Decisions based on self, at the expense of the common good.
 

QUORA: Was WWI avoidable?

by David Lipman, former 1st Cavalry Division (1983-1987)
Answered Oct 22, 2018
The fact that the Great War was avoidable is one of that wars
many tragedies. When dealing with jealous, competetive, and
powerful nation states, a deft diplomacy is mandatory. But wise
diplomacy was gone from Germany, the young and foolish Kaiser
dismissed the masterful Bismark. It took a diplomat of Bismarks
skill to balance the jealous rivals Germanies nationhood had
created. With his ouster, the diplomacy of Germany became erratic.

The French were burning for the return of Alsace and Lorraine.
Provinces taken in the final of three wars Bismark had instigated
to form the German nation in 1870. France knew she would need
powerful allies to defeat the new German colossus. Bismark had
kept Russia tied to Germany. The Kaiser threw this €œThree Emperors
League€� away. France quickly filled the void. The Kaisers stupidity
had lost Russia to France.

Britain was finished with €œSplendid Isolation€�. She sought naval
agreements with the rising naval power of Germany. The Germans
wanted a firm alliance, far more than Britain could countenance.
The end result was no agreement at all. The Kaisers ship building
mania alienated the British. The German fleet could have but one
adversary. Each new German dreadnought drove the British from
friendly neutral into implacable foe. Bismark wanted no colonies
and a small fleet. Kaiser Wilhelm II demanded an Empire and an
all powerful fleet. In the end he got neither. His idiocy drove
the British into an alliance with France. A happening that would
have been unthinkable only a few years earlier. France had her
powerful allies. She was ready.

This left Germany tied to the moribund Hapsburg domains. Nationalism
was the death of Austria Hungary. She was a Medievel holdover, the
peoples under her control increasingly restive. The Archdukes
assassination gave her the pretext she wanted. Crushing Serbia
would surely bind the ramshackle realm together. In reality, the
Hapsburgs were on borrowed time. They were too weak to do anything
without German support. Serbia was frantic to avoid war. All the
Kaiser and Germany had to do was to leash their Austrian dog. But
they supported A-H totally. Given the go ahead, the Hapsburgs
attacked Serbia and the lights went out in Europe.

Mobilisation meant war. Germany and the Kaiser could have stopped
it with a word. Deny the Hapsburgs German support, and she was
powerless. But A-H was given a €œblank check€�. The Dual Monarchy
would not have attacked Serbia alone. Russia was the Serbs protector.
The Austrians wisely had no stomach for a death match, unaided,
against Serbia's powerful protector. The Kaiser and Germany's
support insured that the war would be fought.

If only Germany had wise statesmen, if only the Kaiser was not
quite the ass that he proved to be. If only, if only. The two
saddest words in the English language.

Decisions based on self, at the expense of the common good.
 

David P wrote

QUORA: Was WWI avoidable?

by David Lipman, former 1st Cavalry Division (1983-1987)
Answered Oct 22, 2018
The fact that the Great War was avoidable is one of that wars
many tragedies. When dealing with jealous, competetive, and
powerful nation states, a deft diplomacy is mandatory. But wise
diplomacy was gone from Germany, the young and foolish Kaiser
dismissed the masterful Bismark. It took a diplomat of Bismarks
skill to balance the jealous rivals Germanies nationhood had
created. With his ouster, the diplomacy of Germany became erratic.

The real problem was that they didnt realise that that
conflict could turn into anything like a 4 year world war.
They expected that it would just be another local war
like the european wars before that.

The French were burning for the return of Alsace and Lorraine.
Provinces taken in the final of three wars Bismark had instigated
to form the German nation in 1870. France knew she would need
powerful allies to defeat the new German colossus. Bismark had
kept Russia tied to Germany. The Kaiser threw this €œThree Emperors
League€� away. France quickly filled the void. The Kaisers stupidity
had lost Russia to France.

Britain was finished with €œSplendid Isolation€�.

There was never that with the wars against the french and waterloo etc.

She sought naval agreements with the rising naval power of
Germany. The Germans wanted a firm alliance, far more than
Britain could countenance.
The end result was no agreement at all. The Kaisers ship building
mania alienated the British. The German fleet could have but one
adversary. Each new German dreadnought drove the British from
friendly neutral into implacable foe. Bismark wanted no colonies
and a small fleet. Kaiser Wilhelm II demanded an Empire and an
all powerful fleet. In the end he got neither. His idiocy drove
the British into an alliance with France. A happening that would
have been unthinkable only a few years earlier. France had her
powerful allies. She was ready.

