World War I - Week 1 - August 1-8, 1914

Almost everyone is very familiar with WWII due to the hundreds of movies and the fact that most have fathers or grandfathers who fought in that cataclysm. Less well-known but no less interesting is what was called at the time "The Great War" and only later relegated to simply being described as World War I. This war and its results set the stage for most of the events for the rest of the 20th century and some are still with us today. Here are some examples.

The empires of four great powers were destroyed: The Hohenzollern German Empire, the Hapsburg Empire of Austria-Hungary, the Romanov Empire of Russia, and the Ottoman Empire of Turkey. New states were formed in Poland, Czechoslovakia, Austria, Hungary, Yugoslavia, Turkey, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, and most of the modern Middle East.

The emergence of the United States as a superpower and later the other superpower of the Communist Soviet Union.

Set the stage for the rise of Adolf Hitler and his genocidal murder of millions. The devastating loss of an entire generation of young men led to the pacifism of England and France which allowed Germany to gobble up smaller neighbors until finally beginning to fight in 1939.

It was the first genuine world war and total war utilizing armies of millions and requiring the wartime production of many more millions of civilians.

First widespread use of new military technology on the land, sea, and air. On land, millions were slaughtered with machine guns, flamethrowers, poison gas, portable powerful mortars, tanks and motorized transport, and rifled artillery of unimaginable power and accuracy. On the sea were submarines and huge dreadnought battleships. In the air were now thousands of fighter planes and the first bombing of civilian populations from the air with aerial bombers and airships.

The establishment of the forerunner of the United Nations in the form of the League of Nations.

I intend to post a weekly summary every Saturday of the events of World War I coinciding with the 100th anniversary of that tragic period. My intention is to both stimulate a lively discussion and to encourage others to learn more of this fascinating time and the far-reaching consequences of it.

WW1 combined weaponry of greatly increased firepower with the customs of older eras . That made mass slaughter all but inevitable .

Absolutely terrific article pokermike.

I found the ''road through Belgium'', most interesting.

And the French Infantry, and the casualties that they suffered charging straight into heavy German fire. 27,000 dead in one day...Almost impossible to imagine.

I hope that your continuing series takes in the battle of ''One Tree Hill'' Turks vs Aussies. I was living in Australia (1990) when some of the surviving Aussie vet's were flown to Turkey to meet their one time enemy. Doctors and nurses were on the fight to ensure that the ''old Anzac's'' were well taken care of. It was on TV in Aussie for days. Both the Turks and Aussies, said that they would never want to face each other again. Both felt the other were the toughest fighters they had ever seen.

Keep up the great work. Looking forward to more installments.

The Turks were major players in WWI. In fact, it was under the cover of chaos of WWI that they committed the Armenian Genocide, which in turn lead to this famous quote:

Accordingly, I have placed my death-head formations in readiness for the present only in the East with orders to them to send to death mercilessly and without compassion, men, women, and children of Polish derivation and language. Only thus shall we gain the living space(Lebensraum)which we need. Who, after all, speaks today of the annihilation of the Armenians?

Great idea Mike. I look forward to more installments.

The French always crack me up. Their arrogance is always what did them in, in the 20th century. It never occurred to them that Germany could be better equipped and better trained.

That was a funny quote from Belgium. I have never heard it before. Turns out that they were kind of wrong.

I can understand why the Germans were mad at Serbia, but why France? And what the heck brought Britain into the war?

Everyone hates the French ... not sure why .

The only problem with this project is that you will have to wait next April until I write about Gallipoli and the heroic (tragic) story of the ANZACS and the Turks.

Next week will bring a little bit of the "Rape of Belgium" atrocities and Belgium's King Albert.

There are pages and pages of great stories I could write about the Great War but obviously I have to find ways to condense them to remain accurate and yet keep it readable. History has always been a passion of mine and I hope to demonstrate otherwise to those who think it is just boring dates and events.

I can understand why the Germans were mad at Serbia, but why France? And what the heck brought Britain into the war?

Perrie, actually the Germans couldn't have cared less about Serbia. The great German Chancellor had said many years earlier that "The Balkans weren't worth the bones of a single Pomeranian (region of Prussia) grenadier". It was Austria-Hungary that had the score to settle with the troublesome Serbians. The whole war was like a set of falling dominoes.

