Thread 17892679

Did the German Army collapse at the end of WWI?
What did that look like?

>>17892679 (OP)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cT55nlOZCrA

>>17892679 (OP)
They didnt. They were ordered to surrender by the tracherous leftists (many of them jewish) that couped the imperial goverment, far from the trenches

>>17892679 (OP)
they were starting to which can be seen with increasing numbers of german soldiers surrendering in the wake of Entente advances, it was even worse in the east were militias in Poland were simply able to just walk around and claim land without much of a fight from the local german garrisions

>>17892684
Who are these Jews? No, Rosa Luxemburg doesn't count.

>>17892729
> Who are these Jews? No, a Jew doesn't count.

>>17892679 (OP)
It didn't collapse, there was still shooting up until the ceasefire deadline (I think some of which anecdotally was return fire from German forces who had mistaken allied celebratory shooting for a break in the truce).

Mass desertions
Mass retreats
Generals leaving their posts
Revolution
Insurgency
Starvation
Government abdicating
Alllied states collapsing

>>17892684
>Kaiser literally had to run away to another country because he knew his own troops might lynch his ass
>Sailors already assassinated their officers and were seizing guns
>"Nnnnoooo the army was still holding strong!!'

>>17892679 (OP)
Mass desertions and mutiny basically. The sailor's uprising in Kiel is already well know, but by November in the army you also already had plenty of officers telling the High Command that the troops could no longer be trusted to carry out orders and that a revolution was boiling up

>>17892894
The generals (who had basically coup'ed the government during the war) simply abandoned their posts so they wouldnt be held accountable for the surrender, leaving the hardest job to the politicians, so they could later whine and bitch about it.
The whole "undefeated in battle" myth was created by Ludendorff to make himself look good.

The Germans initially wanted to surrender only to the Americans, because Wilsons 14-points offered the best deal for Germany (Germany would possibly even gain land).
France and Britain freaked out and refused the surrender unless Germany surrendered to the allies as a whole. It was a major reason why Britain and France were quick to accept the German armistice, because if they waited longer and continued to push into Germany (which they absolutely could), it would also mean that the victory would increasingly be owed to the Americans (they were still a relatively small force but growing rapidly and had huge battlefield success), giving the US greater negotiation power in a surrender, making it more likely Germany gets a better deal.

So in a way, the stab in the back myth is also due to the allied rivalry amongst themselves. Had they been more unified in their ambitions, they may have outright refused any terms other than unconditional surrender, and continue to push. The Germans were in full retreat anyway so it wasnt as if it was a problem.

>>17892679 (OP)
I thought a flu pandemic played a major role in the end of WW1 everybody got sick and could not fight anymore plus enough people got suck that they could not work building butters & bombs & etc...

>>17892679 (OP)
>>17892684
like other anons already said, people were going to starve that winter and there would have been a full out mutiny/revolution
Ludendorf and Hindenburg both went to the kaiser week before and directly told him the front would collapse before december

>>17893245
Germans were starving by their thousands even in 1916.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turnip_Winter

By 1918 children in Germany were walking around with a swollen belly like you see in Africa.

>>17892684
t. stab in the back myth

>>17892739
Rosa Luxemburg wasn't in the government.

>>17892679 (OP)
Army didn't collapse, government lacked resourses to continue because some (((bankers))) refused to lend more money.

>>17892684
>>>/pol/

>>17892679 (OP)
>What did that look like?
The impending dread amongst the soldiers in the front that knowing the moment the food and ammo runs out, you're going to get overrun and outgunned. No effective way to fight back. Morale rock-bottom. You absolutely despise the key decision makers at the top who got you into this sorry mess to begin with. The only real thing preventing the Allies from assaulting is that they're massing their forces and material and waiting for ideal weather/winds.

I think you're under the impression that the German Army was decisively crushed and then surrendered, when in reality the Germany government negotiated a surrender before that happened to get the best possible deal. Once the effective destruction of the German Army was reality and not hypothetical, the terms will be much harsher. Or the Allies might just negotiate with whoever is left. The top brass knew the completely collapse of the German forces were imminent. And the possibility of a popular revolt ending with them swaying from nooses on a lamp post becomes much higher if they lose the military to control public order.

