World War I Turning Point Poll

The turning point that guaranteed an Allied victory was:

  • November 1914 (Failure to take Paris)

    Votes: 12 17.9%
  • June 1916 (Brusilov Offensive)

    Votes: 3 4.5%
  • May 1916 (Jutland)

    Votes: 1 1.5%
  • December 1916 (Verdun)

    Votes: 6 9.0%
  • March-November 1917 (Russian Revolutions)

    Votes: 2 3.0%
  • April 1917 (Nivelle Offensive)

    Votes: 2 3.0%
  • April 1917 (American entry into the war)

    Votes: 32 47.8%
  • March 1918 (Treaty of Brest-Litovsk)

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • May-July 1918 (3rd Battle of the Marne)

    Votes: 5 7.5%
  • August 1918 (Black Day of the German Army)

    Votes: 1 1.5%
  • Other (Please specify)

    Votes: 3 4.5%

  • Total voters
    67

Vrylakas

The Verbose Lord
Joined
Apr 12, 2001
Messages
1,940
Location
Bostonia
Greetings,

What do you think was the turning point of World War I? Was there a turning point? By "Turning Point", I mean a point at which it became inevitable that the Western Allies would win the war. Was there a single event, or a period, past which the Central Powers (Germany, Austria-Hungary, Ottoman Empire, Bulgaria, etc.) had no realistic hope of winning? Did such a moment ever really exist? I'll lay out a few of the candidates as I see them, but feel free to add your own:

1. November 1914: The failure of Germany to conquer Paris (and possibly knock France out of the war a là 1940) doomed both sides on the Western Front to a long war of attrition involving the massive loss of men and material - things Germany could not match to her enemies. Both von Moltke and his successor Falkenhayn claimed by the end of 1914 that while Germany may not lose the war, it could no longer win. The critical moment for a German victory had passed. Were they just pessimists as Hindenburg and Ludendorf later claimed?

2. June 1916: Brusilov Offensive. This powerful Russian thrust into Galicia (modern southeastern Poland and western Ukraine) effectively destroyed the Austro-Hungarian Army as a fighting force, forcing the Germans to repeatedly send large numbers of their Reichswehr units to aid Habsburg efforts along the Russian, Romanian, Italian and Balkan fronts. As Hindenburg noted a year after the Brusilov Offensive in a comment about Austria-Hungary, "We are fettered to a corpse."

3. May 1916: The failure of the German Kriegsmarine to decisively break out of the British blockade, despite technically scoring a tactical victory over the Royal Navy. This guaranteed that Germany remained a land-locked power, which meant that its two major foes, both great maritime powers, could starve it of the raw materials necessary for making modern war.

4. December 1916: The collapse of the idiotic German campaign against the French at Verdun. The Germans' basic goal was not a breakthrough but rather to simply maul the French Army to such an extent that it would collapse - completely ignoring the equal reality that the German Army would suffer at least similar losses in the battle, as attacking armies usually do. The whole battle, lasting some 10 months, killed 700,000 soldiers on both sides and achieved little beyond seriously weakening both armies. Coupled with the simultaneous British attack at the Somme, Germany began to feel manpower and material losses that its enemies could more readily replace.

5. February/March-October/November 1917: Russian Revolutions. What seemed like a dream come true for Berlin with the collapse of the Tsarist tyranny quickly became a noose of sorts as a whole Pandora's box opened up in an Eastern Europe freed of Russian imperialism. German troops would still be fighting in some enclaves of Eastern Europe as late as 1923. Initially Germany dreamed it could simply dictate order to the region, but it quickly dissolved into chaos and one-by-one Germany lost control of the situation, tying down troops and ensuring a post-war mess regardless of who won the war.

6. April, 1917: The Nivelle Offensive. The failure of the Germans to exploit the French Army's virtual collapse after this failed offensive, leading to the widespread mutinies in the French Army (whereby French soldiers remained at their posts but refused any offensive action) was the last chance Germany had of defeating the French. Their procrastination in exploiting the French Army's weakness gave the new French commander, Petain, the chance to suppress the mutiny and restore French fighting confidence. A lost opportunity.

