I thank and commend you for your personal efforts to bring some historical sanity to the madness. But this is hardly an isolated case, is it? We are going around the same bouys again and again: bouys defined as subjects and topics as well as poster issues. The problem is not a one-off that needs some special attention, it's a problem infecting the entire board. And this section, under your moderation, seems to be about the only one where a proactive defence of historical reality is being implemented. All the other parts I visit there is no moderation of the historical discussion at all. Indeed, I get the impression that anything goes is not just tolerated, it's encouraged! If that's what's desired, then so be it. If it's not, then somebody ought to get a grip. It seems to me the question for senior site management is not whether post X and Y contain insufficient evidence or historical reality to justify not being culled, but whether AHF is to be promoted as a serious/genuine site for historical research and learning or whether it is just another site for random historical and ahistorical gossip, agenda pushing and deliberate trolling.Terry Duncan wrote: ↑15 Mar 2019, 14:45I am generally happy to allow people to push any view of events they want as long as they support it with some sort of evidence. When they become repetitive or refuse to provide sources when requested, I will usually either remove offending posts or call in senior staff to decide what actions to take. As I frequently take part in discussions the latter is the fairest way to resolve serious problems as it removes the ability of people to claim I use authority to suppress alternative views. At present ljadw is seemingly doing his level best to discredit his own arguments so it can serve as a good illustration of a poorly thought out idea whilst at the same time giving some factual coverage of events. With the forum not being overly busy at present, it is useful to allow such activities for a short time to see if they produce anything new, but we are getting close to the point where I will ask senior staff to look over things and consider if any action needs to be taken. The lack of supporting evidence is of most concern.
Germany's handling of the July crisis.
Re: Germany's handling of the July crisis.
Re: Germany's handling of the July crisis.
Poincare was no warmonger and there is no actual evidence he incited Russia to war against Germany.
"The secret of managing is to keep the guys who hate you away from the guys who are undecided." - Casey Stengel
Re: Germany's handling of the July crisis.
The fact that France wanted peace is not at odds with the fact that France would comply with its alliance obligations.ljadw wrote: ↑15 Mar 2019, 11:52And their opinion is debunked by the main French player of 1914, a man who dominated French politics and could at a whimp cause the fall of the government = Jaures .Don71 wrote: ↑15 Mar 2019, 11:01Gerd Krumeich who is definitely not a man from Anglo-Saxon countries and the Vice President of the Comité Directeur du Centre de Recherche de l’Historial de la Grande Guerre at France says absolut the same about Poincaré even worse what Terry mentioned and is fully in agreement with Albertini, Strachan, Clark, Rohl, Joll, Mombauer, Tuchman, Lieven, Fromkin,Stevenson, Herwig!French historians agree that the Grévy constitution reduced the power of the executive branch ( president of the council and especially president of the republic ) to the benefit of the legislative branch = chamber and senate .
That people from Anglo-Saxon countries can not admit this , for cultural reasons, is not my business .
A few days before he was shot , Jaures said that the French government wanted peace and was looking for peace and advised patience and caution to Russia . Jaures was an implacable enemy of the alliance with Russia and of the Russian regime .He said : the French government, not Poincaré,because Poincaré was not a member of the government, he did not mention Viviani, because the French government was a collectiv without leader,dependent for its survival on the caprices of parliament .
Jaures.''leader '' of the socalists who were the enemies of all French governments, praised the French government, which proves that France wanted peace.He did not mention Poincaré or Viviani who were quantité negligeable.
Besides, there is no proof that any other country, Britain, Russia, Austria, Germany , was aligning its policy on what was saying a French politician .
The official French policy was not what was saying Poincaré, Poincaré did not determine French foreign policy,he repeated what was the French position .And the French position remained what it was since the alliance with Russia was signed : France would use Russia for its benefit ,and its benefit was a war between Russia and Germany, not a war between Russia, France and Germany .
Everyone knew what France wanted : the statu quo . Everyone knew what Germany wanted : a change of the statu quo .
