Lead Adventure Forum
Miniatures Adventure => The Great War => Topic started by: Vanvlak on November 09, 2007, 10:50:35 AM
-
(http://i78.photobucket.com/albums/j108/vanvlak/poppy2.jpg)
-
Compiègne? Hm. Stirs difficult feelings.
But today, 9th November, is worth remembering, too. I always felt it would have been the better date for germans national holiday, with 3 remarkable events taking place in the last 100 years: 1918 the proclamation of the republic, 1938 the so-called "Reichskristallnacht", and 1989 the opening of the wall.
-
I have faith in humanity because less than a hundred years after the horror of the Great War, and less than two generations after the Second World War, we citizens of once-mortal enemies can speak in friendship. This, more than any stone monument or bronze plaque, shows that those deaths were not in vain.
-
Hear, hear!
-
Does it show that, though? If we can all be friends now, then why the hell did those poor fellows all have to die in the Great War?
Seems to me that, unbearable as the thought may be, maybe they did die in vain. Especially when you consider what happened twenty years after.
But having said that, I am so glad we are all friends now, and that in 2007 I could go to Rheinland-Pfalz, drink their lovely beer, eat their curious sausages, and try to steal their painting secrets without being shot at.
-
Does it show that, though? If we can all be friends now, then why the hell did those poor fellows all have to die in the Great War?
I think is does! If we were still at war - then they would have died in vain.
:|
-
I think we should not forget however we do need to remember on an equal footing all those that have died since the end of WW2, all the small wars and scuffles have their own tallies of the dead across the world with no end in sight
-
Well I don't really like to think about it this way, but as far as I can see, the monstrous losses and unimaginable sacrifice of Ypres, the Somme, Verdun and the rest achieved nothing but hold the door open for the likes of Mussolini, Hitler and Stalin, and other such gangsters to come marching in.
That's why I say it was in vain. The next generation had to do it all over again.
-
I think we should not forget however we do need to remember on an equal footing all those that have died since the end of WW2, all the small wars and scuffles have their own tallies of the dead across the world with no end in sight
True - in fact Remembrance day is dedicated to all war dead, not just WWI, although it is still held on the day the Great War ended.
-
Does it show that, though? If we can all be friends now, then why the hell did those poor fellows all have to die in the Great War?
I don't think I can answer this. I really don't, and I really want to.
I've written and erased about a thousand words because they don't work.
-
Does it show that, though? If we can all be friends now, then why the hell did those poor fellows all have to die in the Great War?
Seems to me that, unbearable as the thought may be, maybe they did die in vain. Especially when you consider what happened twenty years after.
I'd argue with that. If it wasn't for those men on the Allied side fighting then Belgium, France and a swathe of Europe would have been ruled by a deeply imperialist and ruthless Germany. No doubt war would have spread with the attempt to take colonies away from what few imperial powers existed.
Nonetheless the victory was cheapened by the peace. The Versailles treaty being one of the great foul ups of modern history.
If we hadn't had them then perhaps we wouldn't have the peace now.
-
I guess we don't see eye to eye on that, then.
For me the victory was rendered utterly worthless by the peace, as if it had never happened. All the sacrifice was undone and left meaningless, and Europe was condemned to dance the same waltz in another twenty years.
I suppose the only way to have avoided that would be a quick victory (for any side) in 1914. Once so much blood and treasure had been spent, no one was going to be magnanimous in victory.
But I don't have a crystal ball, so such speculation is a bit pointless, really.
I'd like to think all that sacrifice was worthwhile, but I just don't believe it.
-
Plynkes, do you not agree to that there is a difference these days? I certainly think so and it cannot have come out of nothing.
-
No, the sacrifice of 1939-45 was not for nothing. Out of that came the world we live in, and out of that peace came our united and (mostly) peaceful Europe.
But 14-18 just seems so pointless and futile to me that it is depressing to even contemplate it sometimes.
I am grateful for and appreciate their sacrifice (and that they were trying to protect the future, the one that I live in), I just don't think it achieved anything good.
-
I have come to consider WWI and WWII as one prolonged conflict. The European problems were not solved with the Versaille treaty.
-
"Lest We Forget"
-
I have come to consider WWI and WWII as one prolonged conflict. The European problems were not solved with the Versaille treaty.
I'd agree with that.
I suppose one could put it this way, if we hadn't had 1914-18 we'd just have had 1939-45 a lot earlier and quite possibly it would have gone a lot worse for the 'good guys'.
-
Hmmm. But without 14-18 the conditions that lead to 39-45 aren't there. If there is no Great War then chances are there are no Fascists, Nazis or Communists in power anywhere. If so then we are living in an entirely different world with its own radically different history, and speculating about how that would have turned out, and what wars may have been fought is just moving into the realms of fantasy.
39-45 a lot earlier? Who is fighting whom? Why are they fighting? If there's no Nazis, then it isn't really 39-45, is it?