7. April 1917: American entry into the war on the Entente side. The brilliant German success in removing Russia from the war was mooted by the fumbling German Foreign Ministry's clumsy antagonization of neutral America, bringing the world's largest industrial power into the war against Germany. While the American peace-time army was tiny (c. 200,000; spread throughout the U.S.) the country eventually mobilized some 4 million men in 19 months (2 million of them reaching France by war's end) at a time when Germany was already sending young boys and old men to fill their shrinking ranks. The entire series of events on the Western Front in 1918 was determined by a German need to end the war before American soldiers began showing up in significant numbers. German stupidity in 1917 forced a greater desperation on the German war effort in 1918 - ultimately to a fatal extent.

8. March 1918: Treaty of Brest-Litovsk. The German-imposed treaty that took Bolshevik Russia out of the war seemed like a brilliant stroke at the time but it shocked Europe - including Germans - with its raw imperialism and dismantling of one of the hitherto Great Powers. A political threshold had been crossed, and Germany's position in even some of the strongly pro-German Latin American states was heavily tarnished by this naked act of thuggery. This treaty invigorated not only Allied opposition to the war, but as well native anti-war elements in Germany itself, especially the more extreme Socialists. Compared at the time with Woodrow Wilson's recently-issued "Fourteen Points", the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk made Berlin seem like a power-hungry menace, even to some Germans.

9. May-July 1918: 3rd Battle of the Marne. Despite everything else, the mad German drive that began in March 1918 with Operation Michael could still have knocked France out of the war had the Reichswehr reached Paris - maybe - but the German failure with stiff Allied resistance along the Marne, and the coordinated Allied counter-attacks, ensured Germany was doomed.

10. August 1918: The "Black Day of the German Army". A myth centered around 8. August 1918, in fact throughout August the German Army suffered repeated and constant defeat at the hands of its enemies, and began to crack. By the end of August the staunch Ludendorf would be begging the Kaiser to find a way to diplomatically end the war. Major Allied gains began to snowball in September, but Ludendorf repudiated his August collapse and insisted on fighting on - until late October, after the defection of two of Germany's allies, and the increasingly imminent collapse of the Reichswehr itself. When in November 1918 General Groener was setting out for the negotiations for an armistice, he was told that it was not known if some front line German units still existed.

Well - thoughts?
 
I have to admit that I am not as well-informed on WWI as I'd liked to be :o I never thought of the Russian Revolution in that light. :hmm: But based on my knowledge I'd say either

America's entry into the war - obviously, since America's Industrial capacity and manpower would tilt the scales in favour of the allies. WWI was about fielding more units than your opponent, after all.

or

The 3rd Battle of the Marne. I believe that if Germany had managed to take and hold most of France (or even drive English and American forces off the continent) war weariness would have forced peace on all parties involved. D-day with 1919 technology doesn't sound likely to me.

Actually, since you are well informed on this period, could you recommend a few relatively neutral books on WWI? :)
 
Originally posted by Panda
I have to admit that I am not as well-informed on WWI as I'd liked to be :o I never thought of the Russian Revolution in that light. :hmm: But based on my knowledge I'd say either

America's entry into the war - obviously, since America's Industrial capacity and manpower would tilt the scales in favour of the allies. WWI was about fielding more units than your opponent, after all.

or

The 3rd Battle of the Marne. I believe that if Germany had managed to take and hold most of France (or even drive English and American forces off the continent) war weariness would have forced peace on all parties involved. D-day with 1919 technology doesn't sound likely to me.

Actually, since you are well informed on this period, could you recommend a few relatively neutral books on WWI? :)
I also voted for the US entry into the war.

As for books, one of my favorites is The Guns of August by Barbra Tuchman. It's a great narrative that tells about the causes of the war and the first few months of fighting.
 
Same here. America's entry into the war is the beginning of the end for the Kaiser. W/o America's entry, the Germans might still hold out, since the Anglo-French forces were equally weakened and probably incapable of invading the Reich by themselves. By then, Russia had collapsed which freed up German troops fr the east (the Kaiser could choose not to enforce his gains fr the Brest-Lovotsk treaty i.e. not sending troops to hold territory in the east).
 
