I NEED SOME HELP IN UNDERSTANDING GERMANS.

Stasia, some info, with a cool Blackadder reference too:

In Blackadder Goes Forth, Baldrick opined that the war began when 'Archie Duke shot an ostrich because he was hungry'. His garbled version of the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria-Hungary reflects popular opinion: that the issues were not worth the ensuing bloodbath. Most modern scholars would not agree. Germany and Austria-Hungary (the Central Powers) are seen, at the very least, as creating the conditions for conflict. Some go much further, blaming Germany for planning and waging a deliberate war of aggression.

'Europe was divided into two armed camps: the Entente Powers and the Central Powers...'
Under Kaiser Wilhelm II, Germany moved from a policy of maintaining the status quo to a more aggressive stance. He decided against renewing a treaty with Russia, effectively opting for the Austrian alliance. Germany's western and eastern neighbours, France and Russia, signed an alliance in 1894 united by fear and resentment of Berlin. In 1898, Germany began to build up its navy, although this could only alarm the world's most powerful maritime nation, Britain. Recognising a major threat to her security, Britain abandoned the policy of holding aloof from entanglements with continental powers. Within ten years, Britain had concluded agreements, albeit limited, with her two major colonial rivals, France and Russia. Europe was divided into two armed camps: the Entente Powers and the Central Powers, and their populations began to see war not merely as inevitable but even welcome.

In the summer of 1914 the Germans were prepared, at the very least, to run the risk of causing a large-scale war. The crumbling Austro-Hungarian Empire decided, after the assassination on 28 June, to take action against Serbia, which was suspected of being behind the murder. The German government issued the so-called 'blank cheque' on 5-6 July, offering unconditional support to the Austrians, despite the risk of war with Russia. Germany, painted into a diplomatic corner by Wilhelm's bellicosity, saw this as a way of breaking up the Entente, for France and Britain might refuse to support Russia. Moreover, a wish to unite the nation behind the government may have been a motive. So might desire to strike against Russia before it had finished rebuilding its military strength after its defeat by Japan in 1905.

Thanks, cav! <smiles>

Setanta, thanks, I was just about to say that, and you saved me the trouble of writing it.

I liked the detail about the indians, always a favourite subject of mine. I am too old to learn to call them Native Americans, and Amerinds serves nicely.

I'm not going to get too exercised about henrygreen, but I think his stuff would sit better in a dedicated thread.

McT

Mapleleaf, i'd be interested to know: when you began this and the Frenchmen thread, did you have any idea of the scope of the eventual outcome?

What name should such a thread bear? An exercise in haterd toward the USA? IMO, moderators could have pondered about relevance of Mr. Green's participation.

McTag, there is a work which you might be able to find in two volumes which could prove of interest to you. It is quite readable, entertaining, in fact. This is Francis Parkman's seven volume history of the French in North America. When reading this, keep in mind that he was a typical 19th century man, and considered the Amerinds to be filthy savages. This is one of those inexplicable, but common historical contradictions, because he had travelled the Oregon trail just after leaving university, and probably had more direct experience of the aboriginal natives than any other historian writing in America in that century. The writing style is quite lively, and should be read with salt cellar to hand--there is, for example an hilarious description of the wittily wicked Frederick II precipitating a European war through his insulting remarks about three women: la Maquise de Pompador, the effective manager of Louis XV's government, Maria Theresa and the Empress Elizabeth of Russia. Of course, there was a great deal more than that involved, but the passage is quite entertaining. I think you'd like it.

steissd, henrygreen is a agry person who brings another side to the debates about the US. He is free to express his anger just as long as he refrains from personal attacks. I don't always agree with him, but I can respect his ideas expressed in whatever manner he feels the need - as long as he stays on subject. c.i.

Having dismissed my remarks as psychotic, sentana goes about a lengthy, multi-post effort to rebut them. He takes a long time to get started--at least 3/4ths of his opening gambit is totally hollow invective. The remainder of his historical reconaissance is accurate enough, though it willfully distorts the points I made.

I never insisted Germany was the most creative country on earth--only that their achievements in literature, science, philosophy and music leave the dreadful United States completely and utterly in the shade.