"The secret of managing is to keep the guys who hate you away from the guys who are undecided." - Casey Stengel
Re: Germany's handling of the July crisis.
Where is Johnny Mac when you need him... oh here we go:
Last edited by The Ibis on 15 Mar 2019, 17:43, edited 1 time in total.
"The secret of managing is to keep the guys who hate you away from the guys who are undecided." - Casey Stengel
Re: Germany's handling of the July crisis.
I was talking to a friend last week who was telling me about recently attending a Fleetwood Mac concert. Reading this thread reminded me of the conversation.
"The secret of managing is to keep the guys who hate you away from the guys who are undecided." - Casey Stengel
Re: Germany's handling of the July crisis.
He did exactly that both after McMeekin and Clark, he was the initiator and booster of the arms race since 1911, he was one of the initiators of lending money to Russia for economically total useless, but militarily strategically important railway lines, he supported Russia in 1912 and in 1913 with the Balkan League, which was obviously against the central powers and on his visit in July 1914 at St. Petersburg he gave the Russians a blank check to mobilize their troops also against Germany.
Re: Germany's handling of the July crisis.
We really don't know what Poincare said during the St. Peterburg visit, although we can surmise he committed to support the alliance and supported a firm line. None of the things you mention make him a warmonger. Poincare-la-guerre was disproven and neither Clark nor McMeekin brought anything new to the table to revise that.Don71 wrote: ↑15 Mar 2019, 17:23He did exactly that both after McMeekin and Clark, he was the initiator and booster of the arms race since 1911, he was one of the initiators of lending money to Russia for economically total useless, but militarily strategically important railway lines, he supported Russia in 1912 and in 1913 with the Balkan League, which was obviously against the central powers and on his visit in July 1914 at St. Petersburg he gave the Russians a blank check to mobilize their troops also against Germany.
"The secret of managing is to keep the guys who hate you away from the guys who are undecided." - Casey Stengel
Re: Germany's handling of the July crisis.
Who proved that Pointcare was not a warmonger?
The opinions of the historians go there very far apart and all express opinions and interpretations of the available sources, solid evidence there is neither on one side nor on the other side!
You may think Pointcare was not a warmonger, but that is far from being a fact, just as I can not prove with ultimate certainty that he was a warmonger, but I agree with the opinion of many historians, that he was a warmonger, as you do the oposite!
But you have no real facts on hand to say he was no warmonger, it is just an opinion and interpretation of the the available sources!
The opinions of the historians go there very far apart and all express opinions and interpretations of the available sources, solid evidence there is neither on one side nor on the other side!
You may think Pointcare was not a warmonger, but that is far from being a fact, just as I can not prove with ultimate certainty that he was a warmonger, but I agree with the opinion of many historians, that he was a warmonger, as you do the oposite!
But you have no real facts on hand to say he was no warmonger, it is just an opinion and interpretation of the the available sources!
Re: Germany's handling of the July crisis.
This is debunked that on August 1 1914 ( German DOW ) France abandoned its ally Russia, as it did in 1908 and during the Limam von Sanders crisis .Before the German DOW France advised Russia to do nothing that could give Germany a pretyext to declare war, because France knew that since 10 years Germany was looking for an occasion to declare war on Russia and to have a DOW from FranceThe Ibis wrote: ↑15 Mar 2019, 16:55The fact that France wanted peace is not at odds with the fact that France would comply with its alliance obligations.ljadw wrote: ↑15 Mar 2019, 11:52And their opinion is debunked by the main French player of 1914, a man who dominated French politics and could at a whimp cause the fall of the government = Jaures .Don71 wrote: ↑15 Mar 2019, 11:01Gerd Krumeich who is definitely not a man from Anglo-Saxon countries and the Vice President of the Comité Directeur du Centre de Recherche de l’Historial de la Grande Guerre at France says absolut the same about Poincaré even worse what Terry mentioned and is fully in agreement with Albertini, Strachan, Clark, Rohl, Joll, Mombauer, Tuchman, Lieven, Fromkin,Stevenson, Herwig!French historians agree that the Grévy constitution reduced the power of the executive branch ( president of the council and especially president of the republic ) to the benefit of the legislative branch = chamber and senate .
