well, did we win?

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

If the US hadn't entered and help halt Germany's advance WW1 might have never ended. We are talking about the US occupying Iraq for a few years like it is the greatest tragedy in history. You think that Germany would have peacefully ruled Europe especially with Russia looming on the Eastern front?

germany was on the cusp of winning the war when we got in. it's why they had once again said all shipping was a target; they figured they'd win out before we could get over there.

my only point was the peace that was forced on germany after that war was what eventually lead to ww2. i've done more studying on ww1, germany was made out to be the bad guy-but the start of that war, and the build up...well, i don't think germany was the only one at fault for that war.

i don't think us invading iraq was the greatest tragedy in history-there's a lot of history, and a lot of tragedy.
but i do think that it was a tremendous mistake. ill advised, ill planned, poorly waged, and took too much away from afganistan.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Danzig

germany was on the cusp of winning the war when we got in. it's why they had once again said all shipping was a target; they figured they'd win out before we could get over there.

my only point was the peace that was forced on germany after that war was what eventually lead to ww2. i've done more studying on ww1, germany was made out to be the bad guy-but the start of that war, and the build up...well, i don't think germany was the only one at fault for that war.

i don't think us invading iraq was the greatest tragedy in history-there's a lot of history, and a lot of tragedy.
but i do think that it was a tremendous mistake. ill advised, ill planned, poorly waged, and took too much away from afganistan.

"The peace forced on Germany" is an interesting way to put it. Perhaps "They lost" would be a better way to explain why German nationalism led to Hitler and WW2.

I wasn't inferring that you in particular said that Iraq was the greatest tragedy in history but when you look at past "wars" it really is hardly more than a blip on the radar screen.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

"The peace forced on Germany" is an interesting way to put it. Perhaps "They lost" would be a better way to explain why German nationalism led to Hitler and WW2.

I wasn't inferring that you in particular said that Iraq was the greatest tragedy in history but when you look at past "wars" it really is hardly more than a blip on the radar screen.

i say forced on germany because france in particular laid most of the blame for the start of the war on germany, when in fact that's really not true. the weeks leading up to ww1 were a colossal cluster**** of epic proportions. had austria just gone into serbia on her own, things probably wouldn't have escalated as they did. but there's a saying that an unjust peace is better than a just war, so they ultimately agreed to the terms.
then there's the fact that an armistice was declared; it wasn't a win-more of a temporary ceasefire while they tried to work up a plan to end the war. germany almost went back to fighting again, rather than accept france's offer. wilson did his best to keep france from imposing such harsh terms. the harshness is what lead to everything that germany went thru after, and what lead to hitler's rise, and eventually to ww2 in europe.

and i agree completely-when one looks at iraq in a historical vein, it's nothing. however, it's impact on this country in its short history is huge.

on another note about ww1, if anyone is ever in kansas city, mo, the ww1 museum is located there. excellent displays, lots of info. 34000 miles of trenches on the western front alone.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Danzig

i say forced on germany because france in particular laid most of the blame for the start of the war on germany, when in fact that's really not true. the weeks leading up to ww1 were a colossal cluster**** of epic proportions. had austria just gone into serbia on her own, things probably wouldn't have escalated as they did. but there's a saying that an unjust peace is better than a just war, so they ultimately agreed to the terms.
then there's the fact that an armistice was declared; it wasn't a win-more of a temporary ceasefire while they tried to work up a plan to end the war. germany almost went back to fighting again, rather than accept france's offer. wilson did his best to keep france from imposing such harsh terms. the harshness is what lead to everything that germany went thru after, and what lead to hitler's rise, and eventually to ww2 in europe.

and i agree completely-when one looks at iraq in a historical vein, it's nothing. however, it's impact on this country in its short history is huge.

on another note about ww1, if anyone is ever in kansas city, mo, the ww1 museum is located there. excellent displays, lots of info. 34000 miles of trenches on the western front alone.

Sure but what if we hadnt got involvd and France and other countries were annexed. It would have only been a matter of time until Russia ramped up and went to war with Germany again and with the Germans so spread out most likely constantly putting out fires from the underground which wouldnt have been so happy with being taken over they might have actually lost. Would Russian control of Europe be a positive? Obviously hypo's but it isnt a given that germany would have sucessfully ruled Europe peacefully. As a matter of fact you could argue that there might have been multiple wars.

[DaTruth]

The invasion of Iraq was foolhardy, but some of you act as if Saddam wasn't already on thin ice with the international community. You remember things like the conditions to end the 1991 Gulf War, UNSCOM, and the no-fly zones, right?

[bigrun]

Originally Posted by DaTruth

The invasion of Iraq was foolhardy, but some of you act as if Saddam wasn't already on thin ice with the international community. You remember things like the conditions to end the 1991 Gulf War, UNSCOM, and the no-fly zones, right?

True, but how were they such a threat that required invasion and 8 year war?

[jms62]

Originally Posted by bigrun

True, but how were they such a threat that required invasion and 8 year war?

And over 1 Trillion dollars. Going forward unless we are attacked I say we institute a 10% war tax to pay for any of these wars. Congressional approval required. We will see how many of these useless wars we are invovled in.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Sure but what if we hadnt got involvd and France and other countries were annexed. It would have only been a matter of time until Russia ramped up and went to war with Germany again and with the Germans so spread out most likely constantly putting out fires from the underground which wouldnt have been so happy with being taken over they might have actually lost. Would Russian control of Europe be a positive? Obviously hypo's but it isnt a given that germany would have sucessfully ruled Europe peacefully. As a matter of fact you could argue that there might have been multiple wars.

thats the thing...no real way of knowing how things would have gone on from ww one. russia didnt really start exerting real power til after the second war. they got out of ww one before the end and of course had their revolution. it took a whuile for them to become a world player again.
im not suggesting that germany shouldnt have had conditions at the end of ww one. but the harshness of those conditions are what ultimately lead to hitler, rearming, and invasion.
at any rate, interesting to speculate, altho of course it really is a useless exercise.