Yes, that is the OP, and there have been 59 other posts by quite a few posters. What are your opinions?
OP nailed it. No notes.
I thought this was the thread you requested be opened so you could provide a factual case that France was one of the causes of The Great War, not a thread of opinions about the causes of WWI.
Exactly. The points laid out in the OP are factual statements in support of the position that Germany was the instigating aggressor in WWI. My “opinions” agree with that position because it is supported by those facts. It’s not complicated.
All the European powers helped cause the Great war. France, Russia, AH, Serbia and of course Germany.
Against Belgium. Yes, Germany attacked Belgium (which I have said several times), but that was not a cause of the Great war.
That certainly seems to be your opinion, man…
In addition to the OP’s list, I’d add two more factors:
- Germany’s “Blank Cheque” to Austro-Hungary, which is cited as the #1 immediate cause of the Great War by noted historian Christopher Clark (author of “The Sleepwalkers”) who writes in this interview:
A friend of mine asked me this the other day. He said, “Let’s draw up percentages of responsibility” and he wanted it divided up between Germany and France and Russia and so on. I think if we are looking at the July crisis itself and it was a crisis provoked by the assassinations, then I think the “Blank Check,” [eds: Germany’s open-ended offer of support to Vienna] I would put that at the top of the list.
- Kaiser Wilhelm’s unique approach to diplomacy, who seemingly went out of his way to offend everyone, by for example, congratulating the Boers for their early victories over the British, later claiming that Russia and France had invited him to take advantage of the Boer war to join them in attacking Britain, and finally claiming that he had provided Britain with the war plans they had used to defeat the Boers.
You can certainly argue that all of the European powers had a hand in creating the “powder keg” conditions that made escalation of war likely.
But it was still Germany who attacked France, not the other way around.
Germany declared war on France, told Belgium they needed to move through Belgium to attack France and then attached Belgium. All France did was move their troops to the border so they could attack or defend their border if Germany attacked them.
What is your opinion?
Which I listed as one of the causes.
But it was still Russia that attacked Germany.
and
France crossed the border first when French troops entered the contested Alsace region on August 7, 1914, just days after hostilities began,
Under General Joseph “Papa” Joffre (1852–1931), the French launched their first attack on the town of Mulhouse in the Alsace region of Germany. It was a botched attack led by a reluctant commander who was soon fired by Joffre.
The two main things you can blame the allies for are having secret treaties and the UK and Russia for not making it obvious from the start that they had red lines they were 100% going to go to war over.
The central powers’ diplomats went into the crisis thinking they could deftly maneuver everything to get a cheap war in the Balkans and not have to take on all of their strongest enemies at once. Of course they committed a comedy of errors leading to publicly declaring a war they largely thought was a dumb idea but it’s possible that enough pressure from the start could have convinced them to deescalate before their generals told them it was too late.
Offered without comment opinion,
One week after the assassination of Franz Ferdinand, Germany’s Kaiser Wilhelm II pledged unconditional support to Austria-Hungary, however it chose to respond to the attack. With this so-called blank check assurance, Austria-Hungary declared war on Serbia on July 28, 1914. Within days, France, Germany, and Russia announced their own cascading declarations of war.
Why Did World War I Happen? | CFR Education
Bolding mine
Why did Germany attack Belgium?
In accordance with their treaties, after Germany attacked France.
Yup, French troops entered the contested region days after hostilities began. After. And therefore not the cause of hostilities.
Yes, hostilities began when Russia attacked. or when war was declared. Or when Mobilization occurred.
