…our involvement in WWI and in the one sided treaty that followed?..
Conservatives talk a good game…[/quote]
If you were one of the history bozos that swoop into this forum from time to time I would sooooo bust you up bad for alluding to Wilson being a “conservative.” You’re lucky I’m showing some mercy here.[/quote]
Sorry, two different thoughts. I wasn’t suggesting Wilson was a conservative. I was suggesting that today’s conservatives (in general) are not so conservative when it comes to foreign policy.
[quote]Jeff R wrote:
Friend, you are very confused. Please look up Wilson and Versailles.
If the English/French had listened, hitler would have stayed a failed artist.
Please read about it. Wilson was repudiated by the other powers.
Jeffr
[/quote]
I beleive I am familiar with what happened. Wilson had a hard-on for engineering world peace and a seat at the treaty table, realized entering the war was the only way to do this, and then caved once there.
I will read a bit more about WWI at some point. From what I have read, it doesn’t seem there was any clear victor in sight before we got involved. Pure conjecture, but it seems a fair treaty would have been more likely with both sides taking an equal beating.[/quote]
dhhickey:
I think it is wrong to assume that Wilson entered the War for the purpose you suggest. Look at the lead-up to 1917. Wilson did everything he could to stay out. INCLUDING not declaring war after the Luistania was sunk. There were too many provocations for him to ignore (German plans for invasion of U.S. from Mexico/unrestricted submarine warfare, etc). Oh, he didn’t “CAVE” at all. His points were out-voted.
Let me direct your reading. Type in 1918 + Ludenorff + million men from the Russian front.
Then type in the French General Petain and his quote about avoiding the offensive and “waiting for the Americans.”
Then type in World War One + french mutinies.
What you’ll find is that the Germans were winning, BIG, and it was only the Americans that stemmed the tide of a dispirited and defeated Allied war effort.
If still you think the Germans would have gone through 4 years of trench warfare then broke through and THEN decided on a “fair treaty,” I say you are wrong.
Finally, type in Versailles + Wilson + points. You’ll find a vast difference between your understanding and the facts.
[quote]Jeff R wrote:
I think it is wrong to assume that Wilson entered the War for the purpose you suggest. Look at the lead-up to 1917. Wilson did everything he could to stay out. INCLUDING not declaring war after the Luistania was sunk. There were too many provocations for him to ignore (German plans for invasion of U.S. from Mexico/unrestricted submarine warfare, etc). Oh, he didn’t “CAVE” at all. His points were out-voted.
[/quote]
If Americans chose to travel into a war zone, fuck’em.
Unrestricted submarine warfare vs. starving Germans via blockades. Sounds fair to me.
Plans for invasion of the US through Mexico. I recall reading about that. We should have been preparing a defense instead of entering the war.
I’d prefer to queue up some books if you have suggestions.
If this was the case, being out-voted shouldn’t have been issue.
From what little I have read, my impression was that the German people were in pretty rough shape. I was assuming total victory was unlikely. Best case = they kick the shit off each other for awhile longer before a treaty is agreed to. Worst case = the other side gets fucked instead of the Germans. Would the consequences of this been worse than WWII?
You remind me of that scene in the airplane movie titled “counter-point.” The guy in that said, “They bought their tickets, they knew what they were getting into. I say, let 'em crash.”
The problem for you, is that was meant as a joke.
You are serious.
I want you to think through the ramifications of what you are suggesting.
When one country can violate international law and declare unrestricted submarine warfare, what is to stop them from expanding the “war zone” into the Potomac?
We weren’t blockading Germany. But, they were attacking our citizens. Therefore, Germany was at fault.
[quote]Plans for invasion of the US through Mexico. I recall reading about that. We should have been preparing a defense instead of entering the war.
[/quote]
This can’t be serious. I get the sense you are one of those “Fortress America” types.
Hint: it doesn’t work. It never has. Jefferson tried it. Wilson tried it. FDR tried it. It fails every time. I suppose you could say that clinton tried it as well.
That’s a google issue. I’ve given you my suggestions. Just add books to the end of that.
Huh? Look up the structure of the Versailles conference.
Total German victory was not only likely, but, nearly inevitable. Please read Petain’s quotes. Read about the 1918 campaign. Germany’s defeat of russia had released 1 million veterans to the Western Front. Even with the Americans, it was a pretty near run thing for a while.
