Versailles treaty discussion

[TheDarkling]

While I tend to think we helped the war end more quickly but I also wonder if by doing so we may have enabled the settlement terms that Germany got saddled with which helped set up the next World War.

Please don't buy into that ridiculous Versailles too harsh myth; it is only true in the realm of the gloss coffee table history book.

[Tribun]

While I tend to think we helped the war end more quickly but I also wonder if by doing so we may have enabled the settlement terms that Germany got saddled with which helped set up the next World War.

Please don't buy into that ridiculous Versailles too harsh myth; it is only true in the realm of the gloss coffee table history book.

You should better not so easily dismiss it.

History experts have come to the conclusion, that without the totally overboard demands from Versailles, the political climate in Germany would have never became so poisend that it allowed to success of the extreme radicals.

[TheDarkling]

You should better not so easily dismiss it.

History experts have come to the conclusion, that without the totally overboard demands from Versailles, the political climate in Germany would have never became so poisend that it allowed to success of the extreme radicals.

Indeed history experts have come to that conclusion and most of them published their works before the 50's, any more modern look comes to the conclusion that it is a myth put about by various biased groups (German apologists, pacifists, Wilsonians and so on). What I am saying is not rocket science in fact it is taught in high school in the UK (at A Level) I have discussed this with my brother (who is doing it at the moment) and almost all his various sources, teachers, books and so on point to the conclusion that Versailles was just a one placed excuse. So lets face it, if the Versailles is to blame answer is too simplistic even for high school history then it doesn’t hold much water.

[Dahak]

While I tend to think we helped the war end more quickly but I also wonder if by doing so we may have enabled the settlement terms that Germany got saddled with which helped set up the next World War.

Please don't buy into that ridiculous Versailles too harsh myth; it is only true in the realm of the gloss coffee table history book.

It mattered a great lot to the people, who thought they were "backstabbed" by Versailles. It certainly helped Hitler and his croonies, who were able to build on that mood.

[Tsyroc]

Please don't buy into that ridiculous Versailles too harsh myth; it is only true in the realm of the gloss coffee table history book.

I still think it would have been better for the US not to have sent troops to that war.

[TheDarkling]

I still think it would have been better for the US not to have sent troops to that war.

Maybe so, without Wilson being lionised at the peace conference, Versailles may turn out better.

[MKSheppard]

Oh look, it's the bloody "Versailles wasn't bad" wanker!

Tell me, is having to take your day's pay home in a frigging
WHEELBARROW, caused by hyperinflation from paying off
the Versailles debts good?

[TheDarkling]

Oh look, it's the bloody "Versailles wasn't bad" wanker!

Tell me, is having to take your day's pay home in a frigging
WHEELBARROW, caused by hyperinflation from paying off
the Versailles debts good?

The Weimar Republic could have avoided hyper inflation and still paid of the debts, the French managed the same when the shoe was on the other foot on a far shorter timescale. Unfortunately the Weimar republic didn't get its act together soon enough, but the allies weren't responsible for that.

True enough the invasion of the Ruhr exasperated the situation but the German government could have prevented that, the following shut down of business/strikes was at the behest of the German government causing further problems. All of this could have been prevented by the German government and does not automatically follow from the Treaty of Versailles.

Notice that when the Germans got a sound economic policy they began enjoy good economic standing (until the onset of the depression anyway).

There is also the fact that the hyper inflation was done and dusted and the Weimar Republic was enjoying the so called Golden age, then comes the Wall Street Crash and its effects which led to the rise of Hitler (who until that point was sliding off the political scene). True it had left its scars and weakened the republic but the depression would have still led to a rise of extremism.

[Lonestar]

The Weimar Republic could have avoided hyper inflation and still paid of the debts, the French managed the same when the shoe was on the other foot on a far shorter timescale. Unfortunately the Weimar republic didn't get its act together soon enough, but the allies weren't responsible for that.

France also didn't have a disinitrigrating Russia next door, who were trying to spread communism in the interest of global solidarity.

[TheDarkling]

France also didn't have a disinitrigrating Russia next door, who were trying to spread communism in the interest of global solidarity.

Russia was still busy getting its own house in order although there were some Communist elements in Germany there were enough Right Wing death squads to keep them under control.

As I have said the main cause of the Hyper Inflation was the government telling their industrial heartland "Go on strike, don't worry we will still pay you. We can print money don't you know...." hardly the actions of a fiscally responsible government.

The Germans could have paid the reparations (and thus avoided the invasion), true it would have required a mean cut into the civil service and various social programs (which is where your note about communism comes in) but those were taken in the end anyway. Even if the government misses that juncture, once the invasion happens they could not order their workers to strike and so they won't print money like it is going out of style.

