Lest we forget to bash Trump

Blue checkmark Twitter has been alight this past 24 hours with complaints that Trump is a disgrace. Why this time, I don’t hear you ask? Apparently, rather than join Merkel and Macron at Compiègne, the site where the 1918 Armistice was signed, Trump decided to stay in his room and watch TV because it was raining. I have no idea whether this is true or not, but given this version is being widely circulated by lefties and it happens to suit their narrative, we’ll be safer assuming it’s a load of bollocks.

There are several reasons why Trump may not have attended. Was it on his agenda? The main Armistice event is today under the Arc de Triomphe, I don’t know if attendance at Compiègne the day before is normal for a US president. Was Trump even invited? Many people posted pictures of Obama standing in the rain, albeit at a wholly different event but you’d not know that from any caption. This is known as “fake news”. I’m certain that had Trump gone along, the same people now saying “disgraceful” over and over would complain he wasn’t welcome and he did or said something inappropriate. Or his wife looked too good in her outfit, as usual.

The blue checkmarks also simpered over this Tweet, and followed up in the comments with more Trump-bashing:


It’s a good pic, but I fear the sycophants are missing a vital point. Angela Merkel, who was supposed to be the leader of the free world when Trump “abdicated the responsibility”, is barely in charge of Germany having been rejected at the ballot box. Macron, who is fresh from honouring the leader of the Vichy Regime, has a popularity rating of 29%, a record low. Meanwhile, the Americans have just had a vote which, if it not exactly providing Trump with a ringing endorsement, did not show he was wildly disliked either.

So here we have American, British, and European elites praising two deeply unpopular leaders for a cutesy photo-op while criticising, for the millionth time, a president who remains popular with the masses. Perhaps Trump was being disrespectful for not going to Compiègne, but standing on the graves of dead soldiers to virtue-signal your dislike for him is hardly better.

That’s not the only point they’ve missed, though. A popular view among the dim or dishonest is that it was Trump-style nationalism that caused WWI, whereas it was as much about competing empires as anything. One could hardly argue, as you might with WWII, that populations were whipped into war fever before the shooting began in 1914, nor that those who fought were doing so for selfish internal interests. If we’re looking for parallels between today and the pre-1914 situation on mainland Europe, we might want to look at the EU and it’s economic and political bullying of member states and Macron’s recent call for pan-European army. For the elites, though, this is all good. No doubt Archduke Ferdinand thought much the same thing when planning the tour of his subjects in the Balkans.

Frankly, the sight of deeply unpopular German and French leaders cosying up, cheered on by elites who scream hysterically about an American president, does not bode well for peace in Europe.

Liked it? Take a second to support Tim Newman on Patreon!
Share

42 thoughts on “Lest we forget to bash Trump

  1. The photograph stunt– ie Obummer in the rain somewhere else unnamed–put up to give the impression that the Chicago Marxist creep could be bothered to attend this little shindig previously but Trump couldn’t is absolutely typical of the scummy and brazenly lying left.

  2. What about a credible threat received ala Day of The Jackal to assassinate Trump in France. Either by Macrons Rothschilds gang because they hate him or Hezbollah because there is plenty or Iranian sympathizers in France, necessitating a change in schedule, it wouldn’t be the first time that plans have had to be change due to intelligence.

    Or is that too old fashioned these days.

  3. @MrEcks- Even worse the comparison between Candidate Obama’s scripted globalist carbon speech to 200,000 gushing Germans with JFK’s freedom speech delivered to 120,000 Berliners.

    Obama – “This is the moment when we must come together to save this planet. Let us resolve that we will not leave our children a world where the oceans rise and famine spreads and terrible storms devastate our lands. Let us resolve that all nations – including my own – will act with the same seriousness of purpose as has your nation, and reduce the carbon we send into our atmosphere. This is the moment to give our children back their future. This is the moment to stand as one.”

    JFK- “Freedom is indivisible, and when one man is enslaved, all are not free. When all are free, then we can look forward to that day when this city will be joined as one and this country and this great Continent of Europe in a peaceful and hopeful globe. When that day finally comes, as it will, the people of West Berlin can take sober satisfaction in the fact that they were in the front lines for almost two decades. All free men, wherever they may live, are citizens of Berlin, and, therefore, as a free man, I take pride in the words “Ich bin ein Berliner.”