HAIG WON HAIG WON HAIG WON
1918 was a TOTAL BRITISH AND TOTAL HAIG VICTORY.
Fuck frogs
Fuck mutts
Brits won a TOTAL VICTORY
Brits broke the hamburger line.
1960s left wing authors brainwashed everyone into believing Haig was a butcher and that soldiers hated their officers…YOUVE BEEN LIED TO.
British soldiers loved their officers and loved soldiering, British soldiers of the Great War conducted the greatest feat of arms ever carried out in warfare and they did it proudly. THEY DIDNT HATE THEIR TIME IN THE TRENCHES…YOUVE BEEN LIED TO. The 100 days offensive was the greatest military achievement in all of military history and you have Haig to thank for that btw.
Garry Sheffield is the greatest historian ever and wrote the truth about how Frogs ran away, how Yanks did fuck all, while we Brits fucking won all thanks to HAIG.
Commonwealth forces didn’t really do anything.
GERMS LOST
FROGS LOST
MUTTS LOST
BRITS WON
HAIG WON

>REEEE JEWS REEEEE
>The Spring Offensive being blunted due to the soldiers stopping to loot British supply dumps to send food to their starving families back home, then retreating as fast as they can physically run during the Hundred Days, with the Entente forces stopping at the German border only to build up supplies for the invasion? Never heard of it.

>>17892679 (OP)
Define 'collapse'.
The will of the German leadership was broken and none seriously thought prolonging the war would be of any advantage.
There were still soldiers fighting on the final day of the war and the Allies were still under the impression the Germans might try and counterattack (see criticism of Pershing's record on the final day, which led to him being questioned by Congress).
Arguably, they might have been able to 'fight' a little longer - but food and ammunition were increasingly scarce and it could very well have led to a revolt or mass mutiny if they did.

>>17893278
>By 1918 children in Germany were walking around with a swollen belly like you see in Africa.
Imagine lying to your /his/ brethren.

>>17895485
Haig LOST.

>>17892679 (OP)
The German army, in November 1918, was outfought, outgunned, outmanoeuvred, starved and physically, mentally and emotionally spent.
Comprehensively defeated. Defeat-in-Detail.

>>17893810
>someone called it a myth, therefore it couldn't have happened

>>17892910
This.

>>17896202
No he didn’t ok HAIG FUCKING WON.
Garry Sheffield and Peter Hart were right about everything. 1918 was a TOTAL HAIG VICTORY.

It collapsed at the very end of the war and led to the November Revolution. There were numerous strikes across workers, soldiers would either mutiny or mass surrender, and there were very little victories altogether. A dark time to be a German nationalist.

>>17892910
>The whole "undefeated in battle" myth was created by Ludendorff to make himself look good.
Do you know what an armistice is?

You can construct a narrative about how it was really the Allies who beat Germany, but you would be wrong.

The German communist uprising forced the German politicians to negotiate a punitive surrender to the western allies

Which means the “stab in the back” is true.

>>17896214
Based Haig

>>17897148
>what an armistice is
the first step in a peace deal, which the krauts started because they were losing and knew trying to stop the inevitable would mean they would get an even worse peace deal

>>17892684
Their allies sure were collapsing, how was Germany going to carry on the war with a new wideopen front to the south?

>>17892684
Muh leftists

>>17897148
> b-b-but you would be wrong!
>looses thousands of square km of territory in 2 months

>>17897249
Why did the allies agree to an armistice if they were winning?

>>17897259
because why bother going all the way to Germany when they were already offering to give up shit to get out of the war

>>17897249
>spend thousands of lives to force germany to surrender or accept their surrender

>>17897266
An armistice is a ceasefire, not a unconditional surrender.

The german surrender was caused by internal communist uprisings, not by allied victories over an intact german army

>>17897280
Both in Compiegne and at Versailles it was a de facto unconditional surrender as the Entente set all the terms for the Germans to take it or leave it.

>>17897280
yep normaly you sign armistices and have your leadership flee when you are winning a war.
The ottomans were also on the verge of victory when they signed their armistice?
Dumb pol niggers that learn tik tok history always have the most retarded takes.
>DURRRRRRRRR ARMISTICE MEANS CEASE FIRE ON THE DICTIONARY

>>17897259
>Why did the allies agree to an armistice if they were winning?
same reason the Soviets accepted one from Finland in 1940 despite winning.
They no longer needed to push further becaue the Finns would be compelled to agree to terms.