Without the Americans, the french would have broken. We saw what happend to the AEF in france when the french cracked. See 1940.
You remind me of that scene in the airplane movie titled “counter-point.” The guy in that said, “They bought their tickets, they knew what they were getting into. I say, let 'em crash.”
The problem for you, is that was meant as a joke.
You are serious.
I want you to think through the ramifications of what you are suggesting.
When one country can violate international law and declare unrestricted submarine warfare, what is to stop them from expanding the “war zone” into the Potomac?
[/quote]
New York time May 8, 1915:
Secret of the Lusitania: Arms find challenges Allied claims it was solely a passenger ship
Her sinking with the loss of almost 1,200 lives caused such outrage that it propelled the U.S. into the First World War.
But now divers have revealed a dark secret about the cargo carried by the Lusitania on its final journey in May 1915.
Munitions they found in the hold suggest that the Germans had been right all along in claiming the ship was carrying war materials and was a legitimate military target.
A bunch of Americans decided to sail on the Lusitania after they had been warned by an ad and by anonymous telegramms and then they died when a ship that carried millions of rounds of ammunition was sunk.
When one country can violate international law and declare unrestricted submarine warfare, what is to stop them from expanding the “war zone” into the Potomac?
[/quote]
Your last several posts in this thread have been a regurgitation of a 5th grade history book. Nice and sanitized.
You realize that the Lusitania knowingly sailed into hostile waters? Americans were warned numerous times that it would be dangerous to take a cruise in the North Atlantic. Civilians and war zones don’t mix.
This makes as much sense as you going to Iraq for a vacation and then blaming the Iraqi government if something bad happens to you.
Don’t go sailing the North Atlantic when you know there are U-Boats sinking everything in sight.
German victory was never “likely”. I have no clue where you get this stuff. The Western Powers were butchering each other over areas of land the size of parking lots and football fields.
If any side was going to break without American involvement, it would have been Germany. The naval blockade of the Fatherland was working, very well. So well that the German government had instituted food rationing. It’s hard to convince starving people to keep fighting.
Without American involvement, worst case scenario, the Western Powers beat each other to a pulp to the point that they come to “fair” peace terms for all sides involved.
You remind me of that scene in the airplane movie titled “counter-point.” The guy in that said, “They bought their tickets, they knew what they were getting into. I say, let 'em crash.”
The problem for you, is that was meant as a joke.
You are serious.
I want you to think through the ramifications of what you are suggesting.
When one country can violate international law and declare unrestricted submarine warfare, what is to stop them from expanding the “war zone” into the Potomac?
[/quote]
New York time May 8, 1915:
Secret of the Lusitania: Arms find challenges Allied claims it was solely a passenger ship
Her sinking with the loss of almost 1,200 lives caused such outrage that it propelled the U.S. into the First World War.
But now divers have revealed a dark secret about the cargo carried by the Lusitania on its final journey in May 1915.
Munitions they found in the hold suggest that the Germans had been right all along in claiming the ship was carrying war materials and was a legitimate military target.
A bunch of Americans decided to sail on the Lusitania after they had been warned by an ad and by anonymous telegramms and then they died when a ship that carried millions of rounds of ammunition was sunk.
So?
[/quote]
I consider bota’s home to be in the war zone.
Get ready to pay for my things.
Oh, in case you can’t translate, it’s not ok to have unrestricted submarine warfare.
Americans should be able to travel the oceans/have commerce, etc.
I think it is wrong to assume that Wilson entered the War for the purpose you suggest. Look at the lead-up to 1917. Wilson did everything he could to stay out. INCLUDING not declaring war after the Luistania was sunk. There were too many provocations for him to ignore (German plans for invasion of U.S. from Mexico/unrestricted submarine warfare, etc). Oh, he didn’t “CAVE” at all. His points were out-voted.
[/quote]
Are you capable of any of independent thought? Wilson was itching to get the U.S involved in WWI.
President Woodrow Wilson established The Committee on Public Information (CPI) through Executive order 2594 on April 13, 1917. The committee consisted of George Creel (Chairman) and as ex officio members the Secretaries of: State (Robert Lansing), War (Newton D. Baker), and the Navy (Josephus Daniels).
The purpose of the CPI was to influence American public opinion toward supporting U.S. participation in World War I via a prolonged propaganda campaign. Among those who participated in it were Wilson advisers Walter Lippmann and Edward Bernays…
When one country can violate international law and declare unrestricted submarine warfare, what is to stop them from expanding the “war zone” into the Potomac?
