If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Spiegel)   We Saved the World: WWI and America's rise as a Superpower   (spiegel.de) divider line 103
    More: Interesting, World War I, President Woodrow Wilson, Sarajevo, German submarines, Iraq invasion, Robert Kagan, United States of America, Eugene Debs  
•       •       •

4461 clicks; posted to Main » on 25 Jan 2014 at 6:34 PM (11 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



103 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-01-25 06:39:25 PM
Not to rain on everyone's parade, but, we didn't save shiat in WWI. And we might not have gotten involved in WWII if the Japanese hadn't blown Pearl Harbor to kingdom come.

/ yes, I know; our arrival in WWI helped end that war quicker; but, WWI and the various restrictions put on Germany caused WWII
 
2014-01-25 06:43:42 PM
The United States supported the WRONG side in World War I, Had we thrown in with the Germans and the Turks the world would be  a MUCH better place today. No rise of fascism, no rise of Hitler, peace in the Middle East no Cold war and most importantly of all no Hitler and no Holocaust.

 We backed the wrong d side because racist  Wilson was an Anglophile. We were wrong in every way and the world is still paying for our mistake.
 
2014-01-25 06:45:37 PM
Oh brother here we go.
 
2014-01-25 06:45:51 PM

iheartscotch: we didn't save shiat in WWI


Saying it doesn't make it true.  When we intervened, the Germans had just been able to send massive reinforcements to the western front, which were only there because of the collapse of Czarist Russia and the subsequent takeover by the Bolshevikds.

Without American reinforcements (and don't forget supply shipments), the Allied side of the western front may well have collapsed in 1917.  At a minimum, the USA prevented that from happening.
 
2014-01-25 06:46:15 PM

Delawheredad: The United States supported the WRONG side in World War I, Had we thrown in with the Germans and the Turks the world would be  a MUCH better place today. No rise of fascism, no rise of Hitler, peace in the Middle East no Cold war and most importantly of all no Hitler and no Holocaust.

 We backed the wrong d side because racist  Wilson was an Anglophile. We were wrong in every way and the world is still paying for our mistake.


img.fark.net
 
2014-01-25 06:47:39 PM
It was only 100 years ago.  Seems like yesterday.

/100 years before that was the War of 1812.  In the grand scheme of things we are so young. In 20 years the country will be completely bankrupt. $1,000,000,000,000 added to the national debt each year with fewer and fewer paying taxes...
 
2014-01-25 06:49:49 PM

uber humper: It was only 100 years ago.  Seems like yesterday.

/100 years before that was the War of 1812.  In the grand scheme of things we are so young. In 20 years the country will be completely bankrupt. $1,000,000,000,000 added to the national debt each year with fewer and fewer paying taxes...


We're one of the oldest countries on the planet, continuously operating with the same government for far, far longer than just about everyone you're thinking of.
 
2014-01-25 06:50:14 PM

Shedim: Delawheredad: The United States supported the WRONG side in World War I, Had we thrown in with the Germans and the Turks the world would be  a MUCH better place today. No rise of fascism, no rise of Hitler, peace in the Middle East no Cold war and most importantly of all no Hitler and no Holocaust.

 We backed the wrong d side because racist  Wilson was an Anglophile. We were wrong in every way and the world is still paying for our mistake.

[img.fark.net image 500x271]


Be prepared to use that picture alot in this thread, the way this is going...
 
2014-01-25 06:50:56 PM

iheartscotch: Not to rain on everyone's parade, but, we didn't save shiat in WWI. And we might not have gotten involved in WWII if the Japanese hadn't blown Pearl Harbor to kingdom come.

/ yes, I know; our arrival in WWI helped end that war quicker; but, WWI and the various restrictions put on Germany caused WWII


Agree on WW2, disagree on WW1. While portable machine guns, mortars, tanks, and aircraft transformed the way war was waged, there is zero doubt that the presence of American troops was the single most important factor in the failure of the German's offensive in the Second Battle of the Marne. And by having 10,000 new troops a day deployed in the summer of 1918, yes, we absolutely saved shiat, though I wouldn't go as far as some of the American Nationalist types who see us as some sort of heroic savior. We were the key, but we needed their help as much as they needed ours. Regardless the French were always going to lose unless the British could hold on. And with the loss of the Eastern Front, there is serious doubt that was possible.
 
