Home > Discussion Groups > World War I and 1920s + 1930s

Message posting guidelines:

Full real names must be used at all times.

A valid e-mail address must be provided. (This is not optional)
Images must be posted at low resolution (72 dpi) and no larger than 760 pixels wide, and copyright/trade mark owners must be credited whenever reasonably possible.
4. From 20 April, registration is compulsory if you wish to post messages on the Discussion Groups. For further information, please see the following message: http://www.network54.com/Forum/message?forumid=282066&messageid=1113823087
Please read our Community guidelines before posting.
By contributing to this discussion group, you indicate your agreement to the Terms and Conditions of Use.
Posts that violate the guidelines or Terms and conditions of Use of the Missing-lynx.com discussion groups will be erased, and repeated violation of this policy may result in termination of the violator's account.

 Return to Index  

More to it than that

March 15 2004 at 2:58 AM
David Maynard  (no login)
from IP address

Response to Im curious what you think.

Britain was a signatory of a treaty guaranteeing Belgian neutrality, which was of course violated by the German invasion. We didn't need any atrocity stories to get involved. The Belgians were also entitled to defend their country against aggression. In addition, Belgian independence would undoubtedly have disappeared in the event of a German victory.

The German policy of reprisals was not ad hoc, it already existed, and grew out of their experience of franc tireurs after the Franco-Prussian wars. Some of the civilian killing undoubtedly took place after blue on blue incidents, which are inevitable in the chaos of war. Which hardly justifies killing over 500 people at Dinant, for instance.

British involvement in the First World War was inevitable as staying out would leave the Germans in a better position to defeat the French. And then left Britain alone in the face of single continental super power.

 Respond to this message   

  1. True. - Vil Elliott on Mar 15, 2004, 3:10 AM
    1. Strategic question... - gilles Thomas on Mar 15, 2004, 4:43 AM
    2. Entangling Alliances - mike foncannon on Mar 17, 2004, 6:07 PM
  2. Not enough - Mario Wens on Jul 12, 2004, 7:54 AM

Terms and Conditions of Use
Report abuse