[Quintus Curtius]

The 100th anniversary of the start of the First World War is coming up in August. Recent articles in The Economist have drawn attention to the continuing importance of understanding this conflict, which was without doubt the defining event of the twentieth century. If any event deserves its own thread, it is WWI.

Check out these articles:

http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21...d-outbreak

http://www.economist.com/topics/first-world-war

But knowledge of the Great War is hard to come by. It has been too often overshadowed by the Second World War and other events closer to our own time. This is unfortunate, to say the least. The First World War produced some of the greatest war writing, poetry, and memoirs ever published. Its effects are still with us today.

I'd like to use this thread as a place for us to post book recommendations, thoughts, opinions, and "lessons learned" views. Thousands of books have been written about WWI, but which ones to read is what we all want to know.

I plan to read Ernst Junger's "Storm of Steel", the memoir of a German soldier of the war. It's coming out in a new translation. I hear it's the opposite of "All Quiet On The Western Front": very gung-ho, not pacifist, and packed with brutal detail.

[cardguy]

This is on my 'to read' pile. It is a contrarian take on World War One:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Mud-Blood-Poppyc...0304366595

Quote:

The popular view of the First World War remains that of BLACKADDER: incompetent generals sending brave soldiers to their deaths. Alan Clark quoted a German general's remark that the British soldiers were 'lions led by donkeys'. But he made it up.

Indeed, many established 'facts' about 1914-18 turn out to be myths woven in the 1960s by young historians on the make. Gordon Corrigan's brilliant, witty history reveals how out of touch we have become with the soldiers of 1914-18. They simply would not recognize the way their generation is depicted on TV or in Pat Barker's novels.

Laced with dry humour, this will overturn everything you thought you knew about Britain and the First World War. Gordon Corrigan reveals how the British embraced technology, and developed the weapons and tactics to break through the enemy trenches.

[samsamsam]

Paris 1919. Super detailed accounting of the aftermath of the war and how things were settled up. And the decisions that were made that laid the ground work for future conflict.

Lots of detail. I would have to re-read certain parts because it was so detailed.

http://www.amazon.com/Paris-1919-Months-...0375760520

[cardguy]

Here is an entertaining comedic lecture by one of the UK's most famous comedians.

It is a history of oil - and looks at the geopolitics surrounding oil over the past century.

The lecture starts off by arguing that the plan to build a railway line to Iraq was the real reason for WWI kicking off.

I haven't studied WWI yet - so I can't comment.

[Quintus Curtius]

I really am looking forward to checking out this book by Ernst Junger ("Storm of Steel"). The title alone sounds great.

For me, the best books written by veterans are the writings of:

Siegfried Sassoon
Robert Graves
Erich Maria Remarque
Wilfred Owen

One of the best "down in the mud" books I've read was "Death's Men: Soldiers of the Great War" by Denis Winter

Interest in the war has always been very high in England, in comparison to France, Germany, and Russia. Even though the continental countries lost huge amounts of men in comparison to England, they have not analyzed it to the same extent as the British have.

[Deluge]

(04-03-2014 12:13 AM)Quintus Curtius Wrote:  

which was without doubt the defining event of the twentieth century.

Why do you consider WWI the defining event of the 20th century instead of WWII?

[Flint]

(04-03-2014 04:41 AM)Deluge Wrote:  

(04-03-2014 12:13 AM)Quintus Curtius Wrote:  

which was without doubt the defining event of the twentieth century.

Why do you consider WWI the defining event of the 20th century instead of WWII?

I'm not QC but here is my answer:

- Without the result of WWI (Russian defeat, German defeat, Treaty of Versailles) it is at least questionable if the Nazis would ever have come to power
- WWI ended centuries of monarchic order in Europe. The seemingly everlasting power of Habsburg, the Tsars and Prussia was destroyed in just a few years. The result was republics and nation-states.
- Without Germany's tacit support for Lenin the October Revolution would probably have taken on a different direction, if not led to the Victory of the Tsarists in the Civil War
- The end of the Ottoman empire and the ensuing artificial borders of the new colonies (Lebanon, Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Palestine, etc.), drawn by France and England, are the major cause for the mess we have in the Middle East today

[bojangles]

(04-03-2014 05:21 AM)Flint Wrote:  

(04-03-2014 04:41 AM)Deluge Wrote:  

(04-03-2014 12:13 AM)Quintus Curtius Wrote:  

which was without doubt the defining event of the twentieth century.

