Who should have won World War I?

[Steeleye]

Which side do you think should have won the War to End All Wars?

[Kludge]

Switzerland won.

[Sean]

The world probably would have been better off if the central powers won and the US stayed out.Germany defeated France in like 1870 and the world didn't come to an end. Plus communism might have been defeated in Russia.

[Mini-Me]

Well, from my hazy understanding, the Germans were offering some pretty fair peace terms to the British before the Balfour Declaration, the entry of the United States, etc. Without the US having gotten involved, the British probably would have had no choice but to accept them...so unless I'm seriously missing something, the Central Powers would have and "should have" won.

For that reason, I'll vote for the Central Powers, but it sure as hell isn't an endorsement. The mere fact that World War I even happened was astoundingly ridiculous, and all the policy-makers involved on every side should have been lynched for what they put their populations through. In any case, it wasn't our business and it wasn't our problem, so we should've just stayed the hell out of it...which would have conveniently prevented a few other minor inconveniences like World War II. :rolleyes: In other words, what Kludge said: Switzerland won.

[Pod]

Lets not forget who declared the war. Austria-Hungary had imperial designes in the Balkans and paid for them with its life. Death to empires!

[Imperial]

I am not sure, not that I don't care.

The Middle East wouldve been far less screwed up, but an Arab revolt would have probably occurred at some point. How draconian or screwed up the Ottoman Empire(at this point under a new regime of somewhat more liberal "young turks") would have reacted is uncertain.

You also have to wonder what impact would have been found if the authoritarian system of Germany won over the democracies(not that the democratic victory was good either, just wondering if this would be a negative in itself).

You also have to wonder if France wouldn't of eventually been radicalized with a Central Powers victory, as more than likely they would lose alot of territory. A type of Nazi France with a different name could have possibly developed.

But I think the difference would be degree. Our entry escalated and prolonged the bad feelings and blood loss of WW1. So even though French blowback, Arab separatism, and some vindication of an authoritarian/bureaucratic system would have occurred, it may not have been as intense and not resulted in a global war.


Plus communism might have been defeated in Russia.

How?

[South Park Fan]

I am not sure, not that I don't care.

The Middle East wouldve been far less screwed up, but an Arab revolt would have probably occurred at some point. How draconian or screwed up the Ottoman Empire(at this point under a new regime of somewhat more liberal "young turks") would have reacted is uncertain.

You also have to wonder what impact would have been found if the authoritarian system of Germany won over the democracies(not that the democratic victory was good either, just wondering if this would be a negative in itself).

You also have to wonder if France wouldn't of eventually been radicalized with a Central Powers victory, as more than likely they would lose alot of territory. A type of Nazi France with a different name could have possibly developed.

But I think the difference would be degree. Our entry escalated and prolonged the bad feelings and blood loss of WW1. So even though French blowback, Arab separatism, and some vindication of an authoritarian/bureaucratic system would have occurred, it may not have been as intense and not resulted in a global war.



How?

A peace prior to October 1917 would have gotten rid of the Bolshevik's main justification for coming to power: ending the war.

[Pod]

You also have to wonder if France wouldn't of eventually been radicalized with a Central Powers victory, as more than likely they would lose alot of territory. A type of Nazi France with a different name could have possibly developed.

An excellent point. It is a problem of what is seen and what is not seen. Yes we know that Entante victory ultimately led to many bad things, but who is to say a Central Powers victory would not have led to other bad things. And nevermind revanchist France, imagine a revanchist Russia, if you think Versailes was unbalanced then just take a look at the Brest-Litovsk treaty. Then add to that the Turks clinging on to middle east and reestablishing a foothold in the Balkans guaranteeing more turmoil in the future, imagine the government that genocided the Armenians staying in power, imagine the ticking time-bomb that was Austria-Hungary remaining in existance. And it is stil far from excluded that a mayor clash beetween Germany and Britain would not have happened again 20 years later for victorious Germany would have likely wanted to expand its overseas empire inevitabily clashing with Britain.

Ultimately you cant get anywhere with this sort of speculation. So the only thing which you can base your position on is justice. It was a war between competing imperialist powers so there wasnt much justice in either camp but ultimately I think the central powers were a tad worse. They invaded totally without justification Serbia and Belgium and they were the ones who launched the war and started the saber rattling. Also in reality Versailes was not that harsh. It was hypocritical yes, because it stripped Germany of its empire while it expanded the British and French empires. But losing an empire is not a legitimate grievance. Altogether only one small German mayority province (Alsace) was detached from Germany and annexed by another country. (Danzig was detached but was not annexed by anyone, South Tyrol was annexed by Italy and Sudeten became part of Czechoslovakia but these were former Austrian provinces not German ones.) Anyway to repeat myself it was far milder than what the Germans had in mind for Central and Eastern Europe ("Mitteleuropa").


A peace prior to October 1917 would have gotten rid of the Bolshevik's main justification for coming to power: ending the war.

And a peace treaty in 1915 would have been even better. But the question isnt a peace treaty yes or not. The question is the central powers or the entante.

[FrankRep]

Everyone loses in war. The Bankers won, they made tons of money.

[acptulsa]

Lets not forget who declared the war. Austria-Hungary had imperial designes in the Balkans and paid for them with its life. Death to empires!

And Wilhelm II was right there with him. The guy was such a freak that Bismarck thought him heartless--and Bismarck was as Machiavellian a son of a bitch as you could ever hope to meet.

As for the Soviet Union, preventing the war would have prevented its creation. Not that Wilhelm cared; he took the coward's way out and didn't have to deal with that or anything else.

Well, who knows where alternate outcomes would have taken the world? But I can tell you this--the fact that it did not, in fact, end all wars proves that, as a herd, humans are awfully foolish.

