Only the military were really active members of the Black Hand. The rest just looked on with pride. Just the fact that the government knew about the plot would have made it hard to accept the ultimatum, and the Russians convinced them completely. The fact is, that the Black Hand would have been powerless to stop the Serbians from accepting the ultimatum, if it hadn't been for the Russians stepping in.
Great unknown Generals in History
- Thread starter deo
- Start date
Clausewitzian
Chieftain
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2007
- Messages
- 90
Adler,
The german generals in general, and von Moltke in particular, actually did want the war. The reason being that Russia was growing more powerful, and the sooner the confrontation, the better Germany's ratio of force to that of Russia would be.
The entire ultimatum to Serbia was carefully crafted at the behest of Berlin so that war would be inevitable. Exactly how Germany comes out of all this as an innocent victim is a mystery to me. The Austrians did exactly what Berlin had wanted them to do. Getting cold feet at the last minute doesn't exonerate Germany here, and the german generals weren't having any of it any way.
Russia's mobilization was not a declaration of war, but a declaration of their seriousness about the matter, and they were forced to take this stance in the first place due to a document (the ultimatum to Serbia) of which Germany was a full participant. The final drop is that it was Germany that did the actual war declaring. Austria did not want war with Russia and was still negotiating with them about their war with Serbia. Left to their own devices, they would have backed down. It was the German declaration of war that killed that off, because the german generals wanted their preemptive strike.
Germany was in the driving seat of the events leading up to WWI. Nothing innocent victim about it whatsoever, IMHO. They were playing with fire, and the world burned down.
The german generals in general, and von Moltke in particular, actually did want the war. The reason being that Russia was growing more powerful, and the sooner the confrontation, the better Germany's ratio of force to that of Russia would be.
The entire ultimatum to Serbia was carefully crafted at the behest of Berlin so that war would be inevitable. Exactly how Germany comes out of all this as an innocent victim is a mystery to me. The Austrians did exactly what Berlin had wanted them to do. Getting cold feet at the last minute doesn't exonerate Germany here, and the german generals weren't having any of it any way.
Russia's mobilization was not a declaration of war, but a declaration of their seriousness about the matter, and they were forced to take this stance in the first place due to a document (the ultimatum to Serbia) of which Germany was a full participant. The final drop is that it was Germany that did the actual war declaring. Austria did not want war with Russia and was still negotiating with them about their war with Serbia. Left to their own devices, they would have backed down. It was the German declaration of war that killed that off, because the german generals wanted their preemptive strike.
Germany was in the driving seat of the events leading up to WWI. Nothing innocent victim about it whatsoever, IMHO. They were playing with fire, and the world burned down.
Clausewitzian,
I agree with most of what you said, except the part about
I agree with most of what you said, except the part about
And that only partly. The Russians would have declared war eventualy anyway, if the Austrians kept at war with Serbia. If either of them had backed down, they would have lost a lot of face in world affairs. The thing is, once they declared war, it would be up to Germany to decide whether to go into the war or not. The only difference that Germany declaring war made was that they were in the war, and that it started earlier. It kept it from being a small scale war, true, but it didn't start the war.
Clausewitzian
Chieftain
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2007
- Messages
- 90
Russia's mobilization was a declaration of intent. We will go to war over this, unless...
Austria got the message. Signs were, they were willing to limit their war with Serbia to whatever degree was acceptable to the Russians and left Russian prestige intact.
If an agreement could have been reached, then no matter how you look at it, Germany started WWI, for they killed the proces that would have contained the Austro/Serbian war to something very limited in scale.
If no agreement could have been reached, and Russia was certain to declare war, then it's like you said, except that the timing of Germany's entering the war becomes crucial, from the German military point of view.
It's these imponderables that make history so fascinating.
I think we're in agreement here, Sovin, just emphasizing things differently. Your version is fine with me
Austria got the message. Signs were, they were willing to limit their war with Serbia to whatever degree was acceptable to the Russians and left Russian prestige intact.