That people from Anglo-Saxon countries can not admit this , for cultural reasons, is not my business .
A few days before he was shot , Jaures said that the French government wanted peace and was looking for peace and advised patience and caution to Russia . Jaures was an implacable enemy of the alliance with Russia and of the Russian regime .He said : the French government, not Poincaré,because Poincaré was not a member of the government, he did not mention Viviani, because the French government was a collectiv without leader,dependent for its survival on the caprices of parliament .
Jaures.''leader '' of the socalists who were the enemies of all French governments, praised the French government, which proves that France wanted peace.He did not mention Poincaré or Viviani who were quantité negligeable.
Besides, there is no proof that any other country, Britain, Russia, Austria, Germany , was aligning its policy on what was saying a French politician .
The official French policy was not what was saying Poincaré, Poincaré did not determine French foreign policy,he repeated what was the French position .And the French position remained what it was since the alliance with Russia was signed : France would use Russia for its benefit ,and its benefit was a war between Russia and Germany, not a war between Russia, France and Germany .
Everyone knew what France wanted : the statu quo . Everyone knew what Germany wanted : a change of the statu quo .
Re: Germany's handling of the July crisis.
No : Poincaré agreed with Viviani, not Viviani who agreed with Poincaré. Poincaré agreed with his superior ,Viviani was a member of parliament and parliament had elected Poincaré .The opinion of Poincaré was not important : see the law priding the income tx and the Treaty of Versailles .Two examples where the opposition of Poincaré failed .Terry Duncan wrote: ↑15 Mar 2019, 14:29Well done. You have disproved your own argument before you even laid it out. As 'facepalms' go, this is pretty epic.
And even in 1946 the power of the French president was meaningless : De Gaulle resigned in January 1946 because his power as president was the power of someone who was subordinated to parliament and government .
The foreign secretary sent a telegram to Russia, and the president agreed .Why did Poincaré agree ? Simply :because Viviani asked for his opinion , something he was not obliged to do .
Fromkin said not : the president sent a telegram to Russia and the foreign secretary agreed .
Who in Britain is sending telegrams to Juncker ?The queen or the concerned minister ?
Re: Germany's handling of the July crisis.
France abandoned Russia as ally with a general mobilization on August 1. at 15.55 before the german general mobilization?This is debunked that on August 1 1914 ( German DOW ) France abandoned its ally Russia, as it did in 1908 and during the Limam von Sanders crisis .Before the German DOW France advised Russia to do nothing that could give Germany a pretyext to declare war, because France knew that since 10 years Germany was looking for an occasion to declare war on Russia and to have a DOW from France
Realy?
This claim is nonsense!
Re: Germany's handling of the July crisis.
The "Poincare-la-guerre" political attacks at home made Poincare an easy target for the writers in the 1920s and 1930s looking to absolve Germany. I assume you are aware of the historians who revised that judgment over the next 70 years (Keiger most prominently). Clark and McMeekin were, consciously or not, trying to turn back the clock, but didn't bring anything new to the table. So, too Stefan Schmidt, who might well have spent more time in the French archives than either. But even Schmidt wrote in Frankreichs Außenpolitik in der Julikrise 1914: "Mit seiner Politik der fermeté trieb Poincaré folglich nicht zum Krieg,..." although Schmidt believes Poincare was willing to risk it: "nahm aber doch ganz bewußt ein sehr hohes Risiko in Kauf."*Don71 wrote: ↑15 Mar 2019, 19:56Who proved that Pointcare was not a warmonger?
The opinions of the historians go there very far apart and all express opinions and interpretations of the available sources, solid evidence there is neither on one side nor on the other side!
You may think Pointcare was not a warmonger, but that is far from being a fact, just as I can not prove with ultimate certainty that he was a warmonger, but I agree with the opinion of many historians, that he was a warmonger, as you do the oposite!
But you have no real facts on hand to say he was no warmonger, it is just an opinion and interpretation of the the available sources!