2014-01-25 06:51:01 PM

Delawheredad: The United States supported the WRONG side in World War I, Had we thrown in with the Germans and the Turks the world would be  a MUCH better place today. No rise of fascism, no rise of Hitler, peace in the Middle East no Cold war and most importantly of all no Hitler and no Holocaust.

 We backed the wrong d side because racist  Wilson was an Anglophile. We were wrong in every way and the world is still paying for our mistake.


Jesus, I really hope you're trolling.  Just in case you're not:

First of all, how on earth can you really say that there would have been "no fascism, no Hitler, peace in the Middle East, no Cold War, and no holocaust"?  Do you have access to some alternate reality where you can see what "would have" happened?  No, you don't.  So you're making assertions you can't prove.

Second, why do you think we should have intervened on the side of the  aggressor nations in that war?  Just because Wilson should have looked in a crystal ball (like the one you seem to have) and realized that siding with Germany would inevitably lead to Naziism and WWII?  Because the torpedoing of civilian passenger and merchant ships (including American-flagged ships) was really just their way of saying "I love you?"
 
2014-01-25 06:51:04 PM
too bad america is the new germany

citizen
 
2014-01-25 06:51:49 PM
Williams Jennings Bryan who WAS Wilson's Secretary of State RESIGNED because he felt that his president was leading the country into an immoral and illegal war. He was the last Secretary of state to possess a set of brass ones. Once he stepped down he campaigned against the declaration of war. Imagine THAT happening today.
 
2014-01-25 06:52:16 PM
iheartscotch: Not to rain on everyone's parade, but, we didn't save shiat in WWI. And we might not have gotten involved in WWII if the Japanese hadn't blown Pearl Harbor to kingdom come.

/ yes, I know; our arrival in WWI helped end that war quicker; but, WWI and the various restrictions put on Germany caused WWII


Our involvement in WWI largely caused all our problems since.

If Germany wins WWI and the Kaiser is still the King, Hitler dies a penniless would be painter in a gutter and does not come to power and start WWII as we know it.

A strong Imperial Germany headed by the Kaiser and victorious in WWI would likely have keep the USSR in check and keep the US from being involved in the Cold war or the various proxy wars from it like Korea, Vietnam, etc.

An intact Ottoman empire would mean the middle east would mostly be at peace and we wouldn't be involved in Iraq or Afghanistan or Libya etc.
 
2014-01-25 06:52:33 PM

HMS_Blinkin: First of all, how on earth can you really say that there would have been "no fascism, no Hitler, peace in the Middle East, no Cold War, and no holocaust"?  Do you have access to some alternate reality where you can see what "would have" happened?  No, you don't.  So you're making assertions you can't prove.


For all we know, the alternate universe where America sided with the Central Powers is a radioactive wasteland by now.
 
2014-01-25 06:53:25 PM

Molavian: uber humper: It was only 100 years ago.  Seems like yesterday.

/100 years before that was the War of 1812.  In the grand scheme of things we are so young. In 20 years the country will be completely bankrupt. $1,000,000,000,000 added to the national debt each year with fewer and fewer paying taxes...

We're one of the oldest countries on the planet, continuously operating with the same government for far, far longer than just about everyone you're thinking of.


Ha.  You're right.  Especially since WWI.  The maps did look completely different
 
2014-01-25 06:53:42 PM

HMS_Blinkin: iheartscotch: we didn't save shiat in WWI

Saying it doesn't make it true.  When we intervened, the Germans had just been able to send massive reinforcements to the western front, which were only there because of the collapse of Czarist Russia and the subsequent takeover by the Bolshevikds.

Without American reinforcements (and don't forget supply shipments), the Allied side of the western front may well have collapsed in 1917.  At a minimum, the USA prevented that from happening.


That is a valid point, the Germans may have been able to hold off the French and Brits or pressed forward with the reinforcements from the Russian front. But, the way WWI was fought; it would have been a stalemate. Us coming did end the war for the Germans; but, it set Germany and Europe up for round 2 twentish years later.

I'm saying that, without the huge economic cluster-fark that Germany became; they might never have gone fascist.
 