  4. Indeed. The whole thing was kicked off by someone who wanted their country liberated from an empire shooting an Archduke. This led to countries backing Serbia and Germany got very jittery about it, thinking Russia, France and England wanted Germany annihilated.

    Historic parallels are nearly always nonsense and expose just how poorly many people know their history or can grasp that technological changes are going to affect history. Most people don’t grasp what the world used to be like and in particular, how much it cost to get food, how much wealth was about owning arable land or getting other people to work the land for them under threat of violence. A lot of support for WW2 in Germany is because he promised Lebensraum, which was a well-supported policy even before he came on the scene – the slavs will grow lots of cheap food for us. We might find that policy atrocious, but if our bellies were as empty as Germans, or at risk of blockade (like Germany was), we might feel like that.

    The reason we ended war in the west is that tractors, combine harvesters, fertilisers and transportation dramatically changed the cost and availability of food. It just isn’t worth killing your next door neighbour for his field. Might as well pay him to grow the food while you do something more productive.

  5. What’s particularly depressing is the way that even those mainish-stream media I still enjoy like Spiked feel the need to shoehorn in some knee-jerk Trump bashing at every opportunity.

    That Ella Whelan woman is one of the worst offenders. You get the feeling that despite having acceptable views on the madness of feminism, she belongs to the same Islington dinner party set as all the other media elitists and is just as mindlessly immersed in their politics as everyone else.

    Just a different cheek of the same arse.

  6. Hey, I think I actually know the answer to this one! I saw it on the news: apparently Macron said this pan-European army would be used to defend Europe *from America*, and Trump rightly took offence.

    Macron told a radio station called Europe 1 “We have to protect ourselves with respect to China, Russia and even the United States,” but there’s some quibbling in the media about the context. Apparently it’s too hard for these fuckers to just append a transcript of his remarks so we can judge for ourselves.

    Anyway: that might be it.

    Or, it might be something else. I just read that the White House said something to the effect of, This event was sprung upon us and we didn’t have time to organise the motorcade. Which sounds like bullshit to me, but there you go.

  7. This event was sprung upon us and we didn’t have time to organise the motorcade.

    It’s quite possible that the weather grounded Marine 1 and the security in charge of the motorcade hadn’t the time to plan a route, or had reservations of some kind. They may have looked at the event and advised it wasn’t worth it, particularly if there was something more important the next day. A lot of people don’t realise that the security and logistics operations around the US president is like nothing on Earth, and they don’t take chances – especially in a place which is openly hostile to their charge.

    But it doesn’t really matter: if there was a genuine reason for Trump not being present, we’d never hear about it. As I said, Trump sitting in his room watching TV suits the narrative, so that’s the story we get.

  8. One could hardly argue, as you might with WWII, that populations were whipped into war fever before the shooting began in 1914

    My understanding is that the populations willingly whipped themselves into a war fever in the summer of 1914, due to a combination of nationalism, overconfidence, and not having fought a major war in Europe for almost a century.

    In 1939, no-one was eager for war, except for die-hard Nazis and 17-year-olds, because everyone remembered the Great War. Only a string of bloodless victories throughout 1938-1939 gave Hitler the support he needed to attack Poland – and then that turned out to be an easy conquest – and then France turned out to be an easy conquest. But there were no eager, undisciplined crowds in the streets and squares as there were in 1914.

    An interesting thing I’ve read about the Great War is that the nationalism we associate with the second World War actually began in the first, though it did not have the racial tint which it did in the second. Also, the press abandoned all semblance of objectivity, or dedication to the truth when reporting about the war. It was far more important to support the troops by telling the right kinds of lies. The result was that after a few years in the trenches, the men in the front lines hated reporters more than the enemy. Also, when the second world war came about, and reports came of all sorts of Nazi atrocities and barbarities, no-one felt an urgency to act upon them, because they’d heard all sorts of lies before, and now believed nothing they heard.

    My main source for this is Stephan Zweig’s “The World of Yesterday”, which I heartily recommend.

  9. My understanding is that the populations willingly whipped themselves into a war fever in the summer of 1914, due to a combination of nationalism, overconfidence, and not having fought a major war in Europe for almost a century.

    Up until Archduke Ferdinand got shot, nobody had the faintest idea war was coming and then it got serious very fast. Only once war had been declared did the whipping up of passions begin.

    In 1939, no-one was eager for war, except for die-hard Nazis and 17-year-olds, because everyone remembered the Great War.

