TThe effect of Article 231, is that Germany takes full responsibility for the War, even including the actions of its allies, Austria-Hungary, and Italy before it switched sides. I feel as if all the other countries needed to hear Germany admit that it was their fault in order to regain peace in Europe.
I think Article 231 is totally justified by German guilt. "Through rapacious and godless atrocities which served solely to reveal and further confirm the nature of the German enterprise as a whole." (pg. 50) The reading states that the belief in German guilt and responsibility for a war by the majority of countries leaves them responsible. Germany really started most of the fighting, and were the first to declare war. Germany invaded Belgium to get to France, which was so unnecessary, but they wanted to spark even more conflict and drag more countries into the war, such as Great Britain. On top of invading Belgium, Germany also used submarine warfare, a "military tactic unforseen in previous agreements on the rights of peoples." (pg. 51) Although the British put up the blockade, and as devastating as that was, the submarine warfare was far more distructive. "struck friend and enemy alike." (pg. 51)
The effect of this Article is the admittance by Germany of basically causing the war, or taking responsibility for all negative consequences of the war within their opposing countries. An Article like this seems like something done more for the peace-of mind of a country and it's citizens than anything else, however this was probably needed as Maddy said, to help regain peace in Europe. I think it's definitely justified, for all the reasons Maddy said, they first entered the war, they broke treaties, disregarded other countries treaties, created alliances with known intentions, would often not back down in fights due to pride. Totally justified.
Joined: 27 Mar 2012 Posts: 7 Location: United States
Posted: Tue Apr 03, 2012 7:39 pm Post subject:
This Article basically proved to be the "War Guild Cause" and it was a clause that held Germany fully responsible for World War 1, which is acceptable. Germany was a very proud nation that was a global superpower. They went searching for the war themselves. Attacking Belgium and France wasn't necessary but they still forced the assault which allows all the Allies to put the blame onto them.
This article was totally justifiable because Germany disrupted Europe and the World with their power. As a nation it needed the Triple Alliance to defeat them but they should not have provoked Europe into starting another war.
I also believe that Germany should pay reparations to all countries that it assaulted especially France and Belgium as they didn't suffered from a war that they didn't want to be a part of. _________________ Manveer Singh
Article as previously stated by other people is basically a clause that is blaming World War I on Germany. The effect it had lasted a very long time, and along with National Guilt of World War II, still exists to this day. The reprecusions of article 231 were basically to keep Germany down, the stigma that Germany aquired from their massive amounts of blame and punishments kept other countries from getting too close. As seen in the U. S. where , "they were persuaded of the intimate relationship of this German crime against culture... every attempt at German self-defense ... was kept from America" (50). I would say at the time the article was justified by German guilt, because Germany did know that they had made a few major mistakes and needed to be humble and acknowledge their crimes in order to ever be accepted by the rest of the world.
I agree with what both Maddy and Ellery said. Making Germany take responsibility for the war is what the rest of Europe needed at the time. Spirits were so low after the war, so they were looking for a scapegoat. Germany was the logical one for all of the reasons that Maddy mentioned and was seen by many as the instigator as WWI.
Having said that, thinking back to the debate we had today, this idea that Germany should take on all the guilt and blame is a little less black and white than that. Germany made a case today that Austria-Hungary was their partner in crime in this war, hence they should share the blame. Also, what good is it to point fingers after the war is over? Germany is in fact struggling, economically and otherwise, as much as if not more than the other countries. They may have played a huge part in the war, but they certainly did not have their share of losses and they are quite literally on the losing side. Is that punishment enough?
Unfortune for Germany, Germany had no choic but to take whole responsibility for causing World War 1. Some nation or nations should take whole responsibility for causing the war anyways, since Germany was a major reason why WW1 broke out, Germany should be responsible to it. In p.50, it says Treaty of Versailles was possible because of the formal German declaration of war and its invasion of neutral Belgium, thus making Germany exclusively responsible for the war. If Germany did not attack neutral nations, then they could have avoided whole responsibility of it. Also, Germany's destruction of actions were respresented as criminal. As an example, the author mentioned Germanu submarine warfare which represents destruction of goods and people. It can be considered as a strategic decision of world destroying proportions p.51
"As you sow so shall you reap"
As many have said before me, Article 232 basically forces Germany to accept full responsability for the war and that they understand that Germany also suffered some losses to a degree, so they would have reparations for it, but they had to own up to their guilt. I understand that Germany should take some responsability for the war, that much is true. However, the entirety of the treaty basically not only blames Germany, but strips her of all of her powers, leaving her helpless and no longer the most powerful, and expected to compensate for it to the other countries. And this was all to make the other countries feel safer about associating with Germany. I feel that it was no longer based on valid reason for the war, but everyone needed someone to blame for everything that happened to Europe. Germany may have overstepped their boundaries in terms of power and support of Austria-Hungary, but had A-H had a military and economy strong enough, they definitely would have attacked Serbia after the assassination without question. Then Russia maybe would've come to Serbia's aid. And what had happened would've mostly remained unchanged. Europe needed a scapegoat and they had Germany. The solution was simple, blame Germany and move on so we can feel good about ourselves again.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
