Let’s quickly remind ourselves of what was the situation before the war:
Britain had the strongest naval forces and had a rule saying, that their naval forces should be as strong as the two (other) strongest naval forces together. Germany meanwhile was massively expanding its naval forces to be able to compete with the UK. This caused politic tension and an arms race between Germany and the UK.
France has be politically isolated since the 1870s, but due to the German monarch not caring about the contracts that isolated France, that lost a war to Germany, ran out. At the same time the contracts that caused a situation where if anyone in Europe would have started a war would immediately pull 2-3 other countries into it ran out.
Russia was experiencing inner political tension due to the citizens not being satisfied with the Zar ruling. To counter this it tried shifting the focus away from the inner political problems by gaining influence in the middle east
Autria-Hungary tried to gain more influence in the middle east.
After the assassination Austria Hungary gave Serbia an Ultimatum to allow their forces and government officials to operate in Serbian territory to catch the murderer, who’s suspected to be supported by Russia IIRC, and threatening a war if they didnt comply with the Ultimatum. Germany gave Austria-Hungary safety guarantees stating that if they were to go to war with Serbia, they would support them. Ultimately it came to a war with Serbia. Causing Russia to join, since they also wanted more influence in Serbia.
Germany then decided to Attack France in an preemptive Attack, since France hated Germany due to the lost war and the political Isolation caused by Bismarck. Since the German border with France was heavily guarded they decided to attack Belgium first and the go to France to avoid having to fight against a lot of bunkers. The attack against Belgium caused the UK to join the war in order, who were willing to go to war due to the German threat to their naval dominance.
It isn’t really that easy to say who caused the war, since it was a very complex political climate where everyone was willing to go to war to defend their own interests.
If you are from Luttich as you say, then in ww1 the part of Belgium where you’re from, was a part of Germany. The German speaking parts of Belgium, namely Eupen and Malmedy, were only allocated to Belgium with the treaty of Versailles (1919). But since you are from the German speaking part of Belgium, you of course already knew this.
For those confused by the place names: in Belgium there is a city called Liège (French speaking) in a province called Liège. Luttich is the German name for Liège. Eupen and Malmedy became a part of the province of Liège in the 1920s.
That’s an article about a military campaign in a war that was already on going. The article even has a section called “outbreak of the war”, in which the actual outbreak of the war is explained (which was not Germany invading Belgium). The article does not in any way support your claim that Germany started world war 1 by invading Belgium.
Why are you linking articles and then misrepresenting what is in those articles?
He is indeed a revisionist or more probably ignorant and stupid from seeing his other comments.
In this case the wiki article looks OK but I stand by my claim about Wikipedia.
It’s useful to look up stuff about flowers, geography, mathematics and other stuff.
But if the subject has the slightest political relevance it can’t be trusted.
You are OC not right, especially since you’re putting words into my mouth I didn’t say.
Clearly mentioning facts that show you are wrong on WW1 Germany is not ‘defending them’.
"Russia’s invasion doesn’t have an historical conect they’re inherently evil "
Again didn’t say anything like that, only that it has nothing to do with WW1
What are you saying? Definitely not ‘caused by’.
It was caused by many factors and events.
This was a result and not a cause.
You are also completely wrong that ‘Nobody was fighting before that’.
There was already fighting in eastern Europe.
Removed by mod
That’s not the whole story.
Let’s quickly remind ourselves of what was the situation before the war:
Britain had the strongest naval forces and had a rule saying, that their naval forces should be as strong as the two (other) strongest naval forces together. Germany meanwhile was massively expanding its naval forces to be able to compete with the UK. This caused politic tension and an arms race between Germany and the UK.
France has be politically isolated since the 1870s, but due to the German monarch not caring about the contracts that isolated France, that lost a war to Germany, ran out. At the same time the contracts that caused a situation where if anyone in Europe would have started a war would immediately pull 2-3 other countries into it ran out.
Russia was experiencing inner political tension due to the citizens not being satisfied with the Zar ruling. To counter this it tried shifting the focus away from the inner political problems by gaining influence in the middle east
Autria-Hungary tried to gain more influence in the middle east.
After the assassination Austria Hungary gave Serbia an Ultimatum to allow their forces and government officials to operate in Serbian territory to catch the murderer, who’s suspected to be supported by Russia IIRC, and threatening a war if they didnt comply with the Ultimatum. Germany gave Austria-Hungary safety guarantees stating that if they were to go to war with Serbia, they would support them. Ultimately it came to a war with Serbia. Causing Russia to join, since they also wanted more influence in Serbia.
Germany then decided to Attack France in an preemptive Attack, since France hated Germany due to the lost war and the political Isolation caused by Bismarck. Since the German border with France was heavily guarded they decided to attack Belgium first and the go to France to avoid having to fight against a lot of bunkers. The attack against Belgium caused the UK to join the war in order, who were willing to go to war due to the German threat to their naval dominance.
It isn’t really that easy to say who caused the war, since it was a very complex political climate where everyone was willing to go to war to defend their own interests.
Removed by mod
The glider attack happened in ww2, not ww1.
If you are from Luttich as you say, then in ww1 the part of Belgium where you’re from, was a part of Germany. The German speaking parts of Belgium, namely Eupen and Malmedy, were only allocated to Belgium with the treaty of Versailles (1919). But since you are from the German speaking part of Belgium, you of course already knew this.
For those confused by the place names: in Belgium there is a city called Liège (French speaking) in a province called Liège. Luttich is the German name for Liège. Eupen and Malmedy became a part of the province of Liège in the 1920s.
This is a very novel take of historical revisionism, first time I’ve encountered it.
Do you have any sources other than yourself that support your claim that ww1 was started by Germany attacking Belgium?
Removed by mod
That’s an article about a military campaign in a war that was already on going. The article even has a section called “outbreak of the war”, in which the actual outbreak of the war is explained (which was not Germany invading Belgium). The article does not in any way support your claim that Germany started world war 1 by invading Belgium.
Why are you linking articles and then misrepresenting what is in those articles?
Removed by mod
Bravo, another vague link. Can you explain how what you link to supports your claim?
1 Wikipedia is a garbage source.
2 Russia/Ukraine has nothing to do with it.
The wiki article is actually very good. The historical revisionist is just claiming that it says things which it definitely does not.
He is indeed a revisionist or more probably ignorant and stupid from seeing his other comments.
In this case the wiki article looks OK but I stand by my claim about Wikipedia.
It’s useful to look up stuff about flowers, geography, mathematics and other stuff.
But if the subject has the slightest political relevance it can’t be trusted.
Removed by mod
You are OC not right, especially since you’re putting words into my mouth I didn’t say.
Clearly mentioning facts that show you are wrong on WW1 Germany is not ‘defending them’.
"Russia’s invasion doesn’t have an historical conect they’re inherently evil "
Again didn’t say anything like that, only that it has nothing to do with WW1
Removed by mod
hope you crash
What are you saying? Definitely not ‘caused by’.
It was caused by many factors and events.
This was a result and not a cause.
You are also completely wrong that ‘Nobody was fighting before that’.
There was already fighting in eastern Europe.