If an agreement could have been reached, then no matter how you look at it, Germany started WWI, for they killed the proces that would have contained the Austro/Serbian war to something very limited in scale.
If no agreement could have been reached, and Russia was certain to declare war, then it's like you said, except that the timing of Germany's entering the war becomes crucial, from the German military point of view.
It's these imponderables that make history so fascinating.
I think we're in agreement here, Sovin, just emphasizing things differently. Your version is fine with me
Serutan
Eatibus Anythingibus
I do think Rokossovski might have been a better comabat commander than Zhukov. While Zhukov was a great strategist and planner, his one failing
was that he could be inflexible in combat. Both in Operation Mars, and the
Berlin offsensive, he caused a lot of unnecessary casualties by his stubborness.
BTW, Rokossovski was a Front commander at both Stalingrad and
Kursk. He was entrusted with the defense of the north side of the Kursk bulge, and the Germans barely dented it.
Adler17
Prussian Feldmarschall
Well at least there was another point not to accept the ultimatum. And if the Black Hand members could stop any attempts of the government to stop the plot they can hardly be called inactive and powerless.
Clausewitzian, the German generals might have wanted the war, but they were not (yet) leading the government. Also the ultimatum was harsh but containing only things Austria had to demand. Even if Germany was helping them to formulate, which is new to me, this demarche did not endanger the Serbian state as such. If Cheyney is killed by an Iranian agent the US would make a very similar ultimatum to Iran today.
Anyway even if Germany declared war on Russia first, before a Russian attack on Austria, it was not more than a kind of preemptive strike. Russia could have only lost her face in a interior problematically phase of the czardom. Also Russia mobilised first signalling to go to war earlier than the Germans. And if you already agree in a preemptive strike you already accepted this offensive as indeed defensive action as a preemptive strike shall only stop an attacker just before he started the attack. That was done here. Sovin nai was absolutely right here. Also who was making terror in Austria-Hungary and who was backing the Serbs up?
Thus I can not see much to blame Germany in these points.
Adler
I was glad to see Epaminondas' name on the board--he's probably the most important Greek the common man hasn't heard of. Another excellent Greek general during the Peloponnesian War that doesn't receive much attention is Demosthenes, probably because whenever that name comes up, it is the more famous statesman of the next century that is being talked about. However, the Demosthenes that fought in the Peloponnesian War was a man who learned from his early mistakes, and became an expert at using light infantry...if I recall correctly (it's been well over a year since I have picked up Don Kagan's books, so I may be wrong here), he was also responsible for the capture of the Spartans on Pylos, forcing Sparta to the negotiating table. Anyone who could beat the Spartans on the land when they still were the strongest in Greece was no slouch.
Well, it is true that the German's generals didn't control the government yet, but even some of the politicians wanted war, not all, but enough. The ultimatum was one of the most severe things ever, and completely would have undermined the sovereignity of Serbia. It would have been a slightly autonomous, but not very, province of Austria. And with the Iran statement by you, with the present government, maybe, but I very much doubt that that kind of ultimatum would be acceptable to the UN, or the rest of the world. They would protest a lot.Adler17 said:
aelf
Ashen One
I recall that the Serbian government actually advised the Archduke against the visit to Sarajevo. But I guess it fell on deaf ears.
Adler17 said:
Strangely enough, you underestimate the power of the General Staff. Who was it that convinced the Kaiser that Germany had to stop trying to negotiate and activate the Schlieffen Plan in order to win a war that might be coming? And you forget that your beloved Kaiser was quite a militarist himself, who had been harbouring clear imperial ambitions.
If Cheney was killed by an Iranian extremist while visiting Iraq, I agree that the US might behave in the same way as Austria-Hungary. But that doesn't mean that the Iranian government is necessarily wholly to blame or make a subsequent declaration of war by the US right. Anyway, the Serbian government had already agreed to all but one of the harsh terms Austria demanded, including outlawing the Black Hand. It only couldn't agree to one that it deemed would violate the sovereignty of Serbia. Didn't the Austrians know how to come to a beneficial compromise? Obviously, they expected to fight and win.