The cottage industry in germany-bashing for the sins of the holocaust does INDEED continue apace while the repulsive leadership of the American Nazi state glorifies our bloodbath in indochina to this day.

While the Germans have paid billions in restitution to their victims, the United States laughs at its victims of murder and orchestrated torture, refusing so much as an apology for the millions incinerated in Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos (let alone Chile, Nicaragua, Honduras, el salvador, Iran, Afghanistan, Iraq, etc), or the Africans it kept shackled together in order to build this ludicrous and debased country.

There are monuments to the war resistance in every city in germany. Such a thing would be unthinkable in our own militarized pigsty where those refusing participation in our slaughter of the "gooks" are still considered criminals. Reagan referred to Vietnam as "a noble cause" The equivalent would be gerhard schroder calling Auschwitz "a fine idea" --pretty unthinkable, if you ask me.

The main difference between the German Nazis and the American Nazis is that the former faced credible opposition to their tyranny which in fact, defeated them in the end. No such opposition exists today to check the bloody progress of "the last remaining superpower." The implications of this are obvious to anyone following the news.

Setana,
No, I had no idea what direction this interaction would take. However, after being a participant on Abuzz, I understand how wide open threads can be in a free society. If those of you who disagree with henrygreen would interact with one another and not him, we could move on to other things. Then again, if you feel he has broken the guidelines of A2K, you should contact Jes or Craven.

It is unfortunate that such ill will has been stirred by mere words. Still, it reminds us of the power of language, be it good or ill.

Many in this country are unawares, but the Germans introduced education and music to this country. All cultures have strengths and weaknesses in our history; nit-picking one or two generations doesn't do it justice. c.i.

If I remember well, President Dwight D. Eisenhower was of German origin.

Action has been taken against member henrygreen for violating Section III B of the Terms of Service. We take threats of physical harm very seriously. Thank you to all who reported this user's comments.

By the most recent data of which i have heard, the Germans now represent the largest single immigrant group in the United States. The Germans in Pennsylvania at the time of the French and Indian War (1754--1763), were from pacifist traditions, and would not fight. By contrast, the Germans in Missouri in 1861, lead by the charismatic Franz Sigel, moved quickly to secure the Federal Arsenal in St. Louis, a hot-bed of Confederate sympathy. Later, although Sigel ruined his own career eventually, he served faithfully as a brigade and then division commander, and German soldiers in the Federal armies would proudly say: "I fights mit Sigel!" During the first world war, the National Guard from Wisconsin contained so many Americans born in Germany, or raised by their immigrant parents in German-speaking households, that they were able to wreak havoc by calling out to Germans during firefights, or by speaking German "in code" on American telephone lines, which were being tapped by the Germans. At one point, one of their battalions formed up in column and marched into the German lines singing favorite German marching songs, and were ignored until it was too late--they managed to capture a German regimental headquarters and hundreds of troops.

Of course, i am criminally remiss in not noticing the cultural contribution of Germans in America, but that's one of my more glaringly obvious faults. I just wanted to take notice that Germans in our history have been different kinds of citizens, and have all made their contributions.

My thanks to all of you for our transition through the henrygreen situation. As I say to my wife, and she to me, you did good.

I need to reread this thread. Probably, with the history site in one window and this thread on the other. Lots to integrate into my increasingly befuddled mind.

Maple, it will help you to understand the thread better if you skip over my posts

Hey, I feel a bit sorry for Henry now. What was that about physical threats? I wasn't aware of any.
He obviously believed in what he was saying, however unpalatable his views, and his way of presenting them.

He said that one of our members should be taken out and shot . . . at any event, that's the post i believe got him canned . . .

That would do it...good riddance.

I didn't interpret it as a direct threat. Henry was talking about a member of the forum with whom he disagreed. The guy is an Iraq war vet who just returned minus two fingers. Henry wrote: "Frankly, a bullet is too good for such a person." Direct or indirect, such a comment is clearly over the line in my book. I'm glad the moderator called him on it.

ci - how did the germans introduce education to america?

stasia