The US entry into the war combined with Brest-Litowsk.I think from this point on Material superiority of the Allies was unstoppable and Brest-Litowsk assured the mood in the major Allies (esp.America) couldn't turn against the war.
 
US entered the war by the time, everything was decided beforehand. Maybe US just helped to make it finish a bit sooner, but I think the US entrance is not the most important event of the war.

I voted for ;) guess what?....:) certainly, Brusilov's offence! This event made Germany and Austria concentrate their forces on the eastern front - it allowed England and France act more active, and btw the Brusilov's offence made more casualties from the aggressors' side, and one more amazing fact - the Brusilov's attack was the FIRST in the world history offence of the whole front! (about 360 kilometres, as far as I remember)!!!

Vrylakas, what have you voted for?
 
I don't think everything was decided when USA entered the war.Look at option 9 i.e. and subtract every single American soldier and weapon from the battle and a German breakthrough is much more likely IMO.
And France and Britain acting more actively didn't brought them too far in the trenches.
 
The Patriots broke the tie in Eastern France. France/ UK and Germany would have been at it for longer. Who knows who would have won.
 
I voted for Brusilov's offence also for the same reasons as Bifrost. Germany had to move many of its troops to back up the remainder of the Austrian army. The other events occured by the time Germany was on the fall and was getting beaten down even further each time it tried to rise up again.
 
Originally posted by Panda
The 3rd Battle of the Marne. I believe that if Germany had managed to take and hold most of France (or even drive English and American forces off the continent) war weariness would have forced peace on all parties involved.

My vote, my reasoning. :goodjob:

Incidentally, Vimy Ridge isn't on your list. I'm sure Newfangle will be offended ;) .

R.III
 
two things made to end colser...
the tanks, adn usa enter the war...
when russia got out, it made it posible for germany to win... but usa took her place...
 
Verdun,

The Germans bid for control of the air, and lost
through bad air tactics. They never recovered
to even match the allies. It cost them the war.
(IMHO).
 
Panda wrote:

Actually, since you are well informed on this period, could you recommend a few relatively neutral books on WWI?

A few come to mind, all in English for you. The British military historian John Keegan just wrote a year and a half ago a brilliant summary of the war called simply The First World War. He is a historian before he's English, and he goes to great lengths to transcend national views and myths. Another good read, though one punctured a bit by historians since, is the German historian Fritz Fischer's Germany and the World War or something along those lines. This book was a shocker when it was published in 1962, when he became the first prominent German to say publically that Germany was a prime cause for World War I. I would also look for anything published by the American historian Lonnie Johnson, whether in German or English. Johnson is a professor at the university in Vienna and is a specialist in Central European history, but his works naturally cross tracks with the Great War and he deals with all his subjects scrupulously professionally and objectively. Also, the younger Seton-Watson's books on the war in Eastern Europe would be very helpful for you.

I would avoid A.J.P. Taylor, although he's standard fare for British readers. He's written a famous history of the war but it is infamously 1. Anglo-centric, 2. dismissive of any contributions not coming from dyed-in-the-wool Englishmen, and 3. has conclusions based on his own unabashed prejudices (i.e., the Germans did what they did because Germans are evil and do that sort of thing). A post-World War II Britain was very ready to believe these kinds of prejudices and Taylor's works have enjoyed a large following in Britain up to our own day. Martin Gilbert also falls into this pop-category.

Bifrost wrote:

Vrylakas, what have you voted for?

When I wrote this I honestly did have a ready conclusion. First of all, it's important to remember that all of these events helped in the eventual defeat of Germany. I was just looking for the final one, the one beyond which there was no hope for Berlin. I think I am leaning towards the 3rd Battle of the Marne, because Germany proved in early 1918 it still had some offensive ability and really came within a hair's breadth of breaking the Marne line, perhaps moving onto Paris itself. The Western Allies could only wait for the Americans' numbers to grow strong enough that the Allies could take the offensive again (because 1917 had seriously weakened the Allied armies as well as the German). If the Germans had somehow managed to cross the Marne in force and threaten Paris, the war might have ended differently. Even if they immediately requested an armistice, their military position would have left them with a very strong bargaining position at the post-war peace conference, and they could have claimed that they were still not defeated.