    Nobody was eager for war except the die-hard Nazis who ran Germany, but most knew it was coming, dividing governments across Europe into peace and war camps.

  10. When economic and international political tensions rise European countries have an endearing talent for letting shit rise to the top…Merkel and Macron to name but two.I’m happy to go with logistical problems for Trumps no show as I’m sure the secret service have the last voice in his travel arrangements, arrangements that are probably micro studied months in advance and not easily changed.

  11. Up until Archduke Ferdinand got shot, nobody had the faintest idea war was coming and then it got serious very fast. Only once war had been declared did the whipping up of passions begin.

    I don’t know about that. True, there weren’t any big crowds clamouring for war like there were in 1914, but the previous decades had seen a widespread sense that a large-scale conflict between the great powers was, if not imminent, at least on the cards. The whipping-up of public opinion didn’t start in earnest until after Archduke Ferdinand was shot, but it’s doubtful that passions could have reached such a pitch in such a short amount of time if there wasn’t the sense of “We always knew something big was coming, and now here it is!”

  12. You just have to think of all those Balkan wars between 1910 and 14 to realise that nationalist feelings were building and these new nations wanted to grab bits of other nations. Italy wanted Trieste. Romania wanted Transylvania. Bulgaria, Greece and Serbia wanted Macedonia etc. Lots of tension was building.

    Then on the larger scale, Germany wanted to outbuild the British navy – stoutly resisted by the Liberal government. Germany wanted overseas colonies, leading to the Agadir crisis.

    It just needed a match to be lit.

  13. “Only once war had been declared did the whipping up of passions begin.”

    Thats not true – there was huge public support of and even demand for the dreadnought building arms race with Germany that occurred in the Edwardian era.

  14. Thats not true – there was huge public support of and even demand for the dreadnought building arms race with Germany that occurred in the Edwardian era.

    That’s not the same thing.

  15. Then on the larger scale, Germany wanted to outbuild the British navy – stoutly resisted by the Liberal government. Germany wanted overseas colonies, leading to the Agadir crisis.

    Yeah, kinda what I was saying about empires.

  16. @TOMX – “but the previous decades had seen a widespread sense that a large-scale conflict between the great powers was, if not imminent, at least on the cards”

    That is certainly my read-on history up until the turn of the twentieth century, thirteen empires had ruled the world and maintained the balance of sorts. WWI led to the destruction of the German, Russian, Austrian and Turkish empires with the remaining imperialistic systems all but done by the fifties. The centuries old and well established system of empires was not undone by a single or random event but was due to years of planning, manoeuvring and intrigue.

    One of the major foundation stones of the Great War was laid by Disraeli at the Berlin Conference of 1878.

    “Our great object was to break up and permanently prevent the alliance of the three Empires and I maintain there never was a general diplomatic result more completely affected.” – Benjamin Disraeli

    Having put Slavic Christians under Austro Hungarian rule, a permanent wedge was placed between the Russian and Austro- Hungarian empires. Both Bismarck and Tolstoy warned against and accurately predicted the build up towards and the eventual Great War.

    “the crash will come twenty years after my departure if things go on like this… One day, the great European War will come out of some damned foolish thing in the Balkans” – Bsimarck

    “The Franco-Russian alliance cannot now present itself as anything else than what it is: a league of war.” Tolstoy

    The formation of the Triple Entente and its nemesis the Triple Alliance many years before were nothing less than the establishment of major war footings.

  17. “We have to protect ourselves with respect to China, Russia and even the United States,”

    Poor Monsieur Micron. Of all the threats faced by a pan-European army (standard requirement, all commanders must speak French?) the prospect of America invading — I am sure those landing craft can easily do 3000 miles in the best of Atlantic bad weather — is vanishingly small next to Russia arriving to take back what they used to own or China, simply marching over everyone having used their little implants in our telecommunications devices to find out what Le General is up to.

    Plus, a pan-European army would be so tethered and restricted by rules of engagement and written permissions and codes of conduct plus at least 30 per cent female infantry to go with the ten percent tranny commandos that the war would be over in about two and a half hours.

    PS: First World War… Didn’t we send an army over because we had a treaty with Belgium about them being invaded? Curious that, having a treaty with the traditional battlefield of Europe.

  18. @Diogenes – “Italy wanted Trieste”

    The Welsh journalist Gareth Jones visited Trieste and the adjoining regions after Italy got Trieste and during the build up to WWII. His short accounts of those times including when he accompanied Hitler from Berlin to a speech in Frankfurt are well worth the read to get a feel for what was actually going down, on the ground with the local folk.