2014-01-25 06:54:58 PM

Oldiron_79: An intact Ottoman empire would mean the middle east would mostly be at peace and we wouldn't be involved in Iraq or Afghanistan or Libya etc.


I'm sure all those slaves still in captivity up until Turkey was modernized would have a thing to say to you.
 
2014-01-25 06:56:46 PM

"We Saved the World: WWI and America's rise as a Superpower"


Too bad our reign as the world's Super Power may not last another couple of generations at most the way things are going in this country.

 
2014-01-25 06:56:55 PM

HMS_Blinkin: Delawheredad: The United States supported the WRONG side in World War I, Had we thrown in with the Germans and the Turks the world would be  a MUCH better place today. No rise of fascism, no rise of Hitler, peace in the Middle East no Cold war and most importantly of all no Hitler and no Holocaust.

 We backed the wrong d side because racist  Wilson was an Anglophile. We were wrong in every way and the world is still paying for our mistake.

Jesus, I really hope you're trolling.  Just in case you're not:

First of all, how on earth can you really say that there would have been "no fascism, no Hitler, peace in the Middle East, no Cold War, and no holocaust"?  Do you have access to some alternate reality where you can see what "would have" happened?  No, you don't.  So you're making assertions you can't prove.

Second, why do you think we should have intervened on the side of the  aggressor nations in that war?  Just because Wilson should have looked in a crystal ball (like the one you seem to have) and realized that siding with Germany would inevitably lead to Naziism and WWII?  Because the torpedoing of civilian passenger and merchant ships (including American-flagged ships) was really just their way of saying "I love you?"


Forget it. He's trolling.
 
2014-01-25 06:57:42 PM
TV's Vinnie: Oldiron_79: An intact Ottoman empire would mean the middle east would mostly be at peace and we wouldn't be involved in Iraq or Afghanistan or Libya etc.

I'm sure all those slaves still in captivity up until Turkey was modernized would have a thing to say to you.


But its OK because they was the same color as their masters.
 
2014-01-25 06:58:10 PM

Oldiron_79: iheartscotch: Not to rain on everyone's parade, but, we didn't save shiat in WWI. And we might not have gotten involved in WWII if the Japanese hadn't blown Pearl Harbor to kingdom come.

/ yes, I know; our arrival in WWI helped end that war quicker; but, WWI and the various restrictions put on Germany caused WWII

Our involvement in WWI largely caused all our problems since.

If Germany wins WWI and the Kaiser is still the King, Hitler dies a penniless would be painter in a gutter and does not come to power and start WWII as we know it.

A strong Imperial Germany headed by the Kaiser and victorious in WWI would likely have keep the USSR in check and keep the US from being involved in the Cold war or the various proxy wars from it like Korea, Vietnam, etc.

An intact Ottoman empire would mean the middle east would mostly be at peace and we wouldn't be involved in Iraq or Afghanistan or Libya etc.


The Ottoman empire was already falling apart before the war. Their problems wouldn't have gone away if they'd been on the winning side. They might have gone through a revolution as nasty as Russia's.
 
2014-01-25 06:59:23 PM

Oldiron_79: iheartscotch: Not to rain on everyone's parade, but, we didn't save shiat in WWI. And we might not have gotten involved in WWII if the Japanese hadn't blown Pearl Harbor to kingdom come.

/ yes, I know; our arrival in WWI helped end that war quicker; but, WWI and the various restrictions put on Germany caused WWII

Our involvement in WWI largely caused all our problems since.

If Germany wins WWI and the Kaiser is still the King, Hitler dies a penniless would be painter in a gutter and does not come to power and start WWII as we know it.

A strong Imperial Germany headed by the Kaiser and victorious in WWI would likely have keep the USSR in check and keep the US from being involved in the Cold war or the various proxy wars from it like Korea, Vietnam, etc.

An intact Ottoman empire would mean the middle east would mostly be at peace and we wouldn't be involved in Iraq or Afghanistan or Libya etc.


img.fark.net
 
2014-01-25 07:01:04 PM

iheartscotch: I'm saying that, without the huge economic cluster-fark that Germany became; they might never have gone fascist.


That is essentially beyond dispute, yes.