Germany gave the OK to Austria-Hungary to punish Serbia.

The Russians warned A-H they would protect their fellow Serbian Slavs.

Germany warned Russia that they would then fight with their ally, A-H.

Russia's binding treaty with France would bring the French into it.

The German war plans had no alternative but to attack France first, then deal with Russia. It was France who most welcomed the war with Germany to regain their two lost provinces and avenge their humiliating defeat in the Franco-Prussian War of 1870.

Britain was brought in as a matter of honor to uphold their 1839 Treaty guaranteeing Belgian neutrality in the event of being attacked.

The definitive book to read on the events leading up to the war is "The Guns of August" by Barbara Tuchman. It won the Pulitzer Prize and JFK credited it with advising him what not to do during the Cuban Missile Crisis. I've read it several times and it is certainly the best book to get a feel for the times and the fascinating characters in it.

I'm old pokermike, but I can wait till April. Well, I think that I can..

And the French Infantry, and the casualties that they suffered charging straight into heavy German fire. 27,000 dead in one day...Almost impossible to imagine.

As bad as that figure is, the British alone would take over twice that many casualties on the first day of the Battle of the Somme in July 1916. Most men were killed with 1 or 2 minutes of going "over the top" and never even saw a German soldier. The commanding British General, Douglas Haig, sent a report back to London that night saying the attack was going well and the men were in good spirits. That kind of insanity gives credence to the Germans that "The British fought like lions but were led by donkeys".

Kavika, I hope you can hang on until November 2018, and I hope to can keep your interest until then. Thanks for the encouragement.

No problem keeping my interest pokermike.

I'm a history nut.

Very interesting but I have to pass on reading it since I have recently purchased a book on WWI ( To End All Wars: A Story of Loyalty and Rebellion, 1914-1918 )and I have yet to get to it. But good idea to cover history in segments.

poker--

Good start, but give us more depth/detail, please. I realize this is a massive project and we're asking a lot, but you're gonna wind up dosing out more info in your comments anyhow, so just stick it into the main post. (Example: Perrie's question elicited relevant political background that might have been tucked into the original article.) Please don't feel you have to keep it 'condensed' for fear of burying people under too much information. For my part, some background on the Ottoman Empire would be particularly interesting, given how that collapse set the stage for developments in the Middle East. I'd like to see if I can turn up some maps for that period, to help provide some visual aid on the various players. If I turn up anything that looks worthwhile I'll send it your way...

Thanks and a big tip of the Swami's turban for taking on this massive task... I'm sure you're likely to regret it before you're anywhere near done!

Thanks for this excellent article about WWI. I've read several books about it, historical novels, mainly, that discuss the social changes that occurred because of it, and gleaned what I could while avoiding the dry books that sap the life out of any subject... Most of these were based on eye-witness accounts, as an example-- of the boats leaving Belgium, toward the coast, with the ashes of the burning city landing in their hair.

This makes me an interested observer, and nothing more... But, I am very interested in all you can tell me. Again, thank you!

Me, too! I love this stuff!

Thanks, pokermike-- I left a comment below!

Perrie, I thought that Britain, France, Belgium, and maybe Poland, were in treaties that said when one was attacked, they would all band together to fight off the attacker. That's what I thought, anyway...

Swami, thanks for the feedback. I was afraid that providing too many details would make it drawn out and boring for people with only a passing interest. Obviously, there is not enough space in this format to provide battle-by-battle descriptions except for the most important. In addition to the major political and military events, I am going to give descriptions every week of each of the combatant military forces along with a major personality in the war. When some weeks do not have much action (winter months decrease large military operations) I intend to cover trench warfare, the many technical innovations which changed warfare like poison gas, airplanes, tanks, submarines etc., shell shock, plastic surgery, the Middle East, the less well-known Eastern Front and much more. I'll cover the Ottoman Empire pretty thoroughly when they actually enter the War in December later this year.

Questions in the comments will be addressed as they come up and this site is perfect to have public conversations to discuss things. Everyone has different levels of knowledge about the War and misconceptions which I cannot anticipate.

