A new thread . . .

In one point I have to agree with Jim. The Germans did fight for the wrong cause.
But...
the US did also fight for the wrong cause. So did the French, the British, the Russians, etc...

With the exceptions of the Belgians and the Greek ANY participating nation did so by its own choosing, or at least by not preventing the war but preparing for it.

Individually every soldier fought for the "right" reason, to protect his nation. Actually they fought to enable their OWN politicians a cover up THEIR part of the mess.

If their is a lesson in WWI, then it is that there are SOME reasons not worth fighting for.

regards

Axel

BTW: Ex-submariner, peacetime only (thanks god)

[Darryl]

JohnL
"Beware of the Hun in the Sun."
"Join the Army. Help Defeat the Hun."
"Do these jingoistic
"phrases sound like the judgment was not"
"in on Germany early in the war?"

With all due respect John..no! They sound like the perfectly normal estranging and demonizing of the enemy that goes on in ANY conflict between nations. How many guys who picked up a rifle and put on a pack to go into Kuwait believed that Saddam should be left in power? I know my opinion. Why, because he was portrayed as the antichrist. BUT what happens when the Coalition forces have won? The real political machinations begin and we can't get him out because that would leave a power vacuum that Iran may fill!

I use this example ONLY because it is the most recent and glaring.(NO, I am NOT buying in to the whole Balkans thing!!) I supported (and still support) the Gulf War but the fact is that it was fought and HAD to be fought, over exactly what the peacenics cried and the politicians denied : OIL.

I don't think you will find a single example in history of a country going to war with pure and just motives.

Just my opinion

Darryl

[mike_baram]

"I don't think you will find a single example in history of a country going to war with pure and just motives"
Darryl,
Granted the fact that I'm kind of partisan on this issue, but I would suggest the "6 Day War" of 1967.
Egypt concentrated troops on Israel's borders, blockaded her only sea link to Asia, and Nasser publicly declared his intent to destroy his neighbor. Given this situation, a pre-emptive strike by Israel was totally necessary and justified.
Egypt's actions were out and out violations of international law, especially blocking the Straits of Tiran.
Mike

[leo]

American citizens of their own free will decided to sail on a British ship in time of war. The ship was carrying munitions and had accommodations to mount weapons. It was a Royal Mail Ship carrying official correspondence of the British government which would have value to that side. The ship was listed in "Janes 1913" edition as an auxilary cruiser. To sum up, it was a legitimate target of war. It is a terrible thing that Americans lost their lives so unnecessarily. Whats really sad was that there was other transportation available to those American passengers. Sweden and other neutral powers operated ships to Europe as well as Us Liners. Secretary of State William Jennings Bryan left the Wilson administration partly over our response to the Lusitania sinking. He felt that Americans should have been notified that in case of action by a German sub against an English ship that the passenger would forfeit the protection of the US government.

All,
The reason why I said that the Germans were fighting for the wrong cause was not only because of their penchant to become a preeminent world power by conquest, but also for their invasion of neutral Belgium. The Belgians had already turned down offers of protection from the French and the British, prior to Germany's request/ultimatum of "right of passage" to execute the Schlieffen Plan. Belgium was abiding by all that was in force at the time to protect her right of Neutrality. The Germans in DIRECT violation of the Hague Convention and the Treaty of Neutrality of 1847 went ahead and invaded a staunchly neutral Belgium after being denied permission by King Leopold. If people think that action is justifiable and right, then we must be compelled to sit down and rethink what determines right and wrong (this is what supposedly separates us from the lower life forms on the planet).
About the submarine thing, there is absolutely NO EXCUSE for torpedoing clearly marked hospital ships as was the case in 1917.
VBR,
Jim

[leo]

Belgium is made a big deal. And, of course it was. Where is the concern for the allied invasion of Greece in WWI, or for that matter of the British incursions into the Orange Free State or Transvaal? Britain raped, murdered and pillaged on all continents for three centuries and all we hear about is Belgium.

[mike_baram]

Leo,
Britain wasn't the only colonial power. Colonialism was the norm for hundreds of years, yet nations, like people, do tend to evolve and advance.
Give Britain credit for spreading the concepts of representative government and a legal system which form the basis for the American government.
We took a history of increasing human rights in stages and wrapped it up in one magnificent document, but the seeds are in the Magna Carta, the bill of rights, etc.
If you haven't read it, check out "Conquest and Culture" by Thomas Sowell. He makes some very insightful points in that book.
VBR,
Mike
PS: IMHO, any nation that could give us Shakespeare can't be all bad.

[Barrett]

Sometimes clearly marked hospital ships are sunk accidentally. A similar event happened in 1945 when the US submarine Queenfish sank the Awa Maru, a relief ship authorized by the US to take POW supplies from Japan to the South Pacific. The sub skipper torpedoed what he thought was a legit target, surfaced to ID his kill and was appalled to learn his commo officer failed to notify him of SigInt about the ship's presence. However, it turned out that among the survivors in the water were 4000 rubber bales. The Japs had been transporting military supplies via relief ship, which was of course contrary to the rules. Another PacFleet sub mistakenly sank a Soviet ship, but I don't think anyone east of Vladivostok was too upset.

Barrett,
The sinkings of hospital ships in 1917 by the German U-Boats, were deliberate acts under the cloak of unrestricted submarine warfare. The night sinking of a couple of them were beyond the scope of accidental, as the ships were lit up like Times Square on New Years eve. There really is no defensible accounting for those acts.
VBR,
Jim

[leo]

Mike Baram: England has been the place where much has been done in the area of representative government. However they seem to be much more interested in promoting it at home than they did in the colonies. I might point to the example of Ireland where England was about as interested in promoting representative government as she was in growing cocoanuts in Antartica.

Jim: To which sinkings are you referring?