[/quote]
Your last several posts in this thread have been a regurgitation of a 5th grade history book. Nice and sanitized.
You realize that the Lusitania knowingly sailed into hostile waters? Americans were warned numerous times that it would be dangerous to take a cruise in the North Atlantic. Civilians and war zones don’t mix.
This makes as much sense as you going to Iraq for a vacation and then blaming the Iraqi government if something bad happens to you.
Don’t go sailing the North Atlantic when you know there are U-Boats sinking everything in sight.
German victory was never “likely”. I have no clue where you get this stuff. The Western Powers were butchering each other over areas of land the size of parking lots and football fields.
If any side was going to break without American involvement, it would have been Germany. The naval blockade of the Fatherland was working, very well. So well that the German government had instituted food rationing. It’s hard to convince starving people to keep fighting.
Without American involvement, worst case scenario, the Western Powers beat each other to a pulp to the point that they come to “fair” peace terms for all sides involved.
[/quote]
I really dislike aggressive ignorance. You are wrong on so many points, it’s hard to know where to start.
Maybe you could just re-read what I wrote and start there.
Or we could discuss a specific instance, the 1918 German offensive. (kind of puts the lie to your, "hard to convince starving people to keep fighting, crap).
I think it is wrong to assume that Wilson entered the War for the purpose you suggest. Look at the lead-up to 1917. Wilson did everything he could to stay out. INCLUDING not declaring war after the Luistania was sunk. There were too many provocations for him to ignore (German plans for invasion of U.S. from Mexico/unrestricted submarine warfare, etc). Oh, he didn’t “CAVE” at all. His points were out-voted.
[/quote]
Are you capable of any of independent thought? Wilson was itching to get the U.S involved in WWI.
President Woodrow Wilson established The Committee on Public Information (CPI) through Executive order 2594 on April 13, 1917. The committee consisted of George Creel (Chairman) and as ex officio members the Secretaries of: State (Robert Lansing), War (Newton D. Baker), and the Navy (Josephus Daniels).
The purpose of the CPI was to influence American public opinion toward supporting U.S. participation in World War I via a prolonged propaganda campaign. Among those who participated in it were Wilson advisers Walter Lippmann and Edward Bernays…[/quote]
You are a fool. First of all, NEVER link wikipedia.
I think it is wrong to assume that Wilson entered the War for the purpose you suggest. Look at the lead-up to 1917. Wilson did everything he could to stay out. INCLUDING not declaring war after the Luistania was sunk. There were too many provocations for him to ignore (German plans for invasion of U.S. from Mexico/unrestricted submarine warfare, etc). Oh, he didn’t “CAVE” at all. His points were out-voted.
[/quote]
Are you capable of any of independent thought? Wilson was itching to get the U.S involved in WWI.
President Woodrow Wilson established The Committee on Public Information (CPI) through Executive order 2594 on April 13, 1917. The committee consisted of George Creel (Chairman) and as ex officio members the Secretaries of: State (Robert Lansing), War (Newton D. Baker), and the Navy (Josephus Daniels).
The purpose of the CPI was to influence American public opinion toward supporting U.S. participation in World War I via a prolonged propaganda campaign. Among those who participated in it were Wilson advisers Walter Lippmann and Edward Bernays…[/quote]
You are a fool. First of all, NEVER link wikipedia.
SECOND, LOOK AT THE DATE 4/13/1917!!!
Then look at the Lusitania/German invasion plans.
Now, back to your hole.
JeffR
[/quote]
So, you are saying that the Wiki link is incorrect? I can post a handful of links if you need convincing?
What do the dates have to do with a Propaganda campaign full of lies and half-truths designed with the specific intent of garnering support from a isolationist public?
I think it is wrong to assume that Wilson entered the War for the purpose you suggest. Look at the lead-up to 1917. Wilson did everything he could to stay out. INCLUDING not declaring war after the Luistania was sunk. There were too many provocations for him to ignore (German plans for invasion of U.S. from Mexico/unrestricted submarine warfare, etc). Oh, he didn’t “CAVE” at all. His points were out-voted.
[/quote]
Are you capable of any of independent thought? Wilson was itching to get the U.S involved in WWI.