What killed the Weimar republic was the global economic depression which dried up investment over night and caused the US banks to call in their loans (thus bankrupting the Republic), these factors and the rising unemployment led to extremism gaining a hold in new fertile ground.

[MKSheppard]

True enough the invasion of the Ruhr exasperated the situation but the German government could have prevented that

Hey moron, how could the german government under versailles
have prevented the Ruhr occupation? They have SHIT no tanks
no heavy artillery no airplanes, no nothing, as per versailles.

[TheDarkling]

Hey moron, how could the german government under versailles
have prevented the Ruhr occupation? They have SHIT no tanks
no heavy artillery no airplanes, no nothing, as per versailles.

How very in character for you Shep, you automatically assume that the only way to prevent the occupation was military force.

However the best way for the Germans to prevent the occupation was for the Germans to pay up the cash, it was possible they were just testing the French and trying to dodge paying the money they had "agreed" to.

I also take it that by not taking issue with my other points that you don't contest them and concede your point (such as it was).

[Patrick Degan]

Hey moron, how could the german government under versailles
have prevented the Ruhr occupation? They have SHIT no tanks
no heavy artillery no airplanes, no nothing, as per versailles.

How very in character for you Shep, you automatically assume that the only way to prevent the occupation was military force.

However the best way for the Germans to prevent the occupation was for the Germans to pay up the cash, it was possible they were just testing the French and trying to dodge paying the money they had "agreed" to.

Sure, they can "pay up the cash" in 1919 —and totally drain what's left of their treasury in the bargain. The seizure of the Saar and Ruhr valleys deprived Germany of their richest coal-production regions and cut into the heart of their industrial capacity. And we're talking about a nation which was already bankrupt from the war and facing famine from the British blockade.

Oh, and as I recall it, the occupation of the Saar and Ruhr provinces, along with Alscase-Lorraine, were part of the treaty stipulations.

[Howedar]

LOL! France, will you stay out of our best land? Please? If you do, we'll pay you the money we don't have.

[Dahak]

Oh look, it's the bloody "Versailles wasn't bad" wanker!

Tell me, is having to take your day's pay home in a frigging
WHEELBARROW, caused by hyperinflation from paying off
the Versailles debts good?

The Weimar Republic could have avoided hyper inflation and still paid of the debts, the French managed the same when the shoe was on the other foot on a far shorter timescale. Unfortunately the Weimar republic didn't get its act together soon enough, but the allies weren't responsible for that.

True enough the invasion of the Ruhr exasperated the situation but the German government could have prevented that, the following shut down of business/strikes was at the behest of the German government causing further problems. All of this could have been prevented by the German government and does not automatically follow from the Treaty of Versailles.

Notice that when the Germans got a sound economic policy they began enjoy good economic standing (until the onset of the depression anyway).

There is also the fact that the hyper inflation was done and dusted and the Weimar Republic was enjoying the so called Golden age, then comes the Wall Street Crash and its effects which led to the rise of Hitler (who until that point was sliding off the political scene). True it had left its scars and weakened the republic but the depression would have still led to a rise of extremism.

THe fact that they could have, possibly, paid the reparations didn't change the fact that in the general populace the so-called "Dolchstoßlegende", that Germany was *butt-fucked* by it's own government, reigned supreme.
They were aching for someone to bring them back the glory, their honour, thier pride. Hitleer perfectly played on those feelings.

[TheDarkling]

Sure, they can "pay up the cash" in 1919 —and totally drain what's left of their treasury in the bargain.

1922 actually and they could afford it by either cutting spending or increasing taxes (or both). They chose neither and thus forced the French (and Belgians) to come and claim what they owned. The German government then destroyed their economy with sheer insanity.

The seizure of the Saar and Ruhr valleys deprived Germany of their richest coal-production regions and cut into the heart of their industrial capacity. And we're talking about a nation which was already bankrupt from the war and facing famine from the British blockade.

1922 not 1919. The Ruhr wasn’t seized until the Germans failed to pay and yes the loss of the Saar was a factor.

Oh, and as I recall it, the occupation of the Saar and Ruhr provinces, along with Alscase-Lorraine, were part of the treaty stipulations.

The Saar yes, the Ruhr no.

[TheDarkling]

LOL! France, will you stay out of our best land? Please? If you do, we'll pay you the money we don't have.

More like

We have the money; you can’t have it even though we said you could, what you going to do?

Invade our best land you say, well then we will commit economic suicide while we are at it... but it isn't out fault....

It is typical of the buck passing that went on after the war, the military blamed the civilian government (a government they set up to take the fall), the left blamed the right and vice versa, the government blamed the allies and the individual states blamed the central government.