Oldiron_79: If Germany wins WWI and the Kaiser is still the King, Hitler dies a penniless would be painter in a gutter and does not come to power and start WWII as we know it.

A strong Imperial Germany headed by the Kaiser and victorious in WWI would likely have keep the USSR in check and keep the US from being involved in the Cold war or the various proxy wars from it like Korea, Vietnam, etc.

An intact Ottoman empire would mean the middle east would mostly be at peace and we wouldn't be involved in Iraq or Afghanistan or Libya etc.


How do you know that?  History is far, FAR too complex for that.  You don't know what would have happened.  Just because you stop Hitler, how do you know that Imperial Germany doesn't go all crazy in the 1940s anyway?  How do you know that the Austro-Hungarian empire doesn't collapse and cause south-central Europe to be the "bizzaro" version of today's middle east?  How do you know that the Ottomans would have done any better maintaining the peace in the middle east?

The effects of even seemingly minor events on history can be profound.  Making any changes (let along MASSIVE ones) to an existing timeline would make the ensuing history completely unpredictable.
 
2014-01-25 07:05:05 PM

HMS_Blinkin: iheartscotch: I'm saying that, without the huge economic cluster-fark that Germany became; they might never have gone fascist.

That is essentially beyond dispute, yes.

Oldiron_79: If Germany wins WWI and the Kaiser is still the King, Hitler dies a penniless would be painter in a gutter and does not come to power and start WWII as we know it.

A strong Imperial Germany headed by the Kaiser and victorious in WWI would likely have keep the USSR in check and keep the US from being involved in the Cold war or the various proxy wars from it like Korea, Vietnam, etc.

An intact Ottoman empire would mean the middle east would mostly be at peace and we wouldn't be involved in Iraq or Afghanistan or Libya etc.

How do you know that?  History is far, FAR too complex for that.  You don't know what would have happened.  Just because you stop Hitler, how do you know that Imperial Germany doesn't go all crazy in the 1940s anyway?  How do you know that the Austro-Hungarian empire doesn't collapse and cause south-central Europe to be the "bizzaro" version of today's middle east?  How do you know that the Ottomans would have done any better maintaining the peace in the middle east?

The effects of even seemingly minor events on history can be profound.  Making any changes (let along MASSIVE ones) to an existing timeline would make the ensuing history completely unpredictable.


The Great Depression would likely have happened regardless. That's the wildcard here. Some say Hitler saved Europe from turning Communist.
 
2014-01-25 07:05:41 PM

Oldiron_79: iheartscotch: Not to rain on everyone's parade, but, we didn't save shiat in WWI. And we might not have gotten involved in WWII if the Japanese hadn't blown Pearl Harbor to kingdom come.

/ yes, I know; our arrival in WWI helped end that war quicker; but, WWI and the various restrictions put on Germany caused WWII

Our involvement in WWI largely caused all our problems since.

If Germany wins WWI and the Kaiser is still the King, Hitler dies a penniless would be painter in a gutter and does not come to power and start WWII as we know it.

A strong Imperial Germany headed by the Kaiser and victorious in WWI would likely have keep the USSR in check and keep the US from being involved in the Cold war or the various proxy wars from it like Korea, Vietnam, etc.

An intact Ottoman empire would mean the middle east would mostly be at peace and we wouldn't be involved in Iraq or Afghanistan or Libya etc.


There may have still been a movement for democracy in Germany in the '20s or '30s lead by some of the same folks who became Nazis...but it would have played out much differently and would likely have ended in a short, unsuccessful and bloody revolt.

I think the Kaiser might have taken on the Soviets during the chaos of the post revolutionary period but yes....no WWII, no Cold War

The Ottoman empire was already mostly defunct by the start of the war and it's history would have played out much the same  as our reality with Attaturk coming to power.
 
2014-01-25 07:05:54 PM

PC LOAD LETTER: iheartscotch: Not to rain on everyone's parade, but, we didn't save shiat in WWI. And we might not have gotten involved in WWII if the Japanese hadn't blown Pearl Harbor to kingdom come.