-
Hmmm. But without 14-18 the conditions that lead to 39-45 aren't there. If there is no Great War then chances are there are no Fascists, Nazis or Communists in power anywhere. If so then we are living in an entirely different world with its own radically different history, and speculating about how that would have turned out, and what wars may have been fought is just moving into the realms of fantasy.
39-45 a lot earlier? Who is fighting whom? Why are they fighting? If there's no Nazis, then it isn't really 39-45, is it?
Interesting thoughts, Would Britian have retained its hold on the empire? would there have been a Russian Civil War? would America have become the Powerhouse of industry and commerce?
-
Yes but the conditions for '14-18 still are there and could only increase with age. Fascists and Communists are just as likely, particuarly in the more tumoltous areas (the Balkans, Poland) and you'd have more heavily armed nationalist groups (Poles, Czechs, Hungarians, Phillipinos, Indians etc.) and more bitter fighting over colonies (Fashoda only waaay, waay worse). Exploitation of China would continue, probably with Japanese help, possible insurrections in the Middle East, either Communist in nature or more likely Jihadical (modern Jihad warfare beginning with the ahdi in Sudan mixed up with the Kaisers support for anti-British Muslim nationalist and sectarians), all combined with a possible fall of the Ottoman Empire and requisite civil war. There is even potential for a Communist Revolution in Russia with increasing industrialisation (because whilst the Great War provoked the immediate result there was a long history of discontent and several peasent uprisings in the early 20th century).
Lowtardog, I'd say yes to all!
-America wasn't just faster, her industrial methods and practices were far superior and remained so. Corelli Barnett is particuarly good on this.
-No force in the Empire was powerful enough to really gain independance, it took two world wars to do that.
-RCW is quite possible because whilst WW1 provided the opportunity there was already widespread discontent.
-
Of course, what you say is possible, but it isn't exactly the "39-45 a lot earlier" that you were postulating before, which is what I was responding to.
I don't think we can really know what would have happened had there been no Great War. For one thing, in our "No Great War" scenario, why is there no Great War? Things have happened differently enough to shift us into an alternative universe where nothing is quite the same. We're just making stuff up now, which fun though it is, doesn't really get us anywhere.
-
I have come to consider WWI and WWII as one prolonged conflict. The European problems were not solved with the Versaille treaty.
Worse, Versailles started more problems.But on the other hand, a german victory with hegemony over eastern europe wouldn't have made things better, maybe even more complicated. A status quo ante bellum in central europe would have been preferable, with Poland, the baltic states and Finland indipendent and the kuk monarchy reformed. Even then there would have been several problems: Polands access to the baltic sea, Czechoslovakia, Serbia to name but a few. And the Bolos, of course.
-
Here's my norman grand-grandfather in april 1915.
(http://perronny.free.fr/ww1/Emile_Potel_1915.jpg)
Here's my grandfather (born in 1904) with his younger brother, his mother and grandmother. The children wore "uniforms" as their father was on the front. Their grandmother fled Lorraine after the french-prussian war.
(http://perronny.free.fr/ww1/FamillePotel1418.jpg)
Fortunately he came back from war.
Olivier
-
Of course, what you say is possible, but it isn't exactly the "39-45 a lot earlier" that you were postulating before, which is what I was responding to.
I don't think we can really know what would have happened had there been no Great War. For one thing, in our "No Great War" scenario, why is there no Great War? Things have happened differently enough to shift us into an alternative universe where nothing is quite the same. We're just making stuff up now, which fun though it is, doesn't really get us anywhere.
Oh, by '39-45 I meant World War at its industrialised peak rather than Nazis and Commies. Probably should have made that clear. :oops:
On No Great War I can think of a few scenarios:
1. Alex does listen to Cousin Willy and stops mobilisation.
2. Balkans war continues on rather than ending so Ferdinand never cops it.
3. Russian victory in R-J war, Russia turns to east rather than west leaving German planners less nihilistic.
4. Ferdinands botched assassination is properly botched.
5. Britain refuses to enter war meaning France falls. Probably an accomadation with Russia by Germany then.
6. Fashoda leads to a war in the colonies between the colonial powers, namely Britain and Germany. Fighting done by proxies, raids and manipulation of tribes.
7. Austro-Hungary collapses, Germany more interested in reinstating/stealing it with Balkans and Russia all trying to muscle in on the action.
8. Polish revolt, Russia becomes involved in a neo-Winter War, meaning it can't come to Frances aid.
Certainly all this is making stuff up but that pretty much is what speculative history is about. Indeed its pretty much impossible to write history without speculation.
Sgt Perry, I love your Grandfathers coat!
-
Wow. Great photos. I wish I had photos like that. I had several ancestors in the Great War, but no photos, really. I also remember when I was little a legion of maiden aunts who had all lost their beaus in the war, and never looked at another man after. I really should have dozens of cousins, but I have almost none.
No photos, but I do have this:
(http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y40/Plynkes/medal2.jpg)