Kaiser Wm II in color

poniatowski

Well-known member
Found this on the internet. Thought it was interesting:

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/f4/e1/65/f4e1654096948992b7e55de68e27e6f2.jpg" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

:D Ron
 
nice foto though
it is just so common that every one that was ever fotographed not one is with a little smile
looks like beeing at war is serious buisnes
but it gives a lotaly diffrent prespectif in details when it is in color rather than in black
great find on the web

jonas
 
He certainly did look every inch the "Emperor" and even more impressive in colour. Note the shorter arm hand is covered and the Foto is taken from his right side to further hide the deformity. The birth defect and all that it entailed certainly shaped his personality and was yet another factor in his war lord posturing which caused him and his nation to be blamed for WW1.
 
b.loree said:
He certainly did look every inch the "Emperor" and even more impressive in colour. Note the shorter arm hand is covered and the Foto is taken from his right side to further hide the deformity. The birth defect and all that it entailed certainly shaped his personality and was yet another factor in his war lord posturing which caused him and his nation to be blamed for WW1.

Yes, it's odd how few realize Austria's Prime Minister had a key roll in much of the start of the war. I think there was a time when Kaiser Wm. told his generals to recall the troops and they said 'It is too late for that Sire." Or something similar. Hell, if I were the Emperor, I'd have ridden out myself and issued orders and gone up and down the line sending them home... if I felt that way. Seriously, how difficult is it to issue orders, "Halt in place." ... "Return to station" or "Stand fast at all borders" ?

Ron
 
To my mind, both the Serbs and the Austrians were the primary culprits. However, I would put Austria as number one, the Serbs caved into all of the Austrian demands after the assassination but they still invaded. Then again, if the Kaiser had not given Germany's "ok" then, would the Austrians have been so aggressive?
 
b.loree said:
To my mind, both the Serbs and the Austrians were the primary culprits. However, I would put Austria as number one, the Serbs caved into all of the Austrian demands after the assassination but they still invaded. Then again, if the Kaiser had not given Germany's "ok" then, would the Austrians have been so aggressive?

This has been debated for more than 100 years now and will likely continue to be debated. I've read about a dozen books on the subject, and seen as many documentaries about it. I would recommend "37 Days," the BBC mini-series. That provides some excellent context to how things got so messed up.

My take is that Queen Victoria is indirectly responsible. She encouraged Willy to have an interest in the British Navy as a way to dissuade his Prussian Army interests, and all that did was convince him that he needed a navy to rival that of his uncle's/cousin's navy! That didn't work out for the British at all.

The Serbs are not blameless but Brian, I'd say you go to far to suggest they were the primary culprits. The government of Serbia probably had ties to the Black Hand, but the bigger issue was how the Serbian royalty were largely looked down by the other European royals, who saw the Serbian Princes and later Kings as upstarts. Unlike most other royals, the Serbian Princes were self-declared. For those who don't know there were two families: Karađorđević and the Obrenović, and neither had any real royal blood. The Karađorđević had the crown as Prince of Serbia first and then it went to the Obrenović, who orchestrated a coup in 1901, in which the Karađorđević family led by Peter I regained it. None of this really helped matters with the Austrians, and the Serbs were militants that wanted Bosnia as part of a Greater Serbia.

The Austrians probably wouldn't have done anything had the Germans not nudged them. Franz Josef was an old man who moved at his own speed and he was really a 19th century monarch in the 20th century. Had he died even a decade earlier the war might have been avoided, but he was urged on by his ministers and as I noted the Germans. I've read he was relieved when Franz Ferdinand died - and said that Sophie Chotek was his greatest cross to bear! This is a man who's brother was executed in Mexico, his son committed a murder/suicide with his teenage lover and whose wife was killed by an Italian anarchist (the anarchist wanted to basically kill any royal he could). Franz Josef lives with all that and felt his nephew's wife was his greatest cross to bear - that's telling. Of course it was always assumed that Karl (Charles) would be the heir after Franz Ferdinand, so I don't know what the problem was, but I am not an aging monarch in a dying nation.

So my feeling is that it still comes back to Willy. He's the one who gave the blank check, he's the one who failed to rope in his generals. He's the guy that started it and could have stopped it. Even as something as simple as not crossing the frontier to Belgium could have the war play out entirely differently.
 
badener said:
I think you all are letting the Russians and French off the hook.

I read an excellent book, The Russian Origins of the First World War, which highlights the fact that Imperial Russia was interested in a war with the Ottomans at all costs as a way to obtain Czargrad (Constantinople). I do believe the Russians and French helped push Europe towards war. The French certainly wanted redemption from 1871, and also feared Germany. Russia too feared Germany - so these fears pushed the two nations together.

Germany could still have avoided the war with France by just holding on the frontier. It was always expected that the French wouldn't and really couldn't invade deeply into Germany. If anything the French might have had to violate Belgian neutrality. That wouldn't have brought the British in the war on Germany's side, but the British could have remained neutral. I read a good book of alternative histories of WWI, and one suggests such an option. In this case the British occupy the channel ports as "peacekeepers" to keep the French and Germans out. The Russians are defeated at Tannenberg and the French and Germans get a reset instead of four years of trench warfare. I buy that such a scenario could have happened.

No European great power is off the hook, but if you look closely at the events Germany's strategy pushed Europe the hardest towards the war.
 
Back
Top