/ yes, I know; our arrival in WWI helped end that war quicker; but, WWI and the various restrictions put on Germany caused WWII

Agree on WW2, disagree on WW1. While portable machine guns, mortars, tanks, and aircraft transformed the way war was waged, there is zero doubt that the presence of American troops was the single most important factor in the failure of the German's offensive in the Second Battle of the Marne. And by having 10,000 new troops a day deployed in the summer of 1918, yes, we absolutely saved shiat, though I wouldn't go as far as some of the American Nationalist types who see us as some sort of heroic savior. We were the key, but we needed their help as much as they needed ours. Regardless the French were always going to lose unless the British could hold on. And with the loss of the Eastern Front, there is serious doubt that was possible.


I agree that our fresh troops were the decisive element to WWI. But, it's not like Black Jack Pershing personally biatch-slapped the Kaiser.
 
2014-01-25 07:08:49 PM
HMS_Blinkin: iheartscotch: I'm saying that, without the huge economic cluster-fark that Germany became; they might never have gone fascist.

That is essentially beyond dispute, yes.

Oldiron_79: If Germany wins WWI and the Kaiser is still the King, Hitler dies a penniless would be painter in a gutter and does not come to power and start WWII as we know it.

A strong Imperial Germany headed by the Kaiser and victorious in WWI would likely have keep the USSR in check and keep the US from being involved in the Cold war or the various proxy wars from it like Korea, Vietnam, etc.

An intact Ottoman empire would mean the middle east would mostly be at peace and we wouldn't be involved in Iraq or Afghanistan or Libya etc.

How do you know that?  History is far, FAR too complex for that.  You don't know what would have happened.  Just because you stop Hitler, how do you know that Imperial Germany doesn't go all crazy in the 1940s anyway?  How do you know that the Austro-Hungarian empire doesn't collapse and cause south-central Europe to be the "bizzaro" version of today's middle east?  How do you know that the Ottomans would have done any better maintaining the peace in the middle east?

The effects of even seemingly minor events on history can be profound.  Making any changes (let along MASSIVE ones) to an existing timeline would make the ensuing history completely unpredictable.


Well I'm rather certain Hitler don't come to power in Imperial Germany but whose to say a "just lost the war and paying reparations to Germany and Austria" Britain and/or France doesn't go Fascist? Especially France with the Napoleon tradition.
 
2014-01-25 07:09:24 PM

PC LOAD LETTER: Some say Hitler saved Europe from turning Communist.


So I've heard.

majorslack.com
 
2014-01-25 07:12:23 PM

PC LOAD LETTER: Some say Hitler saved Europe from turning Communist.


Except Scandinavia
 
2014-01-25 07:14:13 PM

Oldiron_79: Well I'm rather certain Hitler don't come to power in Imperial Germany but whose to say a "just lost the war and paying reparations to Germany and Austria" Britain and/or France doesn't go Fascist? Especially France with the Napoleon tradition.


That's my point.  There's just no way to know.  All I know is, crummy as things are today, it's entirely possible that things would be worse in an alternate timeline.  Or they could be better.
 
2014-01-25 07:15:05 PM

Delawheredad: The United States supported the WRONG side in World War I, Had we thrown in with the Germans and the Turks the world would be  a MUCH better place today. No rise of fascism, no rise of Hitler, peace in the Middle East no Cold war and most importantly of all no Hitler and no Holocaust.

 We backed the wrong d side because racist  Wilson was an Anglophile. We were wrong in every way and the world is still paying for our mistake.


The seeds of the Holocaust was already planted and starting to take affect before WWI, Hitler didn't start crap.  He just became the poster child of the Holocaust.  Citation: it's why my great-grandparents left Germany in circ. 1912.  The village they left behind was later destroyed by the Nazi's.  Some folks did see the writing on the wall way before Hitler mattered to anyone.  That's my historical heritage.

/you big dummy.
 
2014-01-25 07:20:20 PM
I'm more concerned with WW3

2.bp.blogspot.com
 
2014-01-25 07:20:51 PM

iheartscotch: PC LOAD LETTER: iheartscotch: Not to rain on everyone's parade, but, we didn't save shiat in WWI. And we might not have gotten involved in WWII if the Japanese hadn't blown Pearl Harbor to kingdom come.