See what other Historians place the blame-
Barnes soon became a leading crusader for the cause of revisionism regarding the origins of the Great War, publishing The Genesis of the World War (1926) and In Quest of Truth and Justice: De-Bunking the War Guilt Myth (1928). These studies, based on diplomatic documents, memoirs, and interviews with officials, went further than Fay by placing primary blame for the war’s outbreak on France and Russia, and to a lesser extent, on Great Britain. He wrote that “Germany was certainly not a lamb in the midst of the pack of European wolves, but it is just as apparent that she was not the unique wolf in the fold…. she was not as nationalistic as France, not as imperialistic as Great Britain, France or Russia, not as devoted to navalism as Great Britain.”8
(In other word, I read this as they were all guilty)
Fay followed up his articles with a massive two-volume study, The Origins of the World War, published in 1928. Based on documentary evidence and interviews, including an interview with Kaiser Wilhelm, two major corrections from wartime propaganda emerged: German militarism was not unique among the great powers and there was no evidence that Germany intended to conquer all of Europe. As far as “war guilt” is concerned, Fay laid primary blame on Austria-Hungary rather than Germany.12…
One reviewer, C. C. Eckhardt, described Fay’s study as “the most complete, most detached, and impartial work on the subject, and is not apt to be superseded soon.”13 Another reviewer, Preston Slosson, wrote, “If Professor Fay be called a ‘revisionist’ some new word must be coined for those who believe that the war arose from a Franco-Russian conspiracy. His book stands almost equidistant between the wartime propaganda of such writers as James M. Beck
(Now, here it is AH, not Germany)
German author Hermann Lutz, in Lord Grey and the World War (1927), was highly critical of the British role in fomenting German insecurity, but he nonetheless viewed Germany’s actions as regrettable. While accepting the Austro-Hungarian monarchy’s claim that the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand signified a serious security threat to Austria-Hungary arising from Serbia, he judged that wiser statesmen in Berlin could have prevented war by not encouraging Vienna’s militant response. Germany’s “blank cheque was a great blunder,” he wrote. As an alternative, Berlin might have “come to an understanding with Russia, for example, at the expense of Austria-Hungary.”17
(now, we have British guilt, but the Kaiser Blank Cheque was the main case, and i concurred it was one of the causes)
So, not even counting The Sleepwalkers, we have widely varying opinions by mainstream historians as to the cause or causes.
But so far, all i can see is “Those Dirty Huns, they caused it!”
Oh and as far as british and their treaties, can we forget that Britain promised an independent, unified Arab homeland in exchange for military support against the Ottomans. Instead secretly they signed the Sykes–Picot Agreement which cut up the Middle East into zones of imperialistic control- which some say is the start of the whole unending Middle East war zone.
There was also the Treaty of Paris 1856, mentioned here, where the Brits promised peace with the Ottomans, then in defiance of said treaty - occupied Cyprus in 1878 and Egypt in 1882. So, historically the British have viewed treaties as something to follow when it suits them. France, Germany etc, all did the same- so no nation was “forced” to go to war over 'a piece of paper".
And here are a few more cites on the many and varied causes of the Great War=
In recent years this post-Fischer consensus has in turn been revised. Historians have returned to the arguments of the interwar years, focusing for example on Russia’s and France’s role in the outbreak of war, or asking if Britain’s government really did all it could to try and avert the war in 1914. Germany’s and Austria-Hungary’s roles are again deemphasised.
After 100 years of debate, every conceivable interpretation seems to have been advanced, dismissed and then revisited. In some of the most recent publications, even seeking to attribute responsibility, as had so confidently been done at Versailles, is now eschewed.
Core argument: The war was not Germany’s fault alone. All the great powers contributed through their alliance systems, arms races, imperial rivalries, and the failure of political leadership to prevent a crisis from escalating into a world war. Germany was one actor among several; to assign it sole guilt was politically convenient but historically false.
I already said.
The circumstances in which the bizarre intertwined treaties created a volatile political environment and dragged everyone into the war once hostilities started were created over time by all the countries involved. But Germany was the first to open hostilities. Which is not my opinion but a statement of fact.
Where are you seeing that phrasing?
When did Russia attack?
When did Germany declare war on Russia?
And, to repeat myself:
Also, when did Germany declare war on France?