President Woodrow Wilson established The Committee on Public Information (CPI) through Executive order 2594 on April 13, 1917. The committee consisted of George Creel (Chairman) and as ex officio members the Secretaries of: State (Robert Lansing), War (Newton D. Baker), and the Navy (Josephus Daniels).
The purpose of the CPI was to influence American public opinion toward supporting U.S. participation in World War I via a prolonged propaganda campaign. Among those who participated in it were Wilson advisers Walter Lippmann and Edward Bernays…[/quote]
You are a fool. First of all, NEVER link wikipedia.
SECOND, LOOK AT THE DATE 4/13/1917!!!
Then look at the Lusitania/German invasion plans.
Now, back to your hole.
JeffR
[/quote]
So, you are saying that the Wiki link is incorrect? I can post a handful of links if you need convincing?
What do the dates have to do with a Propaganda campaign full of lies and half-truths designed with the specific intent of garnering support from a isolationist public?
[/quote]
Wow.
Instead of saying, “You know, Jeff, I didn’t look at the dates. Of course, Wilson was trying to galvanize the public behind entering WWI when it was deemed necessary” this is your response.
Ok, wikipedia still has subjects that the user can edit. They tightened up their editing, but, again, some things can still be edited.
Imagine the havoc that can be wreaked on a site like that by the aggressively ignorant. For instance, you. So, you and an editor on wikipedia both are wrong about a subject. You’ll see it in wikipedia as if it’s truth.
By the way, I’d be curious to hear what lies and half truths were put out there by Wilson.
When one country can violate international law and declare unrestricted submarine warfare, what is to stop them from expanding the “war zone” into the Potomac?
[/quote]
Your last several posts in this thread have been a regurgitation of a 5th grade history book. Nice and sanitized.
You realize that the Lusitania knowingly sailed into hostile waters? Americans were warned numerous times that it would be dangerous to take a cruise in the North Atlantic. Civilians and war zones don’t mix.
This makes as much sense as you going to Iraq for a vacation and then blaming the Iraqi government if something bad happens to you.
Don’t go sailing the North Atlantic when you know there are U-Boats sinking everything in sight.
German victory was never “likely”. I have no clue where you get this stuff. The Western Powers were butchering each other over areas of land the size of parking lots and football fields.
If any side was going to break without American involvement, it would have been Germany. The naval blockade of the Fatherland was working, very well. So well that the German government had instituted food rationing. It’s hard to convince starving people to keep fighting.
Without American involvement, worst case scenario, the Western Powers beat each other to a pulp to the point that they come to “fair” peace terms for all sides involved.
[/quote]
I really dislike aggressive ignorance. You are wrong on so many points, it’s hard to know where to start.
Maybe you could just re-read what I wrote and start there.
Or we could discuss a specific instance, the 1918 German offensive. (kind of puts the lie to your, "hard to convince starving people to keep fighting, crap).
Hint: the trench stalemate was broken.
Oh, you must have missed 5th grade.
Please retake (if you can hack it).
Thanks in advance.
JeffR
[/quote]
The 1918 offensive you speak of failed. The Germans failed in the offensives main objective. It not only cost them large numbers of deaths, but they lost some of their best trained Soldiers.
And to the effects of the naval blockade of Germany.
How does 1,000 calories a day sound? By 1917, that was the caloric consumption of the average German citizen. That same year, tuberculosis, scurvy, and dysentery where wide spread as a result. Over 760,000 thousand wartime deaths due to the naval blockade.
I think it is wrong to assume that Wilson entered the War for the purpose you suggest. Look at the lead-up to 1917. Wilson did everything he could to stay out. INCLUDING not declaring war after the Luistania was sunk. There were too many provocations for him to ignore (German plans for invasion of U.S. from Mexico/unrestricted submarine warfare, etc). Oh, he didn’t “CAVE” at all. His points were out-voted.
[/quote]
Are you capable of any of independent thought? Wilson was itching to get the U.S involved in WWI.
President Woodrow Wilson established The Committee on Public Information (CPI) through Executive order 2594 on April 13, 1917. The committee consisted of George Creel (Chairman) and as ex officio members the Secretaries of: State (Robert Lansing), War (Newton D. Baker), and the Navy (Josephus Daniels).
The purpose of the CPI was to influence American public opinion toward supporting U.S. participation in World War I via a prolonged propaganda campaign. Among those who participated in it were Wilson advisers Walter Lippmann and Edward Bernays…[/quote]
You are a fool. First of all, NEVER link wikipedia.