Anyway, as Dalton said in Roadhouse:
*My knowledge of German is very poor but Google Translate is my friend.
"The secret of managing is to keep the guys who hate you away from the guys who are undecided." - Casey Stengel
Re: Germany's handling of the July crisis.
Interesting, then, that Fromkin wrote of "Poincare's policy," rather than "Viviani's policy" or "even the French government's policy" when describing the Franco-Russian talks in July.ljadw wrote: ↑15 Mar 2019, 20:32No : Poincaré agreed with Viviani, not Viviani who agreed with Poincaré. Poincaré agreed with his superior ,Viviani was a member of parliament and parliament had elected Poincaré .The opinion of Poincaré was not important : see the law priding the income tx and the Treaty of Versailles .Two examples where the opposition of Poincaré failed .Terry Duncan wrote: ↑15 Mar 2019, 14:29Well done. You have disproved your own argument before you even laid it out. As 'facepalms' go, this is pretty epic.
And even in 1946 the power of the French president was meaningless : De Gaulle resigned in January 1946 because his power as president was the power of someone who was subordinated to parliament and government .
The foreign secretary sent a telegram to Russia, and the president agreed .Why did Poincaré agree ? Simply :because Viviani asked for his opinion , something he was not obliged to do .
Fromkin said not : the president sent a telegram to Russia and the foreign secretary agreed .
Who in Britain is sending telegrams to Juncker ?The queen or the concerned minister ?
"The secret of managing is to keep the guys who hate you away from the guys who are undecided." - Casey Stengel
Re: Germany's handling of the July crisis.
There was no French mobilisation on August 1 .The French mobilisation started on August 3,the first day of the mobilisation was August 2 , but as this was a Sunday, the mobilisation started on August 3 .Besides, the French mobilisation did not help Russia, because it was not a threat to Germany .Don71 wrote: ↑15 Mar 2019, 20:38France abandoned Russia as ally with a general mobilization on August 1. at 15.55 before the german general mobilization?This is debunked that on August 1 1914 ( German DOW ) France abandoned its ally Russia, as it did in 1908 and during the Limam von Sanders crisis .Before the German DOW France advised Russia to do nothing that could give Germany a pretext to declare war, because France knew that since 10 years Germany was looking for an occasion to declare war on Russia and to have a DOW from France
Realy?
This claim is nonsense!
And the German mobilisation started before the French one .And on August 1 and 2 Germany invaded Luxemburg .
Re: Germany's handling of the July crisis.
François Roth in ''Poincaré ': Poincaré a toujours respecté scrupuleusement la Constitution Grévy .The Ibis wrote: ↑15 Mar 2019, 21:14Interesting, then, that Fromkin wrote of "Poincare's policy," rather than "Viviani's policy" or "even the French government's policy" when describing the Franco-Russian talks in July.ljadw wrote: ↑15 Mar 2019, 20:32No : Poincaré agreed with Viviani, not Viviani who agreed with Poincaré. Poincaré agreed with his superior ,Viviani was a member of parliament and parliament had elected Poincaré .The opinion of Poincaré was not important : see the law priding the income tx and the Treaty of Versailles .Two examples where the opposition of Poincaré failed .Terry Duncan wrote: ↑15 Mar 2019, 14:29Well done. You have disproved your own argument before you even laid it out. As 'facepalms' go, this is pretty epic.
And even in 1946 the power of the French president was meaningless : De Gaulle resigned in January 1946 because his power as president was the power of someone who was subordinated to parliament and government .
The foreign secretary sent a telegram to Russia, and the president agreed .Why did Poincaré agree ? Simply :because Viviani asked for his opinion , something he was not obliged to do .
Fromkin said not : the president sent a telegram to Russia and the foreign secretary agreed .
Who in Britain is sending telegrams to Juncker ?The queen or the concerned minister ?
Poincaré has always respected scrupulously the Constitution Grévy .
This constitution has created in France a ''Régime d'Assemblée ''where the executive power was subordinated to parliament ; there were til 1940 106 governments in France ,all dependent on the caprices of parliament and in this regime any political role for the president was excluded .