This left Germany tied to the moribund Hapsburg domains. Nationalism
was the death of Austria Hungary. She was a Medievel holdover, the
peoples under her control increasingly restive. The Archdukes
assassination gave her the pretext she wanted. Crushing Serbia
would surely bind the ramshackle realm together. In reality, the
Hapsburgs were on borrowed time. They were too weak to do anything
without German support. Serbia was frantic to avoid war. All the
Kaiser and Germany had to do was to leash their Austrian dog. But
they supported A-H totally. Given the go ahead, the Hapsburgs
attacked Serbia and the lights went out in Europe.

Mobilisation meant war. Germany and the Kaiser could have stopped
it with a word. Deny the Hapsburgs German support, and she was
powerless. But A-H was given a €œblank check€�. The Dual Monarchy
would not have attacked Serbia alone. Russia was the Serbs protector.
The Austrians wisely had no stomach for a death match, unaided,
against Serbia's powerful protector. The Kaiser and Germany's
support insured that the war would be fought.

If only Germany had wise statesmen, if only the Kaiser was not
quite the ass that he proved to be. If only, if only. The two
saddest words in the English language.

Lonely Auto-contradicting Psychotic Senile Ozzie Troll Alert!
 

On Mon, 18 Nov 2019 10:27:19 +1100, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:


The real problem

The REAL problem is that you are a clinically insane, trolling piece of
senile ****!

--
about senile Rot Speed:
"This is like having a conversation with someone with brain damage."
MID:

Decisions based on self, at the expense of the common good.
 

In article ,
Rod Speed wrote:
David P wrote

QUORA: Was WWI avoidable?

by David Lipman, former 1st Cavalry Division (1983-1987)
Answered Oct 22, 2018
The fact that the Great War was avoidable is one of that wars
many tragedies. When dealing with jealous, competetive, and
powerful nation states, a deft diplomacy is mandatory. But wise
diplomacy was gone from Germany, the young and foolish Kaiser
dismissed the masterful Bismark. It took a diplomat of Bismarks
skill to balance the jealous rivals Germanies nationhood had
created. With his ouster, the diplomacy of Germany became erratic.

The real problem was that they didn‘t realise that that
conflict could turn into anything like a 4 year world war.
They expected that it would just be another local war
like the european wars before that.

The French were burning for the return of Alsace and Lorraine.
Provinces taken in the final of three wars Bismark had instigated
to form the German nation in 1870. France knew she would need
powerful allies to defeat the new German colossus. Bismark had
kept Russia tied to Germany. The Kaiser threw this ”Three Emperors
League• away. France quickly filled the void. The Kaisers stupidity
had lost Russia to France.

Britain was finished with ”Splendid Isolation•.

There was never that with the wars against the french and waterloo etc.

That was 100 years in the past.

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle

Decisions based on self, at the expense of the common good.
 

Rod Speed wrote:
David P wrote

QUORA: Was WWI avoidable?

by David Lipman, former 1st Cavalry Division (1983-1987)
Answered Oct 22, 2018
The fact that the Great War was avoidable is one of that wars
many tragedies. When dealing with jealous, competetive, and
powerful nation states, a deft diplomacy is mandatory. But wise
diplomacy was gone from Germany, the young and foolish Kaiser
dismissed the masterful Bismark. It took a diplomat of Bismarks
skill to balance the jealous rivals Germanies nationhood had
created. With his ouster, the diplomacy of Germany became erratic.

The real problem was that they didnt realise that that
conflict could turn into anything like a 4 year world war.
They expected that it would just be another local war
like the european wars before that.

"Bismarck wanted no colonies and a small fleet. Kaiser Wilhelm II
demanded an Empire and an all powerful fleet."

A decision based on self, at the expense of the common good.

The purpose of regular attendance at recovery meetings (A.A., N.A.,
etc.) is to see more & more clearly how decisions based on self,
at the expense of the common good (also known as "selfishness gone wild",
"an undisciplined craving for more", & "self-will run riot"), are the
cause of trouble & conflict. These kinds of decisions, also made by
numerous members of the political class worldwide, throughout history,
are well-documented.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_opportunism
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_warfare
The only one I would add here is the decision to extend life spans
as much as possible, by preventing communicable diseases.
(The common good includes other creatures, future generations,
and the environment.)

Decisions based on self, at the expense of the common good.
 

David P wrote
Rod Speed wrote
David P wrote

QUORA: Was WWI avoidable?

by David Lipman, former 1st Cavalry Division (1983-1987)

Just another ignorant yank.

