(Note: This is a non-SF/F post. I just felt like saying something. The sad part is, it's not really going to be footnoted or anything, so it's not really good to be a proper work of history from a scholarly perspective either.)
At eleven AM on November eleventh, 1918 the guns fell silent and the killing stopped. The First World War ended. The Western Allies had prevailed not because of their own fighting prowess (Germany was still advancing at the end of the war) but because of the collapse of the German government. The Weimar Republic had stripped away the old Reich and established a new one. Their first act was to sue for peace. In a hospital run by the German army was a young corporal, who was actually Austrian, who was pissed out of his mind and recovering from a gas attack. He went on later to "avenge the wrongs" his people had suffered by starting a war that killed millions. Screw you and your mustache, Corporal Hitler.
That's not really what this post is about though. Nor is it about the mistaken belief, held by many historians, that the Second World War was caused by the actions of the United Kingdom, France and their allies in leveling war reparations on the German government. The Germans never paid them anyway. It could be about the folly of negotiating a peace without first thoroughly defeating the enemy and why national pride will send them back for round two eventually, but that's not it either.
No, this post is really about the stupidity of that war and many of the nations who fought it. I just don't get it. One Archduke gets offed (and depending on you point of view, he may have deserved it) and a few years later, millions are dead. A good-will tour (Franz Ferdinand was in Serbia to see and be seen and make everyone happy) ended up in a conflagration that killed millions and led to parts of the European landscape being uninhabitable a century later.
There was no real reason for World War One to turn into a general conflict. I can see, from the point of view of the Austo-Hungarian Empire (all the Americans reading this just went HUH?) to punish a seditious province and put down a rebellion. I would understand that. But how an internal matter in the Empire to a German invasion of France is something I don't understand and probably never will.
I guess my point in bringing this up is my feeling that it's important to figure things like this out to prevent it from happening again. Don't think it can't. In Europe, where there hasn't been a major war in decades, trains are still built to make loading and moving trips easy. China and Russia are both arming. The United States hasn't faced another major power since the end of World War II but that doesn't mean it never will.
When I read the literature, what I kept finding was that everyone thought that it was time for a war. Really? Everyone just wanted to send their sons and brothers off to die because they hadn't done it in awhile? Is that what you're actually selling? I'm not buying it. And yet, I can't find a fact to refute the belief either. Out there somewhere is a picture taken of the crowd at an Austrian war rally. Right in the middle of it is the aforementioned asshole, the excitement evident in his face. He wanted a fight, at least.
A large part of my studies as a history major centered around politics and wars. I get that it happens. I'll never forget a quote from one of my history professors. "It is sometimes necessary and appropriate to go to war, but it is never pretty." She was right. I just don't see World War I as being either.
So then, why? It wasn't territorial ambition. Germany had invaded France a little over forty years earlier and left after winning the war. The Ottoman Empire and Austria Hungary had far more to lose than to gain as evidenced by the fact that neither one exists anymore. How did all of these countries find themselves training and arming men to kill each other? What made it worth the effort? For the record, I get France's reason for fighting. They were invaded. The same with Russia. What was everyone else thinking?
Whether the United States should have entered the war or not is still
debated, as are it's reasons for doing so. Some will tell you that it
was for the "Merchants of Death," but that makes no sense. As a neutral power the United States had the right to sell weapons to either or both sides. In practice, we sold mostly to the British, but that made sense. They were the closest and had a navy big enough to protect our shipping. Put bluntly, this is mainly a theory promoted by Marxists, who seem unable to believe that any war can be fought for any reason other than profit. To someone whose life philosophy is based around crass materialism that would probably make sense. Another theory is the "unlimited submarine warfare" school that says that the US went to war because Germany was sinking too many ships. (And, for the record, U-boats were damn good at what they did.) This makes no sense either. Yes, there had been some American citizens killed on British cruise ships (most famously the Lusitania) but it wasn't that common and the US government had warned its citizens against boarding the ships in the first place because of the risks involved. This boils down to the same
Of course, there is one other popular theory. The British intercepted a German telegram to Mexico offering to return lost territory if Mexico invaded the US. This, theoretically, would keep the US too busy to interfere in the fighting in Europe. (I remain convinced that the US invaded Iraq in 2003 due to similar motivations.) Mexico obviously never invaded, probably because they were sick and tired of getting their collective asses kicked. (For the record: Yes, the telegram could have been faked. No, it has nothing to do with diplomatic pouches. For one thing, the message was intercepted as it was broadcast. For another, countries can and will violate each others diplomatic pouches during wartime. The reason diplomatic pouches are respected during peacetime is because it is considered to be an act of war to open another country's diplomatic correspondence.) So, even if the telegram was the true motivation for the US to go to war against Germany, why were they convinced that it was necessary?
Tom Clancy said it best: "The difference between reality and fiction is that fiction has to make sense." Nothing about the lead up to World War I in general or US involvement in the same makes the slightest bit of sense. There is no logic here. Maybe I spent too much time growing up listening to characters like Spock and Data, but the lack of a definable purpose offends my sensibilities.
And when your break down the tactics used by all sides, it gets worse. The history books record what happened on the Western Front as "trench warfare." I define what happened on the Western Front as "dig a ditch and die warfare." For the record, we're both right and the difference is totally semantic. I still think my version makes more sense as both sides on the Western Front spent more time dying in place, or for a few yards of territory, than they did accomplishing anything of military significance.
And then, of course, is the part that most citizens of the United States are ignorant of. Someone help me out here: WHAT IN THE BLUE HELL WERE AMERICAN TROOPS DOING FIGHTING IN RUSSIA? Yup, totally happened. American troops, many from my home state of Michigan, were sent to protect supplies meant for the White Russian (ie anti-communist) troops during the Russian Revolution. Within hours of landing at the port of Archangelsk, and before many of them had even disembarked, there were already troops aboard a train headed toward Moscow. They never came close. It still doesn't make sense that they were even there. Ostensibly they were trying to bring Russia back into the war, the Russians having made a separate peace with Germany. I'm still not sure what their real mission was, and that was supposed to be the theme of my Master's thesis if my academic career had not gone under when my marriage did. They damn sure weren't guarding warehouses in a train headed away from the warehouses.
Someday, maybe someone will say or write something that makes this seem slightly logical. It won't be this day, or at least not from this computer. I'm supposed to come up with some big conclusion here that ties this mess together, but the best I've got is that there is no conclusion possible. I guess that's your big revelation. I hope it was worth your time. Anyway, hug a veteran. They've earned it. And, if you think this post is a goofy as I do, feel free to tell me so in the comments.
Feel free to download a copy of the history of some the units that fought in the American Intervention in the Russian Revolution, written by some of the officers that served as part of the expeditionary force, here for free:
http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/22523
If you happen to be in Southeastern Michigan, you can visit memorials to the Michigan Polar Bears (who fought in the Russian Revolution) at both White Chapel Cemetery (look for the polar bear statue off to your right as you pull in from Crooks Road) and at the Detroit Zoo, contained in a class case in the polar bear exhibit. Of course, the coolest place to learn about them would be at Michigan's Own Military and Space Museum in Frankenmuth.
Oh, and word to the Polar Bears themselves: Yes, I promised you guys a book while visiting your graves at the cemetery. It's going to happen. I'm not sure how when I'm not really eligible for academic grants to do the research anymore, but I'll figure something out.
No comments:
Post a Comment