/ yes, I know; our arrival in WWI helped end that war quicker; but, WWI and the various restrictions put on Germany caused WWII

Agree on WW2, disagree on WW1. While portable machine guns, mortars, tanks, and aircraft transformed the way war was waged, there is zero doubt that the presence of American troops was the single most important factor in the failure of the German's offensive in the Second Battle of the Marne. And by having 10,000 new troops a day deployed in the summer of 1918, yes, we absolutely saved shiat, though I wouldn't go as far as some of the American Nationalist types who see us as some sort of heroic savior. We were the key, but we needed their help as much as they needed ours. Regardless the French were always going to lose unless the British could hold on. And with the loss of the Eastern Front, there is serious doubt that was possible.

I agree that our fresh troops were the decisive element to WWI. But, it's not like Black Jack Pershing personally biatch-slapped the Kaiser.


The French helped with our Revolution, and later the US helped them.  Major armies getting together is always good politics when you pick the right side.  It turned out well, so go team Allies.

I would toot the US horn a little louder, but the US helped and that is about all we can say about that.  In exchange, the US got to climb the world ladder.
 
2014-01-25 07:21:19 PM

iheartscotch: PC LOAD LETTER: iheartscotch: Not to rain on everyone's parade, but, we didn't save shiat in WWI. And we might not have gotten involved in WWII if the Japanese hadn't blown Pearl Harbor to kingdom come.

/ yes, I know; our arrival in WWI helped end that war quicker; but, WWI and the various restrictions put on Germany caused WWII

Agree on WW2, disagree on WW1. While portable machine guns, mortars, tanks, and aircraft transformed the way war was waged, there is zero doubt that the presence of American troops was the single most important factor in the failure of the German's offensive in the Second Battle of the Marne. And by having 10,000 new troops a day deployed in the summer of 1918, yes, we absolutely saved shiat, though I wouldn't go as far as some of the American Nationalist types who see us as some sort of heroic savior. We were the key, but we needed their help as much as they needed ours. Regardless the French were always going to lose unless the British could hold on. And with the loss of the Eastern Front, there is serious doubt that was possible.

I agree that our fresh troops were the decisive element to WWI. But, it's not like Black Jack Pershing personally biatch-slapped the Kaiser.


Well, no, but we did do quite well in several key battles. I would say it was our tactical victories that won, not any strategic mastery.
 
2014-01-25 07:24:51 PM
In response to too many of the above posts to list -

I was under the impression that what really pushed Germany over the edge before WWII was the onerous terms of the Treaty of Versailles.

IIRC, Wilson argued for more humane terms, but England and particularly France were out for blood and would not be denied.

Even without Hitler, that economic climate could easily have led to a similar outcome, with someone else serving as the flashpoint.

One particularly nasty alternate historyis where WWII happens and Germany has a *competent* leader. Monster though he was, Hitler was in many ways our best secret weapon.
 
2014-01-25 07:26:20 PM

HMS_Blinkin: Oldiron_79: Well I'm rather certain Hitler don't come to power in Imperial Germany but whose to say a "just lost the war and paying reparations to Germany and Austria" Britain and/or France doesn't go Fascist? Especially France with the Napoleon tradition.

That's my point.  There's just no way to know.  All I know is, crummy as things are today, it's entirely possible that things would be worse in an alternate timeline.  Or they could be better.


A gnatzi France doesnt scare me to much in regards to America. France has always been more of a land power and there is an ocean in the way, and if they got too uppity Im sure Imperial Germany would have laid the smack down.

A gnatzi British Empire would scare me in regards to a pre WWII America. They had a badass navy and naval tradition, losing craphole colonies that they had to garrison would actually strengthen thier army, they have a whole country to our north from which to base a North American attack, and a whole country to our north from which to have 5th columnists that can blend in and speak our language and spy on or sabotage us.
 
2014-01-25 07:29:25 PM
No we saved all that money American robber barons lent to England, France and Russia to finance their war. If we hadn't gone over there, the Triple Entente would have lost to Germany and our billionaires would have lost billions.

War is a racket according to a two-time Medal of Honor winner member of the Marine Corps.
 
2014-01-25 07:31:46 PM

Oldiron_79: iheartscotch: Not to rain on everyone's parade, but, we didn't save shiat in WWI. And we might not have gotten involved in WWII if the Japanese hadn't blown Pearl Harbor to kingdom come.

