Should We (or for that Matter Britain) Have Entered World War I

downloadThis is an exercise in thinking for yourself. it came up in a comment stream (yes, we were off topic) on AATW last week, and it interesting one. There is simply no doubt that the infusion of American arms and money won the Great War for the Allies.

But should we have entered, there is some truth that we entered because Wilson was outraged that the Kreigsmarine ignored his warnings about submarine warfare, and some truth that America was outraged by the Zimmerman telegram. On the other hand it hard to see how we were going to collect the loans we had made to the Allies if we didn’t.

Nor was this a small matter, sometime in 1915 or 1916 the world’s financial center had moved from London to New York, as the British went from being the world’s largest creditor nation to being the world’s largest debtor nation. Without that there is no American century. By the time of the Armistice, Germany was literally starving to death (that’s true in World War II as well, but irrelevant for now). this is when America became the “indispensable nation”. there are lessons in that for us today that we would be wise to take to heart as well.


But to me the more interesting question is this. What if Great Britain had sat out the Great War? Here are four eminent British historians talking about that very idea. Watch the video and then we’ll talk a bit more.

I think I’ve run this before but no matter, it’s quite valuable, and directly on point. One thing that is very hard  for us all is that one can only consider the information they knew at the time.

You heard quite a bit about shopping lists and Bethmann-Hollweg’s demands. If I remember by about October 1914 Germany was so far in debt that she had to make ridiculous claims to pay off her debt, she, of course, didn’t have the British (and then American) banks to hold her hand, and you do remember what happened to Weimar Germany in the 20s, right?

What do I think, overall? From the viewpoint of what we now call Realpolitik there is simply no question, there were no gains available commensurate with the risk of war for Great Britain. And the outcome of her victory could have hardly been worse, if she lost. That is not entirely her fault of course. There are other actors, I, personally would lay a great deal of the blame on the idiotically inexperienced and stubborn Woodrow Wilson But there, are, in fact, no clean hands in this mess.

And the other fly in the ointment is this. Germany should have won anyway, and in 1914. von Moltke the Younger weakened the Schwerpunkt to strengthen the defenses in the Ruhr unnecessarily (the French weren’t coming). That led to the necessary shortening of the right hook and is the reason the First Marne happened instead of the fall of Paris. Then he panicked when he saw the mobilization of Russia proceeding faster than the Prussian plan said they would, and diverted a further three corps from the attack to Hindenburg in the run-up to Tannenberg. When he was told they were coming Hindenburg reportedly said, “Why, I have no use for them. And he didn’t.

They got there after the battle had been fought. So they spent the entire decisive stage of the war riding around on trains across Germany. And so, “the Miracle of the Marne” was actually that the Germans panicked.

And so the whole thing settled into stalemate. The apologists would like you to believe this couldn’t have been foreseen. They’re wrong, it could have been, and should have been. Europe, then as now, believed so much in their superiority that they never looked around. They didn’t have to look far. The 1864-65 campaign of the Army of the Potomac against the Army of Northern Virginia, looks very similar. To change the paradigm was going to take the development of practical combustion powered armored force vehicle which didn’t happen until the 1930s.

And so a clear win for the non-interventionists. Or is it?

Because in the cold logic of realpolitik it seems pretty clear, there remains that nagging little voice, “What of Honor? What of our commitments, and our word?”

And as I sit here in a United States whose feckless government has seemingly forgotten (or never knew) the terms, let alone what they mean. I’m inclined to think they do, other countries need to know what a great power will, in general do. that it will keep its word. And while here, we have been talking of the beginning of the wars of the twentieth century, those wars ended when an American, British, and Polish, person of honor showed the way. Perhaps honor does matter. I think so, i think it makes us better, much better. Otherwise, we are simply a pack of wolves, arguing over the spoils.

A couple of points. World War II is simply not conceivable (at least as it happened without the Great War. I think Churchill correct, when he called them together a new Thirty Years War and the same is true for the Cold War.

Those debating for the proposition in the video have one point that is hard to overstate. It is hard to conceive of an outcome that is worse than what we got.

Perhaps Churchill was also right when he said of the times.

Great Events and Small Men

He excluded himself from that judgement, of course.

Advertisements

About NEO
Lineman, Electrician, Industrial Control technician, Staking Engineer, Inspector, Quality Assurance Manager, Chief Operations Officer

8 Responses to Should We (or for that Matter Britain) Have Entered World War I

  1. Britain, France, US were not going to let Germany become a naval or economic power in the Atlantic. I think Wilson really was driven by ideal of post war League of Nations(which Senate voted down). Britain and France really extended their territorial empire in Middle East and their senseless map drawing has created much of the problems there today. They were hungry to see collapse of Ottoman Empire.

    Like

    • NEO says:

      You need to watch the video, Carl.

      Like

  2. the unit says:

    I look at it as looking ahead…
    Good audio here. I have listened to the speakers…about 40 minutes. Audio for questions not so good, I hope the answers from the speakers will clarify. I will finish listening. Very interesting.
    My impression…what if a panel was discussing Walker’s statement “we need names of the future, not names from the past.”
    Can you imagine these panelists sitting amicably together on that, George Will, Ed Schultz, Val Jarrett, Sarah Palin (or others of your choice)?
    And a co-topic of not what hindsight might one day find of today’s decision about nuclear Iran. Now…to be or not to be…do or not to do?

    Liked by 1 person

    • NEO says:

      It would be an interesting discussion, That’s part of what I like here. these four while they disagree and strongly, one gets the impression that there is a deal of respect and liking for each other. One is a friend of mine, the others I know by their work, they’re all excellent historians.

      Liked by 1 person

      • the unit says:

        I meant to add to that panel the moderator…Candy Crowley.
        Our “The Won” historian would have just said by teleprompter between I,I,I, Me, Me, Me for his 10 minutes…”Someone acted stupidly there there.” 🙂

        Liked by 1 person

        • NEO says:

          Indeed 🙂

          Liked by 1 person

  3. Funny how often historical hindsight appears 20-20! But yes, history does repeat itself, and historians have long been saying WW II was a War long connected to WW I. Treaty of Versailles anyone? And we have not seen the end of the Cold War plus, with Russia, as we have been quite reminded with the lack of US engagement since the Obama Administration, and the lack of NATO! And could it be any plainer that WW III is staring us in the face?

    Like

  4. Pingback: My Article Read (3-15-2015) | My Daily Musing

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s