    …………………………………………………………………………………….

    “On Thursday Mr. Gareth Jones is to fly with Hitler, the German Chancellor, from Frankfurt to attend a Nazi meeting. This was the first time Hitler had invited a foreign observer to fly with him since he became Chancellor.”

    “At this point of our conversation the brilliant lights along the Trieste shore appeared and we were approaching what was once the great port of the Austro-Hungarian Empire and the link between Central Europe and the East. After the War Trieste became Italian and now it plays a vital part in Italian policy.

    My final impression is that Trieste is a clue to Italy’s policy of maintaining the Independence of Austria. The Italians fear that if Austria joins with Germany the Germans will cast longing eyes at the port of Trieste, in the same way as the Russians coveted Constantinople before the War.

    An independent little Austria is no danger to Trieste. Therefore, the Italians by recent agreement have allowed Austria a free harbour in Trieste, where the Austrians pay no customs duties and have extra-territorial rights.

    Italy’s fight for the independence of Austria is, therefore, Italy’s fight for Trieste. And because Trieste means Italy’s spearhead for expansion throughout Africa there are, for example, four Italian lines from Trieste which sail round Africa – and because Trieste means Italy’s mastery of the Adriatic, Mussolini is not likely, without a grim struggle, to allow Austria to join with Germany.”

    “The region around Trieste, which borders on Yugoslavia, is to Italy what Wales is to Britain. There live in the countryside here about 1,000,000 Slovenes, who speak a Slav language and to whom Italian is foreign.

    The Italians are doing all they can to crush the Slovene language.

    The Bishop of Trieste is combating the Italianising influence. He believes that all peoples have a right to worship in their own language, and he is fighting for the Slovene minority. He has, however, been forbidden to publish a Prayer Book in the Slovene language.

    Imagine the revolt which would spread through Wales if Welsh Prayer Books were abolished! Priests have already been imprisoned here for upholding the Slovene language.”

    https://www.garethjones.org/published_articles/published_articles.htm

  19. “We have to protect ourselves with respect to China, Russia and even the United States”

    Why would the USA be interested in invading France? What possible advantage would there be? A bit more land for growing crops to add to the billion hectares they already have in the USA? Looting a few old paintings from the Louvre? Grabbing a few mademoiselles? You’re going to pay to send aircraft carriers and GIs to Europe for that? You’re going to disrupt trade from all your exporters and lose French perfume and Cognac?

    This is mindless drivel. Why anyone takes this seriously, I have no idea.

  20. “My understanding is that the populations willingly whipped themselves into a war fever in the summer of 1914, due to a combination of nationalism, overconfidence, and not having fought a major war in Europe for almost a century.”

    Somewhat overlooks the Franco-Prussian War which brought about the unification of a Germany strengthened by Prussian militarism & was one of the contributing factors to WW1.

    Of course one might say there’s always a good reason for someone having a war with the French. Just depends whose turn it is.

  21. “Somewhat overlooks the Franco-Prussian War’

    and the Anglo-Egyptian, Russo-Turkish & Spanish-American Wars.

    I guess the Russian Revolution doesn’t qualify as a war.

  22. I left out the Crimean, as well. Wars don’t really count unless they’re fought in France. It’s what it’s there for.

  23. There are several reasons why Trump may not have attended. Was it on his agenda? The main Armistice event is today under the Arc de Triomphe, I don’t know if attendance at Compeigne the day before is normal for a US president. Was Trump even invited?

    Yep.

    Assuming he was meant to attend, if security say NO that’s it.

    9/11 Bush wanted to conference-call from school he was in, then fly straight back to Whitehouse.

    Security: Mr President, No sir. We’re going to AF1 Now and staying airborne until situation resolved.

  24. @Bloke on M4 on November 11, 2018 at 1:09 pm,

    The reason we ended war in the west is that tractors, combine harvesters, fertilisers and transportation dramatically changed the cost and availability of food. It just isn’t worth killing your next door neighbour for his field. Might as well pay him to grow the food while you do something more productive.

    Correct, although I’d say “A major reason”

  25. Incidentally, odd photo. What was going on below where it was cropped? Macron’s fly undone, or something? Merkle’s knickers at half mast?