Answered Oct 22, 2018
The fact that the Great War was avoidable is one of that wars
many tragedies. When dealing with jealous, competetive, and
powerful nation states, a deft diplomacy is mandatory. But wise
diplomacy was gone from Germany, the young and foolish Kaiser
dismissed the masterful Bismark. It took a diplomat of Bismarks
skill to balance the jealous rivals Germanies nationhood had
created. With his ouster, the diplomacy of Germany became erratic.

The real problem was that they didnt realise that that
conflict could turn into anything like a 4 year world war.
They expected that it would just be another local war
like the european wars before that.

"Bismarck wanted no colonies and a small fleet. Kaiser Wilhelm II
demanded an Empire and an all powerful fleet."

Thats a trivial part of the question about whether WW1 was avoidable.

WW1 wasnt about the lack of skilful diplomacy and Bismarck
had his share of full scale war, tho not a world war.

A decision based on self, at the expense of the common good.

Sure, but thats a separate issue to whether WW1 was avoidable.
To a large extent it wasnt, because the allegiances were already
in place and once the stupid posturing that happened after
Ferdinand got assassinated got going, there was a real sense
in which full scale war was inevitable and the development
of full industrial war made a world war inevitable.

Just like with Vietnam,, once it gets going, it becomes
unstoppable until one side or the other loses.

The purpose of regular attendance at recovery meetings (A.A.,
N.A., etc.) is to see more & more clearly how decisions based
on self, at the expense of the common good (also known as
"selfishness gone wild", "an undisciplined craving for more",
? & "self-will run riot"), are the cause of trouble & conflict.

That isnt why the UK got involved. Or France either for that matter.

These kinds of decisions, also made by numerous members of the
? political class worldwide, throughout history, are well-documented.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_opportunism
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_warfare

Thats a separate issue to whether WW1 could have been avoided.

The only one I would add here is the decision to extend life
spans as much as possible, by preventing communicable
diseases. (The common good includes other creatures,
future generations, and the environment.)

Again, absolutely NOTHING to do with whether WW1 could have been avoided.

Decisions based on self, at the expense of the common good.
 

"charles" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Rod Speed wrote:
David P wrote

QUORA: Was WWI avoidable?

by David Lipman, former 1st Cavalry Division (1983-1987)
Answered Oct 22, 2018
The fact that the Great War was avoidable is one of that wars
many tragedies. When dealing with jealous, competetive, and
powerful nation states, a deft diplomacy is mandatory. But wise
diplomacy was gone from Germany, the young and foolish Kaiser
dismissed the masterful Bismark. It took a diplomat of Bismarks
skill to balance the jealous rivals Germanies nationhood had
created. With his ouster, the diplomacy of Germany became erratic.

The real problem was that they didn't realise that that
conflict could turn into anything like a 4 year world war.
They expected that it would just be another local war
like the european wars before that.

The French were burning for the return of Alsace and Lorraine.
Provinces taken in the final of three wars Bismark had instigated
to form the German nation in 1870. France knew she would need
powerful allies to defeat the new German colossus. Bismark had
kept Russia tied to Germany. The Kaiser threw this "Three Emperors
League. away. France quickly filled the void. The Kaisers stupidity
had lost Russia to France.

Britain was finished with "Splendid Isolation..

There was never that with the wars against the french and waterloo etc.

That was 100 years in the past.

But there was the Boer War and Egypt etc much more recently than that. And
the colonial wars too. Nothing even remotely like splendid isolation in
fact.

Lonely Auto-contradicting Psychotic Senile Ozzie Troll Alert!
 

On Tue, 19 Nov 2019 05:27:53 +1100, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:


That was 100 years in the past.

But there was the Boer War and Egypt etc much more recently than that. And
the colonial wars too. Nothing even remotely like splendid isolation in
fact.

In auto-contradicting mode again, you clinically insane senile pest? LOL

--
addressing nym-shifting senile Rodent:
"You on the other hand are a heavyweight bull****ter who demonstrates
your particular prowess at it every day."
MID:

Lonely Auto-contradicting Psychotic Senile Ozzie Troll Alert!
 

On Tue, 19 Nov 2019 05:01:39 +1100, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:


Just another ignorant yank.

Nope, just another idiotic troll from you, senile Ozzie pest!

--
Keema Nam addressing nym-shifting senile Rodent:
"You are now exposed as a liar, as well as an ignorant troll."
"MID: .com"