Adler17 said:
Well, we're back to this again. I don't see any mention of the Blank Cheque in your posts, and I guess I'm not surprised. It's the only evidence needed to nullify your argument. With it, Germany gave Austria the assurance that it would stand by it no matter what, knowing that it might mean war. The Germans were probably counting on Russia being intimidated by their might, so you could say that they made a risky gamble without having a backup plan. But that's not entirely true. They did have a backup plan - the Schlieffen Plan. That meant either Russia had to back down or it was going to be war. If anything, force and intimidation were the tools Germany employed, which would hardly lead to a peaceful diplomatic solution.
Mobilisation does not mean war. It only means getting the army ready for one. DEFCON1 does not necessarily mean war, does it? And considering Russian mobilisation took weeks, it was hardly surprising that the Russians opted to be safe than sorry. It could be halted anytime had Germany decided to withdraw its limitless support for Austria and tried to find a diplomatic solution. But no. Fears of growing Russian power and the confidence of the militarists in the Schlieffen Plan, with the tantalising idea of empire behind the prospect of success, took control. And Germany was the first to fire a shot.
Anyway, if Austria wanted to ignore the concept of self-determination and cling on to its disintergrating empire, then it really shouldn't whine about people forming resistance groups. This may sound cliche, but one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. Your choosing to view them as terrorists already shows your bias. Why couldn't the Serbs have been fighting for a just cause? So, in your view, the Afghan fighters in 1979 were terrorists, the US was guilty of backing them up and the Soviet Union had every right to declare war on the US?
Clausewitzian
Chieftain
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2007
- Messages
- 90
++
One of the Great Captains.
_________________
Adler, on July 5 when the blank cheque was issued, and July 6, when Bethmann confirmed it was government policy (Austria, understandably, needed to be absolutely certain), Berlin made clear it wanted war, and the ultimatum was meant to bring that about. The spirit of the ultimatum was at the behest of Berlin. The actual formulation was done by Austria while keeping Berlin fully informed of the contents. The whole thing was done in concert.
Thus, the ultimatum was designed to be unacceptable. That the ultimatum was accepted by the Serbs almost in its entirety caused quite some consternation, almost denying Austria its casus belli. But Austria, having been directed to the rails of war, was having none of it.
Let's be clear on who wanted what:
1) The german politicians wanted the Austro/Serbian war. That is the policy Germany implemented.
2) The german generals wanted an Austro/German vs Franco/Russian war. I'm not so sure anyone else wanted this, it was more like the political elite felt that Germany was sufficiently powerful that if this eventuality came about, it was all for the better.
All the generals needed was Russia mobilizing to force 1) into 2), a fact I don't think the german politicians quite understood the implications of, since their policy was going to force Russia to mobilize...
Thus, when Bethmann (Chancellor) discovered on July 29 from a telegraph from Lichnowsky in London that drawing France into the war would draw Great Britain in as well, realization started to dawn on where all this was headed. But once a plan has been put into action, it acquires a momentum all of its own. Nobody wanted to stop. Austria, who wanted 1) as well, was too far down the line to suddenly stop (they'd already declared war), and the german generals did everything they could to keep things on track. Moltke even pushing to mobilize before the russians did. The german generals understood full well that the russians would be mobilizing, and Bethmann was starting to grasp the implications...
Heh, didn't mean for us to gang up on you like this, Adler, but I'm a sucker for the events that lead up to WWI. A fascinating period of history.