/ yes, I know; our arrival in WWI helped end that war quicker; but, WWI and the various restrictions put on Germany caused WWII

Our involvement in WWI largely caused all our problems since.

If Germany wins WWI and the Kaiser is still the King, Hitler dies a penniless would be painter in a gutter and does not come to power and start WWII as we know it.

A strong Imperial Germany headed by the Kaiser and victorious in WWI would likely have keep the USSR in check and keep the US from being involved in the Cold war or the various proxy wars from it like Korea, Vietnam, etc.

An intact Ottoman empire would mean the middle east would mostly be at peace and we wouldn't be involved in Iraq or Afghanistan or Libya etc.


While all this is pointless speculation, it's fun nonetheless. So I'll play. I'm with you about Hitler and the potential buffer between America and the USSR preventing (or at the very least altering) the Cold War but there is no way that anyone could have propped the Ottoman Empire (or the Austro-Hungarian Empire for that matter) after the war. The rise of nationalism coupled with weak central control made the collapse of those empires inevitable, which would have sent events spiraling in unimaginable directions had Germany won the war.
 
2014-01-25 07:31:53 PM

lack of warmth: iheartscotch: PC LOAD LETTER: iheartscotch: Not to rain on everyone's parade, but, we didn't save shiat in WWI. And we might not have gotten involved in WWII if the Japanese hadn't blown Pearl Harbor to kingdom come.

/ yes, I know; our arrival in WWI helped end that war quicker; but, WWI and the various restrictions put on Germany caused WWII

Agree on WW2, disagree on WW1. While portable machine guns, mortars, tanks, and aircraft transformed the way war was waged, there is zero doubt that the presence of American troops was the single most important factor in the failure of the German's offensive in the Second Battle of the Marne. And by having 10,000 new troops a day deployed in the summer of 1918, yes, we absolutely saved shiat, though I wouldn't go as far as some of the American Nationalist types who see us as some sort of heroic savior. We were the key, but we needed their help as much as they needed ours. Regardless the French were always going to lose unless the British could hold on. And with the loss of the Eastern Front, there is serious doubt that was possible.

I agree that our fresh troops were the decisive element to WWI. But, it's not like Black Jack Pershing personally biatch-slapped the Kaiser.

The French helped with our Revolution, and later the US helped them.  Major armies getting together is always good politics when you pick the right side.  It turned out well, so go team Allies.

I would toot the US horn a little louder, but the US helped and that is about all we can say about that.  In exchange, the US got to climb the world ladder.


The French didn't help us because they were magnanimous; they helped us to screw over the Brits.

WWI was one of the most bloody wars in history; but, little actually changed as a result of the war. We didn't really win as much as we didn't loose.
 
2014-01-25 07:34:44 PM

Oldiron_79: HMS_Blinkin: Oldiron_79: Well I'm rather certain Hitler don't come to power in Imperial Germany but whose to say a "just lost the war and paying reparations to Germany and Austria" Britain and/or France doesn't go Fascist? Especially France with the Napoleon tradition.

That's my point.  There's just no way to know.  All I know is, crummy as things are today, it's entirely possible that things would be worse in an alternate timeline.  Or they could be better.

A gnatzi France doesnt scare me to much in regards to America. France has always been more of a land power and there is an ocean in the way, and if they got too uppity Im sure Imperial Germany would have laid the smack down.

A gnatzi British Empire would scare me in regards to a pre WWII America. They had a badass navy and naval tradition, losing craphole colonies that they had to garrison would actually strengthen thier army, they have a whole country to our north from which to base a North American attack, and a whole country to our north from which to have 5th columnists that can blend in and speak our language and spy on or sabotage us.


Don't worry, get us to see about and our nefarious plots are undone, every time.

/I've said too much!
 
2014-01-25 07:35:08 PM

iheartscotch: Not to rain on everyone's parade, but, we didn't save shiat in WWI. And we might not have gotten involved in WWII if the Japanese hadn't blown Pearl Harbor to kingdom come.