[TheDarkling]

THe fact that they could have, possibly, paid the reparations didn't change the fact that in the general populace the so-called "Dolchstoßlegende", that Germany was *butt-fucked* by it's own government, reigned supreme.
They were aching for someone to bring them back the glory, their honour, thier pride. Hitleer perfectly played on those feelings.

I don't disagree with that however it isn't the allies’ fault that the German people were lied to about the outcome of the war because the military higher ups were prideful bastards who wouldn't take responsibility for their defeat.

Any treaty the allies impose will be blamed for German problems because that is what anybody with power was doing, turning around and blaming somebody else. the allies made an easy target but in truth German woes were caused by German governmental policy and the German military wasn't stabbed in the back by the evil Socialist Jew from within or the allies promising a fair treaty from without - Germany was beaten but nobody had the spine to admit it and take responsibility.

The German people’s feelings are understandable but they are not due to the Treaty being too harsh, they are caused by a systemic problem that permeated the corridors of power in Germany.

[Axis Kast]

Hitler's rise had as much to do with military failure as economic deprivity caused by Versailles.

Even if the Germans had signed a more favorable treaty returning European affairs to their antebellum status-quo, it's still quite likely that militaristic parties would have harped on their nation's being "stabbed in the back" on the verge of victory.

[TheDarkling]

Suddenly I begin to doubt my position.

[Sea Skimmer]

The problem with Versailles wasn’t that it was too harsh; it was that it wasn’t harsh enough and wasn’t enforced thus leaving Germany able to rebuild. If the western allies had occupied the whole country and stripped it down to an agrarian state (as was proposed during the later part of WW2) then everyone could have happily waited in peace for the red tide to wash upon the west.

[PainRack]

The problem with Versailles wasn’t that it was too harsh; it was that it wasn’t harsh enough and wasn’t enforced thus leaving Germany able to rebuild. If the western allies had occupied the whole country and stripped it down to an agrarian state (as was proposed during the later part of WW2) then everyone could have happily waited in peace for the red tide to wash upon the west.

Would Britain and France, already tied up in Imperial expeditions in their empires, have been willing to stay the course in Germany?

[MKSheppard]

Sure, they can "pay up the cash" in 1919 —and totally drain what's left of their treasury in the bargain. The seizure of the Saar and Ruhr valleys deprived Germany of their richest coal-production regions and cut into the heart of their industrial capacity. And we're talking about a nation which was already bankrupt from the war and facing famine from the British blockade.

Oh, and as I recall it, the occupation of the Saar and Ruhr provinces, along with Alscase-Lorraine, were part of the treaty stipulations.

Wow.........Me and Deegan are agreeing on the same thing

I must go sit down.......oh wait, I'm already sitting down

[Plekhanov]

The treaty of Versailles is positively lenient in comparison to the Brest-Litovsk Treaty that Germany had imposed upon Russia in 1917, this doesn’t justify Versailles but definitely puts German complaints into some perspective.

There is considerable evidence that the Weimar Government failed to react adequately to prevent hyperinflation because of a (correct) belief that a “demonstration” of Germany’s inability to pay would force concessions from the international community.

Much of the territorial redistribution that was so bitterly resented simply reversed the results of Prussian expansionism and gave minorities formerly repressed by German or Austro-Hungarian Empires self determination. Other areas “lost” under the treaty specifically the Sudetenland and Austria had never been part of Germany it was absurd to think that the allies would allow them to become so. The common complaint that it forbade Anschluss just shows how unreasonable German expectations were. To expect the allies to allow the creation of a greater Germany after the rest of Europe had struggled to defeat a divided “German” people just shows how divorced from reality much of the population was.

[Glocksman]

Much of the territorial redistribution that was so bitterly resented simply reversed the results of Prussian expansionism and gave minorities formerly repressed by German or Austro-Hungarian Empires self determination. Other areas “lost” under the treaty specifically the Sudetenland and Austria had never been part of Germany it was absurd to think that the allies would allow them to become so. The common complaint that it forbade Anschluss just shows how unreasonable German expectations were. To expect the allies to allow the creation of a greater Germany after the rest of Europe had struggled to defeat a divided “German” people just shows how divorced from reality much of the population was.

Some of the complaints however were justified. The 'Polish Corridor' between East Prussia and the rest of Germany was justifiably regarded as a gratuitious insult.

And as far as reparations go, insisting that the Germans pay to restore battle damages is one thing, but the French insistance that the Germans pay the entire cost of the war merely set the stage for WW2.

One could call the French defeat in 1940 blowback from Clemenceau's decision to saddle Germany with the entire cost of the war.

However you slice it, the Germans came out with the shitty end of the stick from the war. They weren't solely responsible for the war, yet were forced to say that they were and pay all war costs for the victors.