The German generals actually wanted Italy on their side as well. Unfortunately for them, they didn't know about the secret treaty that the French signed with the Italians, and that the Italians thought was more important for their national interest. They declared war on Germany a year later.Clausewitzian said:
Completely agree with you there. I made a research paper on that once. Was horrible, but there you have it. A long time ago. That period in history is one of the most interesting periods in general. A lot of conflicting alliances and agreements. Amazingly complicated politics. Explosive situations. Etc, etc. Perfect for research, and not very well documented.Clausewitzian said:
Ah, another Peloponnesian fanatic who likes Kagan! Fantastic! I wish Demosthenes hadn't had to clean up Nicias' mess on Sicily, or Athens would have reigned supreme...sorry if this is nitpicking, but Epaminondas (a freaking genius) was slightly after the Peloponnesian war; he was in Thebes during the period of hegemony there, in the 370s and 360s BC.
ParkCungHee
Deity
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2006
- Messages
- 12,921
Adler17
Prussian Feldmarschall
Sovin nai, here is the text of the ultimatum:
Summoned up that meant to stop all propaganda against Austria, fighting against terrorists and allowing Austrian policemen to investigate in Serbia. I frankly do not see the sovereignity of Serbia endagered. Also you have to consider that Serbia was about 40 years ago demanding the very same in a similar case and got it granted.
________________________________________________________
aelf, all nations then were imperialistic and militaristic. Anyway if there are traces to the Iranian government itself and if Iran is accepting everything except the point of investigations, how does that sound? That they are completely innocent concerning the mess? Or that they have something to do with it, perhaps even ordered?
Also I never said the German government acted wisely or is completely innocent of this mess. However the Card Blanche was given to Austria to back it up in negotiations. A war, without perhaps only against Serbia, was not in German interest. When the Germans got to know that Austria wanted to go for war and not for negotiations they retook the Card at once. But even that and negotiations with Austria could not prevent the war. Here is Austria much more to blame, that they did not accept further negotiations, than the Germans, whose good faith in Austria was misused. You can blame Germany here for staying on Austrian's side. But as it was the last (trustable) power as ally Germany had not many choices here. In contrast Russia is much more to blame as they backed up murderers and terrorists, at least indirectly.
In history the mobilisation and amassing of so many troops at the enemy border ever lead to a war.
A freedom fighter and a terrorist may be two different things but indeed there are different point of views on this topic. However was the murder of the Archduke justified? Was he an evil tyrant? Or did he in contrast try to save his nation? And even tried to integrate all of his peoples in a liberal way? We can discuss endlessly here. I could give your question in return, as I could ask you, that it is biased that you does not accept this as a murder made by terrorists. But that does not lead to much.
__________________________________________________________
Clausewitzian, the German government wanted negotiations and in the worst case a war with Serbia. Ironically if Austria at once declared war on Serbia nothing more would have happened. Anyway indeed sone German generals wanted war as some politicians, too. But the very same has to be said much more to the French and Russians. Both wanted war much more than Germany. But perhaps it is better to ask not after the one who wanted the war, as then all are guilty, but who wanted peace, who wanted to prevent the mess. And the only ones who really attempted to avoid a war were Britain and Germany.
Adler
Summoned up that meant to stop all propaganda against Austria, fighting against terrorists and allowing Austrian policemen to investigate in Serbia. I frankly do not see the sovereignity of Serbia endagered. Also you have to consider that Serbia was about 40 years ago demanding the very same in a similar case and got it granted.
________________________________________________________
aelf, all nations then were imperialistic and militaristic. Anyway if there are traces to the Iranian government itself and if Iran is accepting everything except the point of investigations, how does that sound? That they are completely innocent concerning the mess? Or that they have something to do with it, perhaps even ordered?
Also I never said the German government acted wisely or is completely innocent of this mess. However the Card Blanche was given to Austria to back it up in negotiations. A war, without perhaps only against Serbia, was not in German interest. When the Germans got to know that Austria wanted to go for war and not for negotiations they retook the Card at once. But even that and negotiations with Austria could not prevent the war. Here is Austria much more to blame, that they did not accept further negotiations, than the Germans, whose good faith in Austria was misused. You can blame Germany here for staying on Austrian's side. But as it was the last (trustable) power as ally Germany had not many choices here. In contrast Russia is much more to blame as they backed up murderers and terrorists, at least indirectly.