>>17897280
>An armistice is a ceasefire, not a unconditional surrender.
It could be, because an armistice can be broken if either side dont like the terms put forward in the settlement.
The British continued to starve Germany even after the armistice specifically because they knew the Germans would find the terms of Versailles unacceptable. It was to add pressure to them to sign it to stop people from starving.

The United States had a entire bomber fleet literally airborne during the Japanese surrender, ready to bomb more Japanese cities immediately in case the Japanese refused to sign the settlement (or if the Japanese decided to attempt to sneak kamikaze attack the USS Missouri where the ceremony was being held).

>>17897294
My point is, because of internal uprisings the german delegation took a bad deal, not because they thought their army was going to lose

>>17897331
>because of internal uprisings the german delegation took a bad deal
Polish insurgency taking citiy after city in East Germany certainly added to the pressure.
But the real pressure was that the German people will still starving under allied blockade and were desperate to lift it.

Also the fact that the army had virtually deserted at that point, along with every General who once had authority over the government (Ludendorf had since long left his post).
The Allies were just days away from entering Germany and begin to take their revenge. The German politicians wanted to avoid that, which was the most reasonable thing to do.

>>17892679 (OP)
No, but they were under tremendous pressure, however their homeland was untouched and their flanks were secure at the time.
>>17892684
This is not untrue.
>>17892893
and yet the Entente still had to accept a surrender before advancing to disarm the German soldiers at the front.
>>17893245
>the starvation myth
They literally had enough food for the entire army stockpiled at the end of summer.
Stop lying. there was no mass starvation, no Food was not plentiful but you make it sound like November 1918 was the month 20m Germans died of starvation.
>>17897266
They werent offering though.
They wanted an armistice because continuing the war was just a bad idea.
Sure theyd have won, but life goes on, its not a game where you get a victory screen and move on, they were all stuck with picking up the pieces.
The sooner the war ends the better for all sides.

>>17897344
If this was the case why didnt they overrun and disarm the German army prior to the peace treaty?
If the Germans literally had ZERO soldiers capable of resistance, why not just literally walk forward?

>>17897331
>it was because of internal uprsisings
even before any of those happened German generals were pretty much already stating the war was lost with many officers in the field stating it was becoming increasingly unlikely for troops to obey orders, in other words the deal they got was the best one since any longer would mean they wouldn't even have an army to fight with

>>17897331
>My point is, because of internal uprisings the german delegation took a bad deal, not because they thought their army was going to lose

Nigger it was the exact same reason Austria, Bulgaria, Ottomans and Hungary took a bad deal despite being largely intact.
You make it sound like this was only Germany.

>>17897331
Their army WAS losing, they were being pushed back across almost the entire front as you can see in OPs pic. And even if they were able to somehow stand their ground, Austria-Hungary was in complete dissarray, meaning the Italians could just march right into an undefended Bavaria.

>>17897357
So why didnt the Italians?

>>17897360
Because they didn't need to, Germany signed an armistice just 8 days after Austria-Hungary did.

>>17897360
because before they could Germany also surrendered, its not like you can just instantly move troops and supplies instantly, but the fact said front was going to be inevitable was also on their minds which contributed to them throwing in the towel

>>17897357
No allied army was in possession of German clay, in fact the germany army occupied ukraine, Belgium and parts of France. We can whatbout all day long, the facts are clear-Germany did not lose the war, it lost the peace

>>17897369
So Japan didn't need to surrender since not a single inch of the Japanese mainland was occupied?

>>17897369
>well uh you weren't in Germany
because they gave up before that could happen
>but we were in France
and they were rapidly retreating from it with no sign of it stopping
>but muh eastern holding
those to were also slipping from their fingers, just look at how some poles were pretty much able to just walk around and get German troops to surrender, they didn't even really have an organized force yet they took a good chunk of land before versailles, that should give you an idea of just how bad the situation was becoming for them

>>17897349
>If this was the case
It was the case
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_Poland_uprising_(1918-1919)

Also why do you pretend like the allied blockade is some sort of secret lore that needs to be debated. Are you retarded?
It's a main reason why Germany surrendered.
Starving people only care about one thing.