/ yes, I know; our arrival in WWI helped end that war quicker; but, WWI and the various restrictions put on Germany caused WWII


Actually, had the US stayed out of the war, they likely would have ended it on their own, and sooner.
WebRepcurrentVotenoRatingnoWeight
 
2014-01-25 07:36:37 PM

PC LOAD LETTER: iheartscotch: PC LOAD LETTER: iheartscotch: Not to rain on everyone's parade, but, we didn't save shiat in WWI. And we might not have gotten involved in WWII if the Japanese hadn't blown Pearl Harbor to kingdom come.

/ yes, I know; our arrival in WWI helped end that war quicker; but, WWI and the various restrictions put on Germany caused WWII

Agree on WW2, disagree on WW1. While portable machine guns, mortars, tanks, and aircraft transformed the way war was waged, there is zero doubt that the presence of American troops was the single most important factor in the failure of the German's offensive in the Second Battle of the Marne. And by having 10,000 new troops a day deployed in the summer of 1918, yes, we absolutely saved shiat, though I wouldn't go as far as some of the American Nationalist types who see us as some sort of heroic savior. We were the key, but we needed their help as much as they needed ours. Regardless the French were always going to lose unless the British could hold on. And with the loss of the Eastern Front, there is serious doubt that was possible.

I agree that our fresh troops were the decisive element to WWI. But, it's not like Black Jack Pershing personally biatch-slapped the Kaiser.

Well, no, but we did do quite well in several key battles. I would say it was our tactical victories that won, not any strategic mastery.


I agree; I'd even say that we didn't win so much as we didn't lose.

WWI is really what got us involved in international politics. You can trace a lot of our current problems to events that happened because of the outcome of WWI.

/ plus, if we could keep our word for longer than 8 years; our lives would be so much simpler
 
2014-01-25 07:41:19 PM
Additionally, I don't know who it was that told the Serbians to help the Croats kill the Archduke but it must have been someone who was dead set against the creation of the United States of Austria in the middle of Europe.

The Germans, the Brits, the Russians, who knows...
 
2014-01-25 07:42:13 PM

Nicholas D. Wolfwood: In response to too many of the above posts to list -

I was under the impression that what really pushed Germany over the edge before WWII was the onerous terms of the Treaty of Versailles.

IIRC, Wilson argued for more humane terms, but England and particularly France were out for blood and would not be denied.

Even without Hitler, that economic climate could easily have led to a similar outcome, with someone else serving as the flashpoint.

One particularly nasty alternate historyis where WWII happens and Germany has a *competent* leader. Monster though he was, Hitler was in many ways our best secret weapon.


Normal western democracy just wasnt gonna happen in post losing WWI Germany, if you had a time machine shot Hitler in 1920 Germany would probably have went communist. Then you have a communist Germany and USSR running a gang rape on Britain and France when a totally different than historic WWII occurs.
 
2014-01-25 07:42:48 PM

iheartscotch: the various restrictions put on Germany caused WWII


I love this line. "Stop hitting yourself!", basically.

If the penalties were so "severe", how did the Germans manage to build the most effective war machine the world had ever seen? If you ask me, they were not severe enough. The idea of "Germany" is not an eternal concept, it was a 19th-century idea that united several disparate kingdoms. We could have easily justified splitting the country up into its 1870 borders and let it spend 100 years uniting again. But we didn't, and THAT'S why WWII happened.
 
2014-01-25 07:44:23 PM

iheartscotch: WWI is really what got us involved in international politics.


Spanish-American War would like to have a word with you about that...
 
2014-01-25 07:48:14 PM
so hu gets to save the world from america?
 
2014-01-25 07:49:11 PM

mccallcl: iheartscotch: WWI is really what got us involved in international politics.

Spanish-American War would like to have a word with you about that...


Mexican-American war would like a word with you.

The war of 1812 was pretty much revolution part 2 electric boogaloo.
 
2014-01-25 07:50:03 PM

Oldiron_79: Germany would probably have went communist


Bolshevik communist,  Menshevik communist or Eser communist
 
2014-01-25 07:50:20 PM
You lot showed up late then tried to take all the credit. One of my most memorable headdesk moments was in a pub being told by an American that I would be speaking German if it weren't for America...told this right in front of three Russians.

The same one also once held up a £10 note and commented that it was funny because US money says "In God  We Trust" and the Bank of England tenner has a picture of Darwin on the back who is, in her words "like, the anti-God."
 
Displayed 50 of 103 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report