In history the mobilisation and amassing of so many troops at the enemy border ever lead to a war.
A freedom fighter and a terrorist may be two different things but indeed there are different point of views on this topic. However was the murder of the Archduke justified? Was he an evil tyrant? Or did he in contrast try to save his nation? And even tried to integrate all of his peoples in a liberal way? We can discuss endlessly here. I could give your question in return, as I could ask you, that it is biased that you does not accept this as a murder made by terrorists. But that does not lead to much.
__________________________________________________________
Clausewitzian, the German government wanted negotiations and in the worst case a war with Serbia. Ironically if Austria at once declared war on Serbia nothing more would have happened. Anyway indeed sone German generals wanted war as some politicians, too. But the very same has to be said much more to the French and Russians. Both wanted war much more than Germany. But perhaps it is better to ask not after the one who wanted the war, as then all are guilty, but who wanted peace, who wanted to prevent the mess. And the only ones who really attempted to avoid a war were Britain and Germany.
Adler
Clausewitzian
Chieftain
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2007
- Messages
- 90
Oops. I had completely forgotten about the third partner of the Triple Alliance.
Those bad, evil, reprehensible, warmongering Austrians, playing the helpless peaceloving innocent Germans for fools, especially their delicate Kaiser Wilhelm. That's a nice spin. Adler, is that how it's being taught in German schools these days?
===
von Hutier hereby added to the list. I've admired infiltration tactics without knowing who their originator was!
You don't call that undermining Serbias sovereignity? Lets look at that piece by piece.
Don't print anything we don't want you to print. It might not say that right out, but the fact that they limit it at all, and that they could choose what publication "incites to hatred and contempt of the Austrian Monarchy." One they shut down one, they will shut down all.
Same thing, just with societies, instead of publications. As with the press, it will just escalate.
We can choose what you teach in your schools. Same thing as above, it just escalates.
Once they do that, what's to stop them from putting in their own choices, along with taking out who they want. Nothing. They could take every single person out of the military and administration, and then everyone that the government replaces them with, until there is no one left to take the office, and the Austrians provide someone.
We can do anything we want inside your territory, and you have to help us. Not exactly helpful to sovereignity.
We can choose the jury, judge, place, and evidence. No free trial, no nothing. Just "guilty" then the electric chair. (OK, a bit of an exaggeration, but basically that is what would happen)
Not too horrible, just saying that they have to arrest those two people, or it is war. Not too terrible.
We choose what is illegal, and you have to stop it. That is final.
You have to publicly explain what your government officials said, and why it is completely wrong, and that they were lying.
You have to report back to us immediately, as soon as you have done what we have asked, no question about it.
You don't call that undermining Serbia's sovereignity? Wow, you are biased.
Ambidexter
Edjumacated Idjit
How about Hjalmar Siilasvuo? While he was only a colonel, he commanded all three Finnish regiments at the Battle of Suomussalmi, so he was de facto a division commander if not one de jure.
ParkCungHee
Deity
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2006
- Messages
- 12,921
Can we please stop this WWI debate before this thread gets locked. We've seen this before, and I'm really enjoying this thread.
ParkCungHee
Deity
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2006
- Messages
- 12,921
I wish I could find some more information about them. I've only recently begun to put serious time into researching military tactics. What armies primarily used them?
I looked back at my post and realized I wasn't all that clear. What I meant to say that I was going to name another Greek general from the time period of the Peloponnesian War, and not accidently imply that Epaminondas was from the same time period (you correctly point out that his involvement in Greek affairs comes much later--I think he was born just as the Peloponnesian War was ending). I guess I shouldn't write anything academic late at night, because those mistakes are bound to happen.
Thanks for calling that one...it slipped past me.
