Germany, like all the other powers, was firmly wedded to the outdated concept that the offensive was the ultimate method of waging war, and taking any other course was somewhat beneath the dignity of a great power. There is a thread here that I worked on with Baltasar collecting different aspects of German spending from soon after the Franco-Prussian war to 1914 that offers a good perspective on what other options had been available.Slobodan Cekic wrote:It is an interesting point, of course , at which point in the German planning, the war as a possible option went over to war being the necessary solution, which only needs a final date. From the defence budget expenses it looks like it has been somewhere 1911/1912. How do you look at this, having in mind not the military expenses only but the political events as well?
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic. ... 3#p1593113
There is also a problem with the German financial system that I am not fully conversant with, but in a basic form the budget was locked into collecting a set figure from all the states comprising the German empire, and it would take some sort of renegotiation of the constitution to increase these contributions. This is why in 1912 the Germans could either increase their army or navy, but not both, and had to opt for ending the naval race with Britain for good. They had simply run out of money. The Prussian ruling class were rather against the idea of renegotiations with the other states as it was felt they may well demand a greater role at the expense of the Prussians, and in at least one account I have read it was suggested there was a feeling they may well demand that Wilhelm relinquished the position of Kaiser as there was so much dissatisfaction at how Wilhelm had backed away in several crisies, so the other states may had asked for a kaiser from amongst their ranks, or more likely in my opinion, forced Wilhelm to abdicate in favour of the Crown Prince who was far more in favour of war and at the time perceived as the greatest threat to Britain, France, and Russia. At the outbreak of the war he was seen as the major villain by the British, and it was only later the Kaiser himself was demonised more.
I think Russia was always going to undergo some drastic form os dissruption at some point as the people were no longer willing to be treated as they were by their rulers, but the form this change would take could take many forms. Sadly the idiots in charge managed to expertly pick a way to rule that almost ensured the worst possible outcome for the Russian people. Even without Rasputin, the Tzar and Tzarina were a terrible mix given the circumstances, it was rather like putting two dysfunctional chimpanzees in charge of the moon landings.Slobodan Cekic wrote:Now, could Alexander II, if he was to live longer, really avert some very turbulent and painful events in the Russian history, or were the weights to be moved, as the 'Rubber history' theory could suggest, too much for a single person in a single lifetime? Well, that is not a question I am going to even try answering ..