{[ promptMessage ]}

Bookmark it

{[ promptMessage ]}

Review2 - War the Nation-State Review Triple Entente vs...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
War & the Nation-State Review Triple Entente vs. Triple Alliance o The two major alliances of the first world war that made up the majority of the fighting and contained all the major players o Triple Entente made up of France, Russia and England France was declining in power and worried about a German rise Russia was a Slavic protector and was just beginning to industrialize England was the wealthiest nation of Europe and was the off-shore balancer o Triple Alliance was made up of Germany, Austria and Italy (initially) Germany is the most powerful player and primarily thought of as the instigator of the war Austria-Hungary was a pathetic military force with internal nationalism problems Italy switches sides in the end o SIG: The main interweaving alliances that are often blamed for facilitating the “Tragedy of Miscalculation” *“Tragedy of Miscalculation” o A theory for the outbreak of World War I that is based on accidents and misperceptions as causing the war o Theorizes that Germany was predicting a quick and decisive war, brought about by the Schleiffen Plan, because of offensive dominance and believing England would not get involved o Believes that rigid alliance structures and time sensitive battle plans forced the hands of many countries into an inadvertent war o Also led by a misperception of the “offensive” character of some technology (i.e. Machine Gun) – and civilian ignorance of the developing situations o SIG: Heightens warnings about the dangers of accidents and increased worry about misperceptions, especially timely during the Cold War, because of the fear of accidental Nuclear Launch (Dr. Strangelove) *Germany’s Two Front War o The problem facing Germany if war was to come about due to the alliance between France and Russia and the difficulty in fighting them simultaneously o The puzzle mulled over for many years by the German general staff, who finally decide on the “Schleiffen Plan” of a quick, decisive attack on France, relying on the slow mobilization of Russia o Calls for exceptional timing and planning and testing repeatedly over the course of time with intricate changes and ratios
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
o SIG: The rigid plans and extreme time crunch called for led to a heightening of tensions and a greater chance for miscalculation that eventually led to WWI *Schleiffen Plan o The offensive battle plan developed by the German general staff to deal with the issue of fighting a two front war o It included dealing a quick defeat of Paris by sending a bulk of the forces through Belgium and around behind Paris while the French were distracted at the Franco-German border Violating neutrality War with Great Britain 7:1 ratio of forces north to the front lines o This quick defeat of the French would allow the German’s to then fight the slow to mobilize Russians afterward o Lieber and others say that the Schleiffen plan is actually a political ploy,
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

{[ snackBarMessage ]}