Why do you consider WWI the defining event of the 20th century instead of WWII?

I'm not QC but here is my answer:

- Without the result of WWI (Russian defeat, German defeat, Treaty of Versailles) it is at least questionable if the Nazis would ever have come to power
- WWI ended centuries of monarchic order in Europe. The seemingly everlasting power of Habsburg, the Tsars and Prussia was destroyed in just a few years. The result was republics and nation-states.
- Without Germany's tacit support for Lenin the October Revolution would probably have taken on a different direction, if not led to the Victory of the Tsarists in the Civil War
- The end of the Ottoman empire and the ensuing artificial borders of the new colonies (Lebanon, Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Palestine, etc.), drawn by France and England, are the major cause for the mess we have in the Middle East today

Nail on the head.

I studied world war 1 and world war 2 for my history exams for 2 years. I can't say it's my favourite period in history.

[tarquin]

Just a few years ago, Germany finally paid off debt incurred by their WWI reparations payments.

Source: http://content.time.com/time/world/artic...40,00.html

[Quintus Curtius]

Flint's response is right on the money. To that, I would add that the psychological and moral effects of the Great War were even more devastating than the political reorganizations that took place.

In short, the war completely destroyed the old order in Europe. For centuries, Europeans had been accustomed to the idea of steady progress in science, arts, and technology. Since Francis Bacon in the 16th century, it was all about the forward progress of science. "Knowledge is power", he had said.

How inadequate that motto now seemed! Progress was not, it was now clear, a foregone conclusion. All the old institutions had proven inadequate to meet the challenge of the modern world.

Men discovered that science was neutral, and could kill and destroy just as readily as it could build. Cities that had taken centuries to build could be shattered by artillery in a weekend. Whole regiments, as the British Army found out on the Somme, could just vanish into the mud and rubble.

This realization caused a profound shock in the European mind. It set men's thoughts on a whole new direction. Gone was the faith in religion, established institutions, traditional art, and education. It directly led to the rise of fascism, communism, and most of the modern art movements. The bitterness and disillusion of the war spurred on Dadaism, futurism, and a whole bunch of other "isms" in the art world. It prompted new literature and forms of expression. Minimalist writing styles (e.g., Hemingway) characterized by alienation and repressed rage became current.

It gave rise to modern Third World nationalism (by way of the Versailles Peace Conference and Woodrow Wilson's "self-determination" doctrines).

It was as profound as the barbarian invasions that had shattered imperial Rome. Everywhere was ruin, dislocation, and disillusion. The war set in motion a chain of events that would culminate in an even more savage conflict 20 years later.

[Nolecbo]

The Price of Glory
The Guns of August
Blueprint for Armageddon (podcast series)

Agreed about it being the defining event of the century. Understanding Europe & US history pre WW1 is like studying a foreign culture.

[RexImperator]

In Europe at least, WW2 was really just WW1 part 2.

[TigerMandingo]

There's also the common myth surrounding WWI which roughly states that 'the assassination of the Archduke Ferdinand was the primary catalyst for the war". I remember being taught this theory in college, too. However, the reality was far more complex (as with everything). The political/military situation in Europe was already so tense that the war would have went ahead with or without the assassination.

[cardguy]

I think there is like 6 different competing theories as to why WWI kicked off.

It is still something of a mystery.

Still - here is one take on it:

[samsamsam]

In case any of you wanted to know how the Archduke was assassinated. I think the war would have happened regardless, but it was only chance that he was the spark.

Quote:

Princip had planned to assassinate Franz Ferdinand that day in 1914, but the plan went bad. Princip gave up and went to Morizt Schiller’s café to have a sandwich. Then something totally unexpected happened. Archduke Franz Ferdinand’s driver, Leopold Loyka, made a wrong turn. He turned onto Franz Josef Street. He was not supposed to have turned there. He drove right in front of a surprised Gavrilo Princip. One can almost picture him, sandwich in hand, slack-jawed in surprise. Loyka realized his mistake and slammed on the brakes. This caused the engine to stall and the gears to lock up. The Archduke, his wife, and Loyka were sitting ducks. Princip seized the opportunity and fired into the open car at a range of five feet. His bullet hit the Archduke in the neck. The archduke’s wife, Sophie, instinctively covered Franz’s body with her own. Princip’s next bullet killed both Franz and Sophie.