[BuddyRey]

The Allies were totally in the wrong, including Wilson, who campaigned on a promise not to get the U.S. embroiled in the war and then did so anyway.

[acptulsa]

The Allies were totally in the wrong, including Wilson, who campaigned on a promise not to get the U.S. embroiled in the war and then did so anyway.

Easy on the 'totally' stuff--there was nothing that clear-cut about this war. Consider the plight of Belgium. What the hell did they do?

[fisharmor]

Austria-Hungary had imperial designes in the Balkans and paid for them with its life. Death to empires!

The thing is, Austria-Hungary was already an empire - and Austria had been around as a continental power for quite some time before this happened.

Consider this... you have the remnant of an empire from almost a millennium ago, it gets defeated, torn to shreds, and then some dude with a smart moustache starts rebuilding an empire right next door... is it any surprise then that Austria was annexed, instead of invaded?

I agree with your sentiment, but destroying empires has consequences.

In any case, I think the central powers should have won. There's no reason why the western powers had any more right to have empires.
The more decentralized government is, the happier people will be, I think. So I think having 10 or 12 superpowers today would make for a more free world than having one or two. And I think if the central powers won back then, that's what we'd be looking at.

[Pod]

The thing is, Austria-Hungary was already an empire - and Austria had been around as a continental power for quite some time before this happened.

Consider this... you have the remnant of an empire from almost a millennium ago, it gets defeated, torn to shreds, and then some dude with a smart moustache starts rebuilding an empire right next door... is it any surprise then that Austria was annexed, instead of invaded?

I agree with your sentiment, but destroying empires has consequences.

Yes but the Habsurg Empire was doomed to fail, it was a dysfunctional anachronism. Better that it just disintegrated the way it did rather than survive the WWI and then go down in a total civil war a decade or so later between Germans, Hungarians, and Slavs, Romanians, Italians and so forth.



The more decentralized government is, the happier people will be, I think. So I think having 10 or 12 superpowers today would make for a more free world than having one or two.

I agree with this.



And I think if the central powers won back then, that's what we'd be looking at.

Or you could have an epic collision course between Germany and the USA with USA stil coming on top but in an even much more bloody and longer conflict than even the WWII as we know it.

[acptulsa]

Or you could have an epic collision course between Germany and the USA with USA stil coming on top but in an even much more bloody and longer conflict than even the WWII as we know it.

Could easily be the case.

Isn't being a Monday morning quarterback fun? If Spruance had been in charge of the Third Fleet at Leyte instead of that agreeable and agressive moron Halsey, the Big One might have ended months earlier. But if we hadn't dropped The Bomb on Japan, who would we have dropped it on? And what sort of ugliness would that have led to? Armageddon?

I mean, we had a new toy. We'd have used it on someone...

[klamath]

None, the war would have ended in a stalemate if the US hadn't gotten involved. None of them were right, it was a war of imperial powers that had nothing to do with freedom for the individual.

[Young Paleocon]

Chances are had we not got involved then the Ludendorff offensives in 1918 would have made a little more headway into France, yet I'm though they were close I'm not sure if this would have broken the BEF or the French. However, in Germany there was a famine and it was on the brink of revolution in 1918 so the war probably wouldn't have lasted much longer in any case. We wouldn't have had the Versailles treaty, no league of nations, most likely no Poland, Germany would have retained Alsace-Lorraine and would probably have developed a socialist government if dispositions in the Reichstag are any indications. No inflation of the 20's, no Hitler, but since France would have probably been on the losing side again and they already being renowned for their antisemitism, (Dreyfus Affair, fast forward to laws made in the 30's) might have had a holocaust-esque event happen in France. Austro-Hungary would have probably devolved into ethnic revolution, due to being so further weakened. Italy still getting the black shirts is a tough call. So anyway in my estimation the war would have lasted until later 1918 or 1919 and barring the French and British collapse or revolution in Germany would have probably ended in a fairly neutral peace.

[acptulsa]

So anyway in my estimation the war would have lasted until later 1918 or 1919 and barring the French and British collapse or revolution in Germany would have probably ended in a fairly neutral peace.

Good post--but don't forget that the influenza virus was decimating populations even faster than the war was.

I completely concur with your conclusions. And it might well be that the Great Depression did more than the Versailles Debacle to bring on The Big One anyway, so who knows if we could have prevented it?

[mediahasyou]

People don't win wars, governments do.

The population loses money and lives not to mention the emotional factors wars bring upon us.

Governments get a new tax base to leach on/reparations. During war governments have a reason to raise taxes; after war they never lower them.

[Young Paleocon]

The Austrian School lost WWI, military planners and socialists thought they could plan economies after the war and Boehm-Bawerk killed himself because of the war's outbreak in 1914.

[Elwar]

Those that were defending themselves from the initiation of force should have won.

[acptulsa]

Those that were defending themselves from the initiation of force should have won.

Thanks to the 'anarchist' attack, which came in response to an unpopular empire, and a whole host of 'entangling alliances', I think just about the only nation who couldn't claim they were defending themselves from force some way or another is the U.S. And we certainly tried to make the claim re the Lusitania.

[pcosmar]

Everyone loses in war. The Bankers won, they made tons of money.

+1
Hit the nail squarely on the head.


, I think just about the only nation who couldn't claim they were defending themselves from force some way or another is the U.S. And we certainly tried to make the claim re the Lusitania.

Not even close. The Lusitania was an engineered excuse to sell our involvement, we (the US)were already involved.

[aravoth]

The greatest victories are born from battles never fought.

[CMoore]

I think the question should not be "Who should have won?" rather "Why was this fought in the first place?" Our involvement in WWI was the very thing we were warned about by the Founding Fathers. They anticipated this sort of thing and specifically warned us against it. We went ahead and did it anyway and look at what the result has been.