ashley26ph2003
Apr 01, 2003, 11:44 PM
why they are defeated in WW1
|
View Full Version : Central Powers ashley26ph2003 Apr 01, 2003, 11:44 PM why they are defeated in WW1 Knight-Dragon Apr 02, 2003, 07:02 AM Reasons are complex and probably deserve a thesis all its own. The way I see it : - Economic blockade Failure (or almost success) of last final offensive against the Allies (before the Americans could arrive in force) Americans can coming Internal unrest and dwindling support within Germany Probably miss a few others. There's a thread on WW1 somewhere below too. West German Apr 02, 2003, 08:44 AM I see it as 1. failure of Schifflen plan, could have won in 1914. 2. American involvement. Though it wouldn't have mattered if they won in 1914 against France. 3. Blockade destroyed economy and starved many people. MajorGeneral2 Apr 03, 2003, 09:46 PM There are a number of reasons, and they had several chances. They almost won early. However, between leaving too many troops in Prussia and turnign the flank left too soon to use a pincer on Paris, it didn't happen. The blockade was a major factor. It added a lot of urgency to the German situation. They probably couldn't have held on much past 1918, leading to... The American entry tied it all up. With the final German offensive, they almost won, but the AEF had come by then, and the US hadn't lost a war ever, and Germany wouldn't be the one to end that streak. pi8ch Apr 04, 2003, 03:39 AM hm.... I think very important is that Italy switched sides when it was critical... Did you know that Rommel had to rewrite most of his bpoks when the Axis were fomed? Becuase in his books about ww1 he considered the Italians always as "weak", "cowardly", "militarical unusable" Later he had to cut out this lines and then he chaged others to: "The German soldier - as well as his Italian-aric comrade".... TheStinger Apr 04, 2003, 04:45 AM The Italians fought as hard as anyone in WW1 pi8ch Apr 04, 2003, 05:31 AM Of course... Everyone has its ideas. I too think it's better to sneak around, to hide, and to cheat than to fight open but to die. But that's not the point, and that's not what I'm saying: I just meant that the Germans and Austrians were of course angry on the Italians for the betrayal... And of course a Germna officer would reflect this in his books.. I just posted that becuase it maybe interesting to know how propganda works.... First against italay, than pro-italy... TheStinger Apr 04, 2003, 05:33 AM You have obviously swallowed the propoganda about Italain troops. pi8ch Apr 04, 2003, 05:47 AM maybe... In fact.. In the German speaking area "Italian" means "lousy soldier" if used in this context... But I I give a **** on that... ;) Some thing have to be taken with a bit of humor.... Isn't it totlay unimportant anyway? I just brought italy in play 'cause i think they are an additional reason why the Central Powers lost. Not important if they fought good or bad. BTW: I didn't want to make fun of Italy... I admire much that comes from italy.. food, cars, clothing, women... ;) thedirk Apr 04, 2003, 08:49 AM Originally posted by MajorGeneral2 and the US hadn't lost a war ever, and Germany wouldn't be the one to end that streak. Have you ever heard of the War of 1812? TheStinger Apr 04, 2003, 08:53 AM i think that war was a draw. the english got stuffed down south but the yanks had the white house burnt down. pi8ch Apr 04, 2003, 09:37 AM To say that the US never lost a war is - even if it would be true - absolutely no prove that they would not have lost against Germany... BTW. War's the US lost: nearly every war after ww2- thedirk Apr 04, 2003, 11:03 AM The British got stuffed down south after the war was over. The only reason the U.S. got reasonable terms in the peace treaty was that the focus of the peace talks was the European situation, and letting the U.S. off the hook was a small concession in the grand scheme of things. Vrylakas Apr 04, 2003, 11:55 AM I had a similar thread once here (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=33799) that explored when the absolute turning point came and the reasons behind it. I think the bottom line in World War I was the Allies in the end - especially after the German diplomatic bumbling that brought the U.S. into the war - had more resources than the Central Powers. Locally the Central Powers (i.e., Germany) could bring superior forces in terms of quality and often quantity to bear against the Allies but after 4 and a half years of grinding attritional war the Allies simply had more men and material for replacements than the Germans. The Germans made several very daring attempts to win the war and they could have succeeded, but the Allies ultimately had the resources to fight a longer war that Germany didn't. |
vBulletin® v3.6.8, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.