (1911–1934)
- Zaian War (1914–1921)
- First World War (1914–1918)
- Volta-Bani War (1915–1917)
- Kaocen revolt (1916–1917)
- Thái Nguyên uprising (1917–1918)
- Occupation of Constantinople (1918–1923)
- Hungarian-Romanian War (1918–1919)
- Franco-Turkish War (1918–1921)
- Allied intervention in the Russian Civil War (1918–1920)
- Luxembourgish rebellion (January 1919)
- Bender Uprising (1919)
- Franco-Syrian War (1920)
- Rif War (1920–1927)
- Great Syrian Revolt (1925–1927)
- Kongo-Wara rebellion (1928–1931)
- Yên Bái mutiny (1930)
**
Kingdom of Great Britain (1707–1801):
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland (1801–1922):
- Anglo-French War (1778–83)
- Anglo-Spanish War (1779–83)
- 4th Anglo-Dutch War (1780–83)
- War of the First Coalition (1793–1797)
- War of the Second Coalition (1797–1802)
- Ibn Ufaisan's Invasion -1793
- Second Maroon War (1795–1796)
- Hawkesbury and Nepean Wars (1795–1816)
- Anglo-Spanish War (1796–1808)
- Kandyan Wars (1796–1818)
- Irish Rebellion of 1798 -1798
- 4th Anglo-Mysore War (1798–1799)
- Temne War (1801–1807)
- Second Anglo-Maratha War (1802–1805)
- First Kandyan War (1803–1805)
- Civil War: Emmet's Insurrection
- British Expedition to Ceylon -1803
- War of the Third Coalition (1803–1805)
- War of the Fourth Coalition (1806–1807)
- Ashanti–Fante War (1806–1807)
- Anglo-Turkish War (1807–1809)
- Gunboat War (1807–1814)
- Anglo-Russian War (1807–1812)
- Peninsular War (1807–1814)
- Travancore rebellion (1808–1809)
- War of the Fifth Coalition -1809
- Persian Gulf campaign of 1809 -1809
- 4th Xhosa War (1811–1812)
- War of 1812 (1812–1815)
- War of the Sixth Coalition (1812–1814)
- Second Kandyan War -1815
- Hundred Days -1815
- Third Anglo-Maratha War (1817–1818)
- Greek War of Independence (1821–1829)
- First Ashanti War (1823–1831)
- First Anglo-Burmese War (1824–1826)
- British attack on Berbera -1827
- Revolt of the Mercenaries -1828
- Baptist War (1831–1832)
- First Carlist War (1833–1840)
- The 6th Xhosa War (1834–1836)
- Rebellions of 1837 (1837–1838)
- Pastry War (1838–1839)
- First Anglo-Afghan War (1838–1842)
- First Opium War (1839–1842)
- Second Egyptian-Ottoman War (1839–1841)
- Battle of Tenggarong (1844)[33]
- First Anglo-Sikh War (1845–1846)
- The 7th Xhosa War (1846–1847)
- Caste War of Yucatán (1847–1901)
- Second Anglo-Sikh War (1848–1849)
- Battle of Tysami -1849
- The 8th Xhosa War (1850–1853)
- Taiping Rebellion (1850–1864)
- Second Anglo-Burmese War (1852–1853)
- Crimean War (1853–1856)
- Second Opium War (1856–1860)
- Anglo-Persian War (1856–1857)
- Indian Rebellion of 1857 (1857–1858)
- Bombardment of Kagoshima -1863
- British Expedition to Abyssinia (1867–1868)
- Klang War (1867–1874)
- Third Ashanti War (1873–1874)
- Second Anglo-Afghan War (1878–1880)
- Anglo-Zulu War -1879
- ‘Urabi Revolt (1879–1882)
- Basuto Gun War (1880-1881)
- First Boer War (1880–1881)
- Mahdist War (1881-1899)
- Third Anglo-Burmese War -1885
- Sikkim Expedition -1888
- Anglo-Manipur War -1891
- First Matabele War (1893–1894)
- Anglo-Zanzibar War -1896
- Second Matabele War (1896–1897)
- Cretan Revolt (1897–1898)
- Boxer Rebellion (1899–1901)
- Second Boer War (1899–1902)
- Mahsud Waziri blockade (1900–1902)
- Anglo-Aro War (1901–1902)
- British expedition to Tibet (1903–1904)
- Bazar Valley campaign -1908
- First World War (1914–1918)
- Estonian War of Independence (1918–1920)
- Latvian War of Independence (1918–1920)
- Allied intervention in the Russian Civil War (1918–1920)
- Turkish War of Independence (1919–1923)
- Third Anglo-Afghan War -1919
- Kuwait–Najd War (1919–1920)
- Irish War of Independence (1919–1921)
- Great Iraqi Revolution of 1920 -1920
- 1922 Burao Tax Revolt -1922
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (1922–present):
- Adwan Rebellion -1923
- Ikhwan Revolt (1927–1930)
- Great Arab Revolt in Palestine (1936–1939)
Well, as the Blackadder sketch goes...
I think the Russians very much considered Belarus and Ukraine to be part of their core nation.
kham_coc
Banned
I'm certain that the Germans thought Sudwest africa was a core part of their nation too.
And does the modern day international borders tell us that, or that the people there don't see it that way?
Health not good this morning.