  26. “I left out the Crimean, as well”

    The first one with daily journalistic reports from the front line to the punters back home and Tennyson….

    The Charge of the Light Brigade

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S93lvQ4Ukg8

    I just noted that Jonathan was talking about wars in Europe over the previous 100 years, which rules out both my Egyptian and American ones and not too sure if Turkey was in NATO back then as well.

  27. To celebrate the end of the war is to also celebrate Versailles, which, seeing as it was responsible for Hitler, I don’t think either the French or the Germans come off as any good. Peace in Europe, the last time we left it in European hands, lead to WW2. You don’t see them celebrating Yalta. It flatters them to consider themselves movers and shakers when the Americans have been running the show for the past 100 years.

  28. “We have to protect ourselves with respect to China, Russia and even the United States”

    Or so they could try to succeed where the German Nazi’s and French Bonapartists failed. NATO often cites Russian interference in Ukraine, but most of the expansionism to date has come from the EU. The Eurocrats swallowed up Poland, Hungary, Austria, Slovakia and the Czech republic and have been trying to rope in the Ukraine ever since. If I was a Russki, I’d be more concerned about them.

  29. The roots of British involvement in WW I lie in the Entente Cordiale. Giving up magnificent isolation for an alliance with the perfidious French.

  30. but the previous decades had seen a widespread sense that a large-scale conflict between the great powers was, if not imminent, at least on the cards.

    Quite true, and quite relevant.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Moroccan_Crisis
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agadir_Crisis

    The whipping-up of public opinion didn’t start in earnest until after Archduke Ferdinand was shot,

    And even then, not right away. Zweig recalls first hearing of the incident, and had no inkling that this would lead to war. He compares it to some other Austro-Hungarian prince what was assassinated ten or twenty years prior, which did not lead to any war. Austro-Hungary tried to use the incident to wrest concessions out of Serbia, and only when Serbia refused (relying on Russian backing) did the ball start rolling.

    There was, I think, another element at play here, which ought to be mentioned. The mass armies of the day required mobilization via the railway system, which had not existed in 1812. For this, strict timetables were prepared, which had to be adhered to, otherwise chaos would ensue. Each nation knew how long it needed, and also knew that other nations might require less – e.g. Russia, with its huge distances and more primitive network was terrified that Germany might mobilize first, and it could never catch up. Joffre at one point told the French government that each day’s delay in mobilization meant 40 kilometers of France lost, and that the responsibility would lie on their heads. Thus the whole continent was caught in a Mexican standoff (if that is the term), in which the only way to win was either nobody shoots, or you shoot first.

    @bloke in spain re: Franco-Prussian war.

    The Franco-Prussian war was over in months, and while it had considerable political repercussions, the total casualties were relatively light. It did not have the effect of, say, the Vietnam war in 1991 – that is, a huge reminder to be very careful about declaring war, because it just might consume the lives and resources of a generation. On the contrary – the brevity of that war was the main reason the troops marching off in August 1918 believed they would be home by Christmas.

    @Patrick Burlun Pham
    To celebrate the end of the war is to also celebrate Versailles

    I’m not sure I would say that. Nov 11 is a celebration of the Armistice, not a celebration of Versailles. It is hard today to bring to mind what the Armistice meant to those who lived through the war. The war had become a living thing, consuming the youth of the continent. Leaders on all sides had proven themselves unable to win the war, and equally unable to stop it. It had grown beyond the ability of any man, or government, to control. The ability of all sides to agree to just stop shooting seemed like a miracle, and it is the memory of that miracle which is celebrated.

  31. but the previous decades had seen a widespread sense that a large-scale conflict between the great powers was, if not imminent, at least on the cards.

    Quite true, and quite relevant.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Moroccan_Crisis
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agadir_Crisis

    The whipping-up of public opinion didn’t start in earnest until after Archduke Ferdinand was shot,

    And even then, not right away. Zweig recalls first hearing of the incident, and had no inkling that this would lead to war. He compares it to some other Austro-Hungarian prince what was assassinated ten or twenty years prior, which did not lead to any war. Austro-Hungary tried to use the incident to wrest concessions out of Serbia, and only when Serbia refused (relying on Russian backing) did the ball start rolling.