[Sonsowey]

This war still reverberates all over the world. The breakup of the Ottoman empire is still the defining event for state boundaries in the Middle East.

"Kurdistan" was so very close to being an independent country. Imagine how different the histories of Iraq and Turkey (And Syria and Iran)would be without their Kurdish communities.

[Vicious]

The Guns of August by Barbara Tuchman is likely the best piece on the conflict.

The most interesting part it goes into in detail is how off the European powers were with respect to what a war would entail. It was the first major conflict were technology was so far ahead of the individuals carrying the fight that the deaths involved became unprecedented with regard to what was gained from the sacrifice of the perished.

[Quintus Curtius]

(04-03-2014 11:31 AM)cardguy Wrote:  

I think there is like 6 different competing theories as to why WWI kicked off.

It is still something of a mystery.

Still - here is one take on it:

Cardguy:
Did you accidentally delete a link you intended to put in your post here?

[cardguy]

Yeah - I messed up the link.

If you go back to my post - it should be up now. It is just a funny meme that was going round the web awhile ago...

[cardguy]

There was a lot of luck involved in the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand.

Just before he was shot - somebody else in the group (The Black Hand) threw a grenade at his car. Which bounced off and exploded underneath the car that was following.

There is actual film footage of this moment - but I can't seem to find it just now.

Anyway - it was whilst returning from the speech he was on his way to give - that he and his wife went to visit those injured by the bomb explosion.

And - as they did so - the car took a wrong turn - and Gavrilo Princip fired two shots killing Ferdinand and his wife.

The rest - as they say - is history...

[Chaos]

Can anybody recommend a good documentary or series about WW1? I know the big picture of what happened, but now I want to look more into details. Especially about Germany,
Prussia and Russia.

WW1&WW2 is just a damn fascinating piece of history.

[LeightonBlackstock]

dupe

[samsamsam]

(04-03-2014 02:00 PM)LeightonBlackstock Wrote:  

Has anyone else heard the view that a sandwich started World War One?

To follow on from cardguy's post, apparently Gavrilo Princip was eating one at a shop after the failed assassination, then the car bundled past after going the wrong way so Princip grabbed his pistol and killed them

relevant http://www.rooshvforum.network/thread-34727-...#pid693506

[LeightonBlackstock]

(04-03-2014 02:10 PM)samsamsam Wrote:  

(04-03-2014 02:00 PM)LeightonBlackstock Wrote:  

Has anyone else heard the view that a sandwich started World War One?

To follow on from cardguy's post, apparently Gavrilo Princip was eating one at a shop after the failed assassination, then the car bundled past after going the wrong way so Princip grabbed his pistol and killed them

relevant http://www.rooshvforum.network/thread-34727-...#pid693506

It appears I should actually read the thread first before posting haha, apologies.

Ignore me everyone, continue below:

[samsamsam]

(04-03-2014 02:12 PM)LeightonBlackstock Wrote:  

(04-03-2014 02:10 PM)samsamsam Wrote:  

(04-03-2014 02:00 PM)LeightonBlackstock Wrote:  

Has anyone else heard the view that a sandwich started World War One?

To follow on from cardguy's post, apparently Gavrilo Princip was eating one at a shop after the failed assassination, then the car bundled past after going the wrong way so Princip grabbed his pistol and killed them

relevant http://www.rooshvforum.network/thread-34727-...#pid693506

It appears I should actually read the thread first before posting haha, apologies.

Ignore me everyone, continue below:

It's all good - I was just messing with you.

I only heard about when I read about a book that talked about small chance events that shaped history.

The book also mentioned that George W. Bush spoke to Selig about the Commissioner of Baseball position before running for president. If I recall correctly, if Selig had given him an idea of when he was going to retire and it was relatively short - Bush may never have ran for president. So everyone should hate Selig for Iraq not Bush