>why didnt they overrun and disarm the German army prior to the peace treaty?
Same reason they didnt overrun Hungary
Same reason they didnt overrun Bulgaria
Same reason they didnt overrun Ottomans
Same reason they didnt overrun Hungary

>If the Germans literally had ZERO soldiers capable of resistance, why not just literally walk forward?
Because they didnt have to, because Germany would be compelled to agree to whatever agreement they put forward.
The real problem wasnt the German ability to resist.
The real problem was that each allied nation had their own ambition and interest. France essentially wanted to annex everything west of the Rhine, something that wasnt blocked by Germany but by Britain and USA.
USA wanted to create a new European order based on demographic identity because it would essentially end imperialism (USA would continue this position and actively work against the colonial powers even after ww2).
Britain wanted to restore a balance of power, which is why they were adament about preserving Germany which went againt the French demand, while also wanting to create states like Czechoslovakia (because it had to be strong enough to defend itself), which went against the US demand since it became a mix of nationalities.

You really just base your entire position on "the jews" because you dont actually know anything.
This was just the surface level of what was going on.

>>17897365
They didnt need to sign an armistice either.
it wasnt necessity driving them.
>>17897367
You literally can just move supply lines instantly when supply travel primarily by horse.
>inevitable
was it? It was the most easily defended part of Germany. Citizen militias could have held it.

>>17897397
>dude like some guys who are starving were totally going to hold out an assult by an army that spent the past few years on mountainous warfare
do you fags even listen to yourselves

>>17897331
>internal uprisings the german delegation took a bad deal, not because they thought their army was going to lose
maybe just maybe, follow me here, the uprisings were caused by the germany being smashed in the field, the navy being stuck in port, the shores were blockaded, the people eating turnips, and all their allies having surrendered.
No you right it was the judeo-liberal-anarcho-comuno-juche-bolshevik-ecological-fascist-sociodemocratic plot to peg the kaiser and bbc the high command

>>17897360
Man you are fucking retarded.
You really think war is about fighting to the last house just because thats what the nazies did.

Its common practice to sue for peace when you're militarily defeated. Fucking retard.

Do you think the Finns sued for peace in 1940 and 1944 because of jews? or because they wanted to spare their population and country from being inevitably scorched and ravaged by the Soviets?
And do you think the Soviets accepted the armistice because they couldnt defeat the Finns?

Fuck me, you stormfags are insufferably retarded.

>>17897397
Please explain to me how Germany could have won the war after the fall of their allies.

>>17897397
>it wasnt necessity driving them.
The germans were already prepared to accept the terms the allies desired. If they had rejected the war the allies would simply continue. Thats how it works you dumb moron.

>>17897397
>Citizen militias could have held it.
Spoken like a true nazi.
Just throw the civilian population into the hellfire. All it takes is the will of the teutonic race to turn the tide.

>>17897395
>it was the case
Thats Poland, not the Western Front, furthermore Poles werent interested in a war with Germany.
>secret lore
> Even as a food crisis loomed on the eve of the armistice, the army built up a reserve of 1.5 million tons of grain (equivalent to 7 months of pre-war imports), plus other foodstuffs, for a possible last-ditch battle.[6]
please just shut the fuck up.
You are only in these threads to nay-say whatever you think chuds are saying.
Thats all these threads are, its third and second world retards screeching about "their" victory was inevitable.

>they didnt have to
They had to two decades later.
>Germany would be compelled
No, Germany would not be compelled, Germany can do what they want.
Their main problem wasnt their army, it was their homefront.
>the jews
I havent brought up the jews once however I will now, jewish socialists and zionists were at work in 1917 and as early as 1916 engaging in industrial sabotage.
yes it was the jews, the Nazis were correct, Hitler was correct, they were right. The people who were literally there, yes, they were right about what they literally saw before their eyes.

If the end of the war was set in stone they wouldnt even have offered an armistice.
They would have just demanded unconditional surrender from the outset, they didnt.

The Entente didnt have hindsight, they didnt know the state of Germany, and it wasnt a guarantee they could carry on the war forever.
Turkey beat the shit out of England when the English actually tried to march into Turkey in 1920.
We have no reason to believe Germany would have been different.