SECOND, LOOK AT THE DATE 4/13/1917!!!
Then look at the Lusitania/German invasion plans.
Now, back to your hole.
JeffR
[/quote]
So, you are saying that the Wiki link is incorrect? I can post a handful of links if you need convincing?
What do the dates have to do with a Propaganda campaign full of lies and half-truths designed with the specific intent of garnering support from a isolationist public?
[/quote]
Wow.
Instead of saying, “You know, Jeff, I didn’t look at the dates. Of course, Wilson was trying to galvanize the public behind entering WWI when it was deemed necessary” this is your response.
Ok, wikipedia still has subjects that the user can edit. They tightened up their editing, but, again, some things can still be edited.
Imagine the havoc that can be wreaked on a site like that by the aggressively ignorant. For instance, you. So, you and an editor on wikipedia both are wrong about a subject. You’ll see it in wikipedia as if it’s truth.
By the way, I’d be curious to hear what lies and half truths were put out there by Wilson.
You remind me of that scene in the airplane movie titled “counter-point.” The guy in that said, “They bought their tickets, they knew what they were getting into. I say, let 'em crash.”
The problem for you, is that was meant as a joke.
You are serious.
I want you to think through the ramifications of what you are suggesting.
When one country can violate international law and declare unrestricted submarine warfare, what is to stop them from expanding the “war zone” into the Potomac?
[/quote]
New York time May 8, 1915:
Secret of the Lusitania: Arms find challenges Allied claims it was solely a passenger ship
Her sinking with the loss of almost 1,200 lives caused such outrage that it propelled the U.S. into the First World War.
But now divers have revealed a dark secret about the cargo carried by the Lusitania on its final journey in May 1915.
Munitions they found in the hold suggest that the Germans had been right all along in claiming the ship was carrying war materials and was a legitimate military target.
A bunch of Americans decided to sail on the Lusitania after they had been warned by an ad and by anonymous telegramms and then they died when a ship that carried millions of rounds of ammunition was sunk.
So?
[/quote]
I consider bota’s home to be in the war zone.
Get ready to pay for my things.
Oh, in case you can’t translate, it’s not ok to have unrestricted submarine warfare.
Americans should be able to travel the oceans/have commerce, etc.
You remind me of that scene in the airplane movie titled “counter-point.” The guy in that said, “They bought their tickets, they knew what they were getting into. I say, let 'em crash.”
The problem for you, is that was meant as a joke.
You are serious.
I want you to think through the ramifications of what you are suggesting.
When one country can violate international law and declare unrestricted submarine warfare, what is to stop them from expanding the “war zone” into the Potomac?
[/quote]
New York time May 8, 1915:
Secret of the Lusitania: Arms find challenges Allied claims it was solely a passenger ship
Her sinking with the loss of almost 1,200 lives caused such outrage that it propelled the U.S. into the First World War.
But now divers have revealed a dark secret about the cargo carried by the Lusitania on its final journey in May 1915.
Munitions they found in the hold suggest that the Germans had been right all along in claiming the ship was carrying war materials and was a legitimate military target.
A bunch of Americans decided to sail on the Lusitania after they had been warned by an ad and by anonymous telegramms and then they died when a ship that carried millions of rounds of ammunition was sunk.
So?
[/quote]
I consider bota’s home to be in the war zone.
Get ready to pay for my things.
Oh, in case you can’t translate, it’s not ok to have unrestricted submarine warfare.
Americans should be able to travel the oceans/have commerce, etc.
JeffR
[/quote]
It is also not ok to starve civilians.
When the gloves are off, they are off.
[/quote]
That’s nice. I don’t think Britain was hindering American travel/commerce circa 1914-1918. If they were, let me know.
When one country can violate international law and declare unrestricted submarine warfare, what is to stop them from expanding the “war zone” into the Potomac?
[/quote]
Your last several posts in this thread have been a regurgitation of a 5th grade history book. Nice and sanitized.
You realize that the Lusitania knowingly sailed into hostile waters? Americans were warned numerous times that it would be dangerous to take a cruise in the North Atlantic. Civilians and war zones don’t mix.
This makes as much sense as you going to Iraq for a vacation and then blaming the Iraqi government if something bad happens to you.
Don’t go sailing the North Atlantic when you know there are U-Boats sinking everything in sight.
German victory was never “likely”. I have no clue where you get this stuff. The Western Powers were butchering each other over areas of land the size of parking lots and football fields.
If any side was going to break without American involvement, it would have been Germany. The naval blockade of the Fatherland was working, very well. So well that the German government had instituted food rationing. It’s hard to convince starving people to keep fighting.
Without American involvement, worst case scenario, the Western Powers beat each other to a pulp to the point that they come to “fair” peace terms for all sides involved.
[/quote]
I really dislike aggressive ignorance. You are wrong on so many points, it’s hard to know where to start.
Maybe you could just re-read what I wrote and start there.
Or we could discuss a specific instance, the 1918 German offensive. (kind of puts the lie to your, "hard to convince starving people to keep fighting, crap).
Hint: the trench stalemate was broken.
Oh, you must have missed 5th grade.
Please retake (if you can hack it).
Thanks in advance.
JeffR
[/quote]
The 1918 offensive you speak of failed. The Germans failed in the offensives main objective. It not only cost them large numbers of deaths, but they lost some of their best trained Soldiers.
And to the effects of the naval blockade of Germany.
How does 1,000 calories a day sound? By 1917, that was the caloric consumption of the average German citizen. That same year, tuberculosis, scurvy, and dysentery where wide spread as a result. Over 760,000 thousand wartime deaths due to the naval blockade.
I think it is wrong to assume that Wilson entered the War for the purpose you suggest. Look at the lead-up to 1917. Wilson did everything he could to stay out. INCLUDING not declaring war after the Luistania was sunk. There were too many provocations for him to ignore (German plans for invasion of U.S. from Mexico/unrestricted submarine warfare, etc). Oh, he didn’t “CAVE” at all. His points were out-voted.
[/quote]
Are you capable of any of independent thought? Wilson was itching to get the U.S involved in WWI.
President Woodrow Wilson established The Committee on Public Information (CPI) through Executive order 2594 on April 13, 1917. The committee consisted of George Creel (Chairman) and as ex officio members the Secretaries of: State (Robert Lansing), War (Newton D. Baker), and the Navy (Josephus Daniels).
The purpose of the CPI was to influence American public opinion toward supporting U.S. participation in World War I via a prolonged propaganda campaign. Among those who participated in it were Wilson advisers Walter Lippmann and Edward Bernays…[/quote]
You are a fool. First of all, NEVER link wikipedia.
SECOND, LOOK AT THE DATE 4/13/1917!!!
Then look at the Lusitania/German invasion plans.
Now, back to your hole.
JeffR
[/quote]
So, you are saying that the Wiki link is incorrect? I can post a handful of links if you need convincing?
What do the dates have to do with a Propaganda campaign full of lies and half-truths designed with the specific intent of garnering support from a isolationist public?
[/quote]
Wow.
Instead of saying, “You know, Jeff, I didn’t look at the dates. Of course, Wilson was trying to galvanize the public behind entering WWI when it was deemed necessary” this is your response.
Ok, wikipedia still has subjects that the user can edit. They tightened up their editing, but, again, some things can still be edited.
Imagine the havoc that can be wreaked on a site like that by the aggressively ignorant. For instance, you. So, you and an editor on wikipedia both are wrong about a subject. You’ll see it in wikipedia as if it’s truth.
By the way, I’d be curious to hear what lies and half truths were put out there by Wilson.
Get me some information. (Not, from wikipedia)
Thanks in advance.
JeffR
[/quote]
Seriously?
The 4th link is especially kewl.
[/quote]
Thanks. I read your “kewl” link. It certainly seems like there was misinformation put out there.
Please do not delude yourself into thinking that these lies/omissions were enough to obscure the simple fact that the Germans were, in fact, killing innocent American civilians and planning on invading the U.S.
When one country can violate international law and declare unrestricted submarine warfare, what is to stop them from expanding the “war zone” into the Potomac?
[/quote]
Your last several posts in this thread have been a regurgitation of a 5th grade history book. Nice and sanitized.
You realize that the Lusitania knowingly sailed into hostile waters? Americans were warned numerous times that it would be dangerous to take a cruise in the North Atlantic. Civilians and war zones don’t mix.
This makes as much sense as you going to Iraq for a vacation and then blaming the Iraqi government if something bad happens to you.
Don’t go sailing the North Atlantic when you know there are U-Boats sinking everything in sight.
German victory was never “likely”. I have no clue where you get this stuff. The Western Powers were butchering each other over areas of land the size of parking lots and football fields.
If any side was going to break without American involvement, it would have been Germany. The naval blockade of the Fatherland was working, very well. So well that the German government had instituted food rationing. It’s hard to convince starving people to keep fighting.
Without American involvement, worst case scenario, the Western Powers beat each other to a pulp to the point that they come to “fair” peace terms for all sides involved.
[/quote]
I really dislike aggressive ignorance. You are wrong on so many points, it’s hard to know where to start.
Maybe you could just re-read what I wrote and start there.
Or we could discuss a specific instance, the 1918 German offensive. (kind of puts the lie to your, "hard to convince starving people to keep fighting, crap).
Hint: the trench stalemate was broken.
Oh, you must have missed 5th grade.
Please retake (if you can hack it).
Thanks in advance.
JeffR
[/quote]
The 1918 offensive you speak of failed. The Germans failed in the offensives main objective. It not only cost them large numbers of deaths, but they lost some of their best trained Soldiers.
And to the effects of the naval blockade of Germany.
How does 1,000 calories a day sound? By 1917, that was the caloric consumption of the average German citizen. That same year, tuberculosis, scurvy, and dysentery where wide spread as a result. Over 760,000 thousand wartime deaths due to the naval blockade.
The offensive failed because it wasn’t sustainable, whether the U.S was involved or not. It was why both sides were content up to that point with staying inside their trenches. Soldiers were still dying, but at least the respectve Armies were not “blowing their loads” in huge offensives. This is what happened with Germany. The offensive wasn’t quick and decisive.
I think it is wrong to assume that Wilson entered the War for the purpose you suggest. Look at the lead-up to 1917. Wilson did everything he could to stay out. INCLUDING not declaring war after the Luistania was sunk. There were too many provocations for him to ignore (German plans for invasion of U.S. from Mexico/unrestricted submarine warfare, etc). Oh, he didn’t “CAVE” at all. His points were out-voted.
[/quote]
Are you capable of any of independent thought? Wilson was itching to get the U.S involved in WWI.
President Woodrow Wilson established The Committee on Public Information (CPI) through Executive order 2594 on April 13, 1917. The committee consisted of George Creel (Chairman) and as ex officio members the Secretaries of: State (Robert Lansing), War (Newton D. Baker), and the Navy (Josephus Daniels).
The purpose of the CPI was to influence American public opinion toward supporting U.S. participation in World War I via a prolonged propaganda campaign. Among those who participated in it were Wilson advisers Walter Lippmann and Edward Bernays…[/quote]
You are a fool. First of all, NEVER link wikipedia.
SECOND, LOOK AT THE DATE 4/13/1917!!!
Then look at the Lusitania/German invasion plans.
Now, back to your hole.
JeffR
[/quote]
So, you are saying that the Wiki link is incorrect? I can post a handful of links if you need convincing?
What do the dates have to do with a Propaganda campaign full of lies and half-truths designed with the specific intent of garnering support from a isolationist public?
[/quote]
Wow.
Instead of saying, “You know, Jeff, I didn’t look at the dates. Of course, Wilson was trying to galvanize the public behind entering WWI when it was deemed necessary” this is your response.
Ok, wikipedia still has subjects that the user can edit. They tightened up their editing, but, again, some things can still be edited.
Imagine the havoc that can be wreaked on a site like that by the aggressively ignorant. For instance, you. So, you and an editor on wikipedia both are wrong about a subject. You’ll see it in wikipedia as if it’s truth.
By the way, I’d be curious to hear what lies and half truths were put out there by Wilson.
Get me some information. (Not, from wikipedia)
Thanks in advance.
JeffR
[/quote]
Seriously?
The 4th link is especially kewl.
[/quote]
Thanks. I read your “kewl” link. It certainly seems like there was misinformation put out there.
Please do not delude yourself into thinking that these lies/omissions were enough to obscure the simple fact that the Germans were, in fact, killing innocent American civilians and planning on invading the U.S.
If that doesn’t warrant war, nothing would.
JeffR
[/quote]
And the Allies killed innocent civilians too. That’s not the best argument to put forth.
Germany was not going to invade the U.S. It would have been literally impossible…even using Mexico as the starting point. Just the idea of this is hilarious, especially with early 20th Century technology.
You can’t use this as an argument so please, stop while your head is still above water.