    There was, I think, another element at play here, which ought to be mentioned. The mass armies of the day required mobilization via the railway system, which had not existed in 1812. For this, strict timetables were prepared, which had to be adhered to, otherwise chaos would ensue. Each nation knew how long it needed, and also knew that other nations might require less – e.g. Russia, with its huge distances and more primitive network was terrified that Germany might mobilize first, and it could never catch up. Joffre at one point told the French government that each day’s delay in mobilization meant 40 kilometers of France lost, and that the responsibility would lie on their heads. Thus the whole continent was caught in a Mexican standoff (if that is the term), in which the only way to win was either nobody shoots, or you shoot first.

    @bloke in spain re: Franco-Prussian war.

    The Franco-Prussian war was over in months, and while it had considerable political repercussions, the total casualties were relatively light. It did not have the effect of, say, the Vietnam war in 1991 – that is, a huge reminder to be very careful about declaring war, because it just might consume the lives and resources of a generation. On the contrary – the brevity of that war was the main reason the troops marching off in August 1918 believed they would be home by Christmas.

    @Patrick Burlun Pham
    To celebrate the end of the war is to also celebrate Versailles

    I’m not sure I would say that. Nov 11 is a celebration of the Armistice, not a celebration of Versailles. It is hard today to bring to mind what the Armistice meant to those who lived through the war. The war had become a living thing, consuming the youth of the continent. Leaders on all sides had proven themselves unable to win the war, and equally unable to stop it. It had grown beyond the ability of any man, or government, to control. The ability of all sides to agree to just stop shooting seemed like a miracle, and it is the memory of that miracle which is celebrated.

    @Ken

    British policy had always been to prevent Europe uniting against her. To serve that purpose, she always aligned herself with the weaker power, or arranged a coalition of weaker powers. In 1900 that meant France.

  32. but the previous decades had seen a widespread sense that a large-scale conflict between the great powers was, if not imminent, at least on the cards.

    Quite true, and quite relevant. The Tangier crisis, and the Agadir_Crisis come to mind.

    The whipping-up of public opinion didn’t start in earnest until after Archduke Ferdinand was shot,

    And even then, not right away. Zweig recalls first hearing of the incident, and had no inkling that this would lead to war. He compares it to some other Austro-Hungarian prince what was assassinated ten or twenty years prior, which did not lead to any war. Austro-Hungary tried to use the incident to wrest concessions out of Serbia, and only when Serbia refused (relying on Russian backing) did the ball start rolling.

    There was, I think, another element at play here, which ought to be mentioned. The mass armies of the day required mobilization via the railway system, which had not existed in 1812. For this, strict timetables were prepared, which had to be adhered to, otherwise chaos would ensue. Each nation knew how long it needed, and also knew that other nations might require less – e.g. Russia, with its huge distances and more primitive network was terrified that Germany might mobilize first, and it could never catch up. Joffre at one point told the French government that each day’s delay in mobilization meant 40 kilometers of France lost, and that the responsibility would lie on their heads. Thus the whole continent was caught in a Mexican standoff (if that is the term), in which the only way to win was either nobody shoots, or you shoot first.

    @bloke in spain re: Franco-Prussian war.

    The Franco-Prussian war was over in months, and while it had considerable political repercussions, the total casualties were relatively light. It did not have the effect of, say, the Vietnam war in 1991 – that is, a huge reminder to be very careful about declaring war, because it just might consume the lives and resources of a generation. On the contrary – the brevity of that war was the main reason the troops marching off in August 1918 believed they would be home by Christmas.

    @Patrick Burlun Pham
    To celebrate the end of the war is to also celebrate Versailles

    I’m not sure I would say that. Nov 11 is a celebration of the Armistice, not a celebration of Versailles. It is hard today to bring to mind what the Armistice meant to those who lived through the war. The war had become a living thing, consuming the youth of the continent. Leaders on all sides had proven themselves unable to win the war, and equally unable to stop it. It had grown beyond the ability of any man, or government, to control. The ability of all sides to agree to just stop shooting seemed like a miracle, and it is the memory of that miracle which is celebrated.

    Several months passed between the Armistice and Versailles, and thankfulness for the miracle was replaced by a thirst for revenge.

    @Ken

    British policy had always been to prevent Europe uniting against her. To serve that purpose, she always aligned herself with the weaker power, or arranged a coalition of weaker powers. In 1900 that meant France.