>>17897425
All I hear is:
>Bro the Germans were totally not starving because I say so
>Wah Wah shut the fuck upppppp

>>17897423
the media praises zelenskyy for it though for it though

>>17897425
>thats poland not the western front
the western front was equally as bad, he was using poland to showcase how Germany wasn't even able to put down ragtag groups anymore, much less handle actual armies. which show cases that no their main problem was the fact their army was becoming increasingly unable to function

>DURRRR NO THEY WOULD NOT HAVE OFFERD DA ARMISTICE, THEY WOULD HAVE FIGHT !!!!!!! W-WHAT ABOUT DA GRAIN??AND DA JOOOOOOS
retarded nigger non-ironicaly thinks people run on grains and that grain for the army = grain for the people, and that germany offered an armistice because da joos said so like they were not out of allies or that unrisings did not happen in all major combatants

>>17897432
That's all true though

>>17897413
The jews were at work in Germany from 1917 onward.
Wtf are you talking about? The war didnt end in 1917 you colossal retard.
>>17897403
>literally starving
>still had 7 months of food left
>>17897423
>a true Nazi
Poland was founded by citizen militias you retarded animal.
>>17897420
>would simply continue
and theyd get mown down like they did every single time they tried to walk forward.
>>17897417
>won the war
won the war? We are talking about salvaging Germany's position. Britain and France both lost the war by every metric. They salvaged their loss to a pyrrhic victory. Germany could have salvaged their loss to an honorable defeat.

>>17897436
>Germany could have salvaged their loss to an honorable defeat.
Explain that then.

>>17897436
>Poland was founded
By terms set forth by the German reich under the most honorable Wilhelm II whose memory has been BESMIRCHED by p*lish dogs and their cronies in the Palestine territory.

>>17897436
>they weren't starving because on paper they had some supplies left
>just ignore how those were essentially pitful rations
>or the fact if you actually want somebody to fight you need to up said rations
also the point everybody is making is there was no way to salvage their position since they were already up shit creek and it was going to get worse so better to get out now rather than try to resist the inevitable longer and get a worse result

>>17897434
funny how the exact same thing happend to the austro-hungrarians but there it is normla, only germany was on the brink of victory and backstabed.

>Britain and France both lost the war by every metric.
>Defeat is when you beat your enemy

So the allies said, We know the german army is broken, we know we can invade germany and show them we are the victors, but we wont do that, we will be nice and agree to an armisice so the germans can think they wernt defeated, and they can blame everybody else for their defeat

Brilliant plan, no wonder someone said it wouldnt work

>>17897425
>They would have just demanded unconditional surrender from the outset, they didnt.
They didnt want unconditional surrender.
The Soviets could have demanded unconditional surrender from Finland too in 1940.
Man you're so fucking retarded its unreal.

>No, Germany would not be compelled, Germany can do what they want.
Curious how Austria and Hungary and Ottomans and Bulgaria accepted terms despite no allied soldier having actually entered their country. Jews at work here too? Or just responsible politicians doing the right thing?

>No, Germany would not be compelled, Germany can do what they want.
Ok so refuse the armistice then and watch the allies take their revenge on West Germany for 4 years of pillaging and scorching Belgium and France. I'm sure it's going to be pretty.

>yes it was the jews, the Nazis were correct, Hitler was correct, they were right.
Oh now I am convinced. I'm sure others will be too :')

>The Entente didnt have hindsight, they didnt know the state of Germany,
Yeah except they had captured more ground in the last few months of 1918 than they had during the entire war, mostly owed to the fact that the German army was in full retreat and mass-desertion, plus all their allies had exited the war, which was also largely attributed to people starving.

>>17897443
Austria was also backstabbed yes. That's a popular point of discussion for them, hence the annexation as an acknowledgement of common ground. For that matter, Russia was also backstabbed. Even the Soviets were backstabbed. Certain people cannot help themselves.

>>17897445
>so the german can think they weren't defeated
only a few french figures argued this would happen, and while they did end up being correct at the same time you can't blame anybody else for not forseeing this since it wasn't exactly reasonable to predict

>>17897427
>the university of Sheffield paper is "because I say so"
>https://files.libcom.org/files/blockade%20Germany_0.pdf
go fetch me your handler, I wish to speak to them.
>>17897429
>equally as bad
which begs the question, why did they wait for an armistice and ceasefire? Why not just disarm the German troops as is?
I mean they couldnt resist right?
>put down ragtag groups
Did they try? how many divisions were assigned to Poland?
>>17897432
I mean if the jews werent sabotaging Germany they would be in a stronger position. The idea that sabotage strengthens a country is silly.
>grain doesnt matter
explain.

>>17897428
LMAO

>>17897452
>why did they wait
because they were organizing said invasion force for a 1919 campaign, it