However, after their failure to take the Marne crossings, the German Reichswehr simply slumped back to defensive positions, and spent the rest of the war in that mode. The Spring 1918 German offensives, coupled with their grinding defeat at the Marne, truly broke the German army. Throughout the summer, and increasingly in the autumn, the Reichswehr began to show signs of stress and cracking, and for the first time the Allies began seeing German soldiers surrendering in significant numbers. The German army was disintegrating.

There surely were other possible "events" or causes as well, some of which I didn't mention. Socialist agitation in Germany, coupled with Bolshevik agitation among German troops invading Russia (so much so that Ludendorf refused to bring some divisions to the Western Front from Russia because they were "infected" by socialist propaganda and now unreliable and potentially mutinous) also played a prominent role. Having an incompetent Kaiser didn't help either. And of course Germany itself was not of "one mind"; some parts of German society and some regions (Ländern) were eastern-oriented (Prussia, Saxony, Brandenburg) while others were more German nationalist (Bavaria) while some others still had strong Anglo-French historical connections (Hanover, Ruhr, Rheinland). When things were going well everyone was a proud German, but when things started going wrong, then it was those damned Prussians or those lazy schlämperei Catholic southerners...
 
There were many turningpoints.

WWI was so titanic in size and scope, and involved so many protracted battles.

I would have to say the Marne (1914) when the battle of mobility ended was huge, bringing on four years of static trench warfare.

The Marne (1918) was, as vrylakas posted, the beginning of the end for the Kaiser.
 
Three events:

Failure at the Marne (1914, France survives, no quick end ala 1870-71)

USA enters war (1917, Germany is now under time pressure to win before US forces arrive to tip the scales)

Failure of the Kaiser's battles (1918, of which the 'black day' is part of, Germany lost it's last chance for a military victory, now it was just a matter of time)
 
German's failure to take Paris started it's downfall. Imagine how demoralized/humiliated England and France would be if Paris fell again to the Germans, and imagine how galvanized the Germans would be.

From a more practical view, the failure started the whole trench warfare business and ultimately halted the German advance into France. If Paris fell France would most likely have surrendered, and Italy might have joined the Central Powers, and US probably wouldn't have bothered to join the Allied effort.
 
The main benefit that American entry brought was morale rather than actual for most of the war...


The amount of men America could eventually commit and could keep committing to combat meant that Germany could see that she could not win a war of attrition.


France and then Britain carried the war on the Western Front...for me the crucial turning point is the failure of the German army to bleed France dry and destroy the French army. Had Germany broken the French at Verdun it would have meant the British would have had a near impossible task holding the line.


America was drawn into the war mainly because of the submarine campaign. The telegram had its value concerning a Germano-Mexican alliance from British Intelligence was also a factor.

The reason Germany kept on with the submarine campaign despite the risk of provoking American entry is they saw it to be their best chance of bringing Britain and her Empire to the negociating table.
Even the threat of the Americans eventually putting an army into Europe wasn't enough to stop it from being continued for it was Britain by 1917 that was carrying the war against Germany.
Indeed the turning point could be said to be the Battle of the Somme where the British took their licks and started on the path to creating an large, experienced army capable of absorbing huge losses and being able to keep fighting.


My choice would be the Battle of the Somme. It showed for the first time that the British had mobalised an army, and it was able of fighting for months and take huge casualties and score some notable successes. It was the mobalisation of Britain to war and her acceptance of the burden that meant the allies could win.
 
America entering the war was probably the turning point that ensured victory for the allies, as far as your poll is concerned.
Germany just couldnt keep up in men and material.

But I wouldnt say America won the war, not by a long shot. We just helped. ;)
 
Back
Top Bottom