  33. @Patrick
    To celebrate the end of the war is to also celebrate Versailles, which, seeing as it was responsible for Hitler, I don’t think either the French or the Germans come off as any good. Peace in Europe, the last time we left it in European hands, lead to WW2. You don’t see them celebrating Yalta. It flatters them to consider themselves movers and shakers when the Americans have been running the show for the past 100 years

    It is somewhat ironic that 100 years later the Germans are trying to get the UK to sign a massively one sided treaty (UK can only exit if the EU consents), where the imbalance is guaranteed to become clear over time leading to huge resentment and unrest.

  34. @Jonathan – “And even then, not right away.”

    Here is the actual timeline of events from the assassination of the heir to the throne, through to the actual declaration of war for those interested.

    Plus a link to the fascinating “Willy-Nicky Telegrams” showing the frantic but unsuccessful diplomatic efforts of both the German and Russian Emperors to avoid war.

    JUNE 28 Archduke and his wife assassinated in Sarajevo
    JUNE 29 Anti-Serbian riots in Sarajevo
    JULY Kaiser Wilhelm II and Russian Tsar Nicholas Telegraphs
    JULY 28 Austria-Hungary declares war on Serbia
    JULY 29 Russia mobilizes it armies against Austria-Hungary
    AUGUST 1 Germany declares war on Russia for its mobilization
    AUGUST 1 France begins advancing towards Austria-Hungary
    AUGUST 3 Germany advances towards France
    AUGUST 4 Great Britain enters the war
    OCTOBER 28 Ottoman Turkish Empire enters the war

    The Willy-Nicky Telegrams
    WWI Document Archive > 1914 Documents > The Willy-Nicky Telegrams

    The Kaiser’s letters to the Tsar, copied from the government archives in Petrograd, and brought from Russia by Isaac Don Levine, ed., with an introduction by N.F. Grant. London, Hodder and Soughton Ltd, 1920
    Tsar to Kaiser, July 29, 1:00 A.M.

    https://wwi.lib.byu.edu/index.php/The_Willy-Nicky_Telegrams

  35. What role do you think the French desire to get the German provinces it lost in the Franco-Prussion war back, played in all of this?

  36. @ Steve T – “What role do you think the French desire to get the German provinces it lost in the Franco-Prussion war back, played in all of this?”

    I see it more that the unification of Germany following this victory of the Prussian Bismarck against Napoleon’s nephew vastly strengthened the newly unified Prussian German empire thus making them a target for destruction more so than a vengeful France seeking to recover lost empire.

    This newly unified Germany quickly became the major economic and military power house of Europe. This coupled with their intermarriage with the British aristocracy and the formation of The League of The Three Empires (Russia, Germany & Austro-Hungarian) meant that they became the new target for destruction.

    Towards the end of the Russo-Turko war and just before Russia’s undoubted outright military victory in that campaign Disraeli managed to persuade the Russians to accept a truce with the Turks, this was the start of the end for Germany.

    The Berlin conference that followed and the intrigue beforehand by Disraeli was one of the biggest coups and diplomatic successes in history, whereby he somehow managed to break up The League of The Three Empires and eventually woo Russia away from Germany and into the Triple Entente (Britain, France & Russia), this was the masterstroke that ended the German Empire, many years before WWI confirmed it.

    “Our great object was to break up and permanently prevent the alliance of the three Empires and I maintain there never was a general diplomatic result more completely affected.” – Benjamin Disraeli

  37. Germany sought war in the summer of 1914. Austria Hungary could not have fought within explicit German support. The German leadership thought this was an opportunity to decisively defeat France and put back Russia’s threat. They accepted the risk of war with Britain – they’d have preferred England stay neutral until France was beaten, but that surface fleet was meant for a confrontation with England.

    There’s a reason why the lie of undefeated German armies was believed, was because at the time of the Armistice, Germany’s armies were all on foreign soil, whether in Ukraine, or the Baltic’s or White Russia or Belgium.

    And how come it was always Germany invading if it wasn’t German aggression. The September 1914 memorandum from Bethmann-Hollweg, envisaged the annexation of most of Belgium and parts of northern France plus very heavy indemnities, much harsher than Versailles (indeed, the indemnity imposed on France in 1871 was much harsher than Versailles, which was mainly paid by loans from the US which were written off in the 1930s!). And the peace of Brest-Litovsk shows exactly the kind of peace Germany had it mind if it hadn’t been defeated.

  38. “Why would the USA be interested in invading France?”

    I can think of one reason. To dig up our fallen and return them home. Such honorable men should not have to spend eternity in that chicken s*t country that will be falling to Islam before long anyway.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *