The Pity of Misconceptions: (Part III of III) The Aftermath

13. Can a war be fought too long to have a negotiated settlement?.'

  • Wars are like forest fires, which only burn themselves out when they run out of fuel. Modern industrial wars require intention, manpower and resources. When the available manpower pool declines due to sustained casualties the fuel runs out and the intention fails. Only then will negotiations begin.

14. 'Germany would have proposed a custom-union state for Europe post victory over France.'

  • Germany came into being initially as a customs union which then became a state. The European Union was originally conceived as a customs union with a vision of a federal Europe which has not yet created unity. Any reference Germany might have ever made to a customs union of Europe was a tantamount to one nation under German control.

15. 'Was America torpedoed into war?.'

  • America chose to stay out of the war for as long as possible for strategic reasons. Britain was until 1914 perceived to be America’s strategic competitor and as such it sought a weakened Britain, who finally won the war against Germany. Thus America resisted the pretexts and potential catalysts that German torpedoes created as its ships were sunk, but finally came into the war when evidence appeared that Germany was working with Mexico (The Zimmerman Note) to invade the American south-west. Critical to this timing was that Britain had run out of money to continue the war. By taking its own time America was able to observe both the Monroe Doctrine and the Roosevelt Corollary

16. 'WW1 was Britain's greatest mistake?.'

  • Britain had for almost two decades perceived that Germany was a threat and had entered into an arms race that was designed to ensure its control of the seas against a German challenge. That arms race placed Britain under enormous financial pressure as her empire slowly moved into decline. It was just not in her power to build an army of comparable strength to Germany whilst still at peace. Thus Britain had done all she could to defend herself in the run up to 1914 against the German challenge.

    If there was a mistake it was a German one that having failed to win a lightning victory against France she did not pull out and negotiate for peace knowing that she could not win the war of attrition that followed.

17. 1914-18 A British Catastrophe'

  • Ultimately, one way or another the old order of Europe comprising of Britain, France, Austria and Russia, was always going to be challenged by the new order in the form of Germany and America. History tells us that such challenges always result in conflict and the larger the participant the bigger the war required to determine the victor. The key lesson is that changes in the economic power of nations and empires driven by demographics manifest major wars. Unless we fully understand this mechanism man is doomed to repeat the pattern with potentially apocalyptic consequences for our race. Empires, as do the individuals who live within them, become old. If every old person fought the up and coming youth where would we be?

    The essential driver is that expanding powers act as predators seeking weakness and opportunity. If they perceive, it they will pounce, so that without strong foreign policies old powers become vulnerable. Thus when weak leaders govern nations and empires their weakness makes the onset of wars become far more probable.

    Mr. Obama, have you read this?












      Engage With David On Social Media

      LinkedIn  Twitter  Facebook



      It's been awhile since I read "The Creature from Jekyll Island" by G Edward Griffin. What I am about to say is from memory and I'm not writing a book.

      The author makes the case that the Lusitania was carrying weapons to Britain. That Germany had every right to sink it. Further the author states that Germany had done every thing in its power prior to the sailing of the vessel, including sending paid for advertising to all major US news media at the time in the US to let the US population know that the Lusitania was a vessel of war and thus a target.

      It was the Wilson administration through political means that stopped the publication of these adds, with the exception of one which the author presents as evidence in the book. From the book, and from the beginning it was the Wilson administration's intention to get into that war on the side of the British and French. Perhaps this accounting is wrong. Would like to hear your response. Thanks.

      The Lusitania, on her 202nd crossing, was indeed carrying munitions (hence the experts say that second larger muffled explosion) as she had many times before across the Atlantic. She was thus a legitimate target having breached the Cruiser Rules.
      The loss of approximately 1198 passengers and crew of which 128 were Americans created a storm, but not a declaration of war as both President Wilson and the majority of the American people did not favour war in May 1915.
      I would maintain that at governmental level America, at this stage, did not wish to overtly support its greatest strategic and world business rival, Great Britain. Winston Churchill was increasingly anxious to find ways of 'pushing' them firmly in our direction.
      Meanwhile the Germans reigned-in her unrestricted U-boat war to de-escalate relations with America.
      Almost two years later and very short-sightedly, in January 1917, the Germans recommenced unrestricted U-boat warfare. Next the Zimmerman Telegram was deciphered and part made public, and lastly Britain was on its knees financially.
      If America had not stepped in by 1917 they might well have faced a German dominated Continent of Europe, which would have been even less in their interests.