Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Poll: Causes of Great War

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Selous View Post
    Your key opponents thus far have been a Belgian, a Kiwi and one perfidious Englander, Herr hoff.
    Putting the kybosh on German bollocks is, and always has been, a team effort.
    Or Dutch bollocks for that matter!
    Signing out.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Full Monty View Post
      You're not even at the starting gate old chap.
      Arrogant as usual but simply hot air.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by tigerivan View Post
        Arrogant as usual but simply hot air.
        Proving I'm correct once more! You can't answer the questions either can you.
        Signing out.

        Comment


        • I think the British would have eventually joined France in the war even if Germany had not violated Belgian neutrality. Their foreign policy had always been about keeping the balance of power on the "continent", and Germany winning the war would certainly have tipped the scales.

          Comment


          • In 1912 the French expended a great deal of effort trying to get a firm commitment from the British. What they got was the following:-

            "From time to time in recent years the French and British naval and
            military experts have consulted together. It has always been understood
            that such consultation does not restrict the freedom of either
            Government to decide at any future time whether or not to assist
            the other by armed force. We have agreed that consultation behveen
            experts is not, and ought not to be regarded as an engagement
            that commits either Government to action in a contingency
            that has not arisen and may never arise. The disposition, for instance,
            of the French and British fleets respectively at the present
            moment is not based upon an engagement to co-operate in war.
            You have, however, pointed out that, if either Government had
            grave reason to expect an unprovoked attack by a third Power, it
            might become essential to know whether it could in that event depend
            upon the armed assistance of the other.
            I agree that, if either Government had grave reason to expect an
            unprovoked attack by a third Power, or something that threatened
            the general peace, it should immediately discuss with the other,
            whether both Governments should act together to prevent aggression
            and to preserve peace, and if so what measures they would be
            prepared to take in common. If these measures involved action, the
            plans of the General Staffs would at once be taken into consideration,
            and the Governments would then decide what effect should
            be given to them." (Samuel R Williamson - 'The Politics of Grand Strategy' - p.297)

            If this equates to an 'alliance' then my backside smells of fresh roses!
            Signing out.

            Comment


            • I certainly didn't say the French and British had an alliance. I would say though that the British were certainly preparing should the Germans take action.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by spwgame View Post
                I certainly didn't say the French and British had an alliance.
                I know, that's why I didn't quote you.
                Signing out.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by spwgame View Post
                  I think the British would have eventually joined France in the war even if Germany had not violated Belgian neutrality. Their foreign policy had always been about keeping the balance of power on the "continent", and Germany winning the war would certainly have tipped the scales.
                  Exactly.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Full Monty View Post
                    Proving I'm correct once more! You can't answer the questions either can you.
                    Hot air and arrogance like always.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by tigerivan View Post
                      Hot air and arrogance like always.
                      Lol! A typically meaningless response. If you could answer the questions or provide evidence you would, but you can't. Ergo, I must be correct in my assertion. You didn't even address the text I provided as further proof. Challenge me with facts if you can. I dare you to, even double-dare you to!
                      Signing out.

                      Comment


                      • Alliance?

                        Those that remain unconvinced, and who aren't already pretending they're the three [un]wise monkeys, should compare the text of the 1912 'agreement' between Britain & France with the terms of the Dual Alliance, Triple Alliance and Franco-Russian 'secret' military convention because they are genuine, scripted out, alliances. Should that still not be enough they should ask the following questions:-

                        1) Why was Joffre so uncertain about British participation in any continental war that his 'Plan XVII' included no British forces?

                        2) Why did France and Russia plead for a firm statement of commitment by the British in late July 1914 in the belief that it would deter Germany and prevent all-out war?

                        3) Why, on August 1st 1914, did the British Cabinet decide against sending the BEF to France?

                        Alliances have clauses setting out mutual commitments to cover situations like the above. That they arose says 'no alliance' no matter what politicians try to score points off each other with.
                        Signing out.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Full Monty View Post
                          1) Why was Joffre so uncertain about British participation in any continental war that his 'Plan XVII' included no British forces?
                          Joffre planned for both possibilities.

                          2) Why did France and Russia plead for a firm statement of commitment by the British in late July 1914 in the belief that it would deter Germany and prevent all-out war?
                          Because the British were acting as if they were trying to decieve the Austrians and Germans about their intentions, that neutrality was a possibility.

                          3) Why, on August 1st 1914, did the British Cabinet decide against sending the BEF to France?
                          Odd then that Haldane and Asquith then proceeded to mobilize the BEF without the cabinet's permission or authorization. I take it this pair wasn't part of the cabinet, to have done that? :^)

                          Alliances have clauses setting out mutual commitments to cover situations like the above. That they arose says 'no alliance' no matter what politicians try to score points off each other with.
                          You seem to assume that the lack of British commitment in written terms implied that the British intended to leave open the possibility of abandoning France. Did the opposite ever occur? Did you ever come to wonder if the reason why the British didn't commit to an alliance was because there were no possible conditions underwhich the British would ever have abandoned France?

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Full Monty View Post
                            Lol! A typically meaningless response. If you could answer the questions or provide evidence you would, but you can't. Ergo, I must be correct in my assertion. You didn't even address the text I provided as further proof. Challenge me with facts if you can. I dare you to, even double-dare you to!
                            A double dare?

                            If he backs out of a double dare, he's a total girl.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Glenn239 View Post
                              Joffre planned for both possibilities.
                              He had one plan.

                              Because the British were acting as if they were trying to decieve the Austrians and Germans about their intentions, that neutrality was a possibility.
                              'Acting as if?' Could you expand on that a little?

                              Odd then that Haldane and Asquith then proceeded to mobilize the BEF without the cabinet's permission or authorization. I take it this pair wasn't part of the cabinet, to have done that? :^)
                              Mobilisation orders were issued late on 4th August after the Cabinet had decided to go to war. Quite how you get the idea that Haldane and Asquith did this without their knowledge is a mystery to me.

                              You seem to assume that the lack of British commitment in written terms implied that the British intended to leave open the possibility of abandoning France. Did the opposite ever occur? Did you ever come to wonder if the reason why the British didn't commit to an alliance was because there were no possible conditions underwhich the British would ever have abandoned France?
                              Lol! It would depend on who was in government. Had the 'Radicals' within the Liberals held sway there would have been no entry into the war in August 1914. They objected to the letter anyway, fearing it gave away too much.
                              Signing out.

                              Comment


                              • Imperialistic/military build up through the 1800s and the alliances formed.

                                Comment

                                Latest Topics

                                Collapse

                                Working...
                                X