If I see this through until the end, it will be over 220 weeks which should be plenty of time to address almost everything to some extent. Any suggestions for particular interests will be welcomed. It should be a hell of a ride.

Dowser, you are thinking of World War II when such treaties were in force. Before WW I there were only the two major groups bound by treaties like that. France and Russia had an 1894 treaty (Dual Alliance) requiring the other to come to the aid if attacked. In both cases the expected attacker would be Germany. Germany, Italy, Austria-Hungary had a similar treaty since 1882 (the Triple Alliance). At the outbreak of war, Italy declined to join her allies claiming it was a defensive treaty and they had not been attacked. Italy would actually join the Triple Entente (Britain, France, Russia) the next year against the Central Powers (Germany, Austria-Hungary, Turkey).

Britain would sign an agreement of cooperation with France in 1904 but it was not a binding pact to defend the other.

Belgium was actually required to remain perpetually neutral by the Treaty of London in 1839 which guaranteed her independence. It was signed by all the great European powers at the time. Germany did not exist yet, but was represented by the Hohenzollern King of Prussia.

There was no nation of Poland in 1914 and there hadn't been one since 1795. The former Poland was broken up among Russia, Austria-Hungary and Germany. It would not be until after the war that Poland would once again be reconstituted as an independent state.

Very very well done Mike. An excellent concept that is well executed. If you need any help, let me know. This was part of my period of interest in PG work.

Britain was brought in as a matter of honor to uphold their 1839 Treaty guaranteeing Belgian neutrality in the event of being attacked.

Mike,

I've always liked Tuchman's description of this and of the "understanding" between the British and French. Particularly good is her description of a meeting between General Robertson (Chief of the British General Staff) and his French opposite number, General Joffre. Robertson asked, "How many British soldiers would the French Government find useful in the event of war?" The French answer, "Just one, and we'll see to it that he is killed".

Another very good book, dealing with the last year of the war, in much the same way that Tuchman dealt with the first year, is No Man's Land by John Toland.

Thanks for fixing my confusion! That makes sense, now!

Australia vs the Turks :

Thank for the compliments. Obviously, this is the first of many installments and I appreciate all feedback and suggestions to improve the concept.

On June 28, a Serbian nationalist assassinated the heir to the Austrian-Hungarian crown along with his wife. The month of July was filled with threats, counter-threats, pleas and ultimatums before war finally began in August.

Archduke Franz Ferdinand. What a guy. According to 23 and me, I am a direct descendant of the Habsburg family on my dad's side - probably a bastard stable hand, more than likely. Marie Antoinette was a cousin. She was a Habsburg, not french. I have been watching out for Serbians since I learned that.

I'm glad I found this, Mike. Thanks for the e'mail.

I didn't know that about Churchill.

Glad you liked it Grump. Check out the second installment and let me know what you think.

Interesting that you have Hapsburgs in your background. They were very proficient at using marriage to gain more land and power. They even tried to install a Hapsburg as King of Mexico (until the Mexicans executed him). I hope you don't have the famous "Hapsburg lip". It was a congenital defect passed on from all the inbreeding.

ha ha. I know about the lip. According to family, my grandfather (dad's dad) looked just like Alfred Hitchcock. So, he had the lip, but my dad and I don't. Dang inbreeding.

Yeah, I've been in Maximilian's palace, Chapultepec Castle, in Mexico City - it's a museum now. At the time, I had no idea we were probably cousins. Lucky for me, I look nothing like his death mask.

No need to bow, folks.

Don't forget Wings, the very first Oscar winner for Best Picture in 1927. My two favorites are Paths of Glory with Kirk Douglas and All Quiet. I know I am in the minority, but I've always found Lawrence as too long and boring.

I agree with you about The Stunt Man. He was excellent in the flick, a very underrated one in my opinion. I thought O'Toole was even more outstanding in My Favorite Year, another gem.

There's a series of documentaries on YouTube. I've watched some of it. Here's the first installment.

If you're an O'Toole fan, be sure to check out The Ruling Class, an under-appreciated mastrpiece performance... (sorry for the off-topic, poker.)

Thanks Swami, I will watch it this evening. Don't worry about the off-topic, this is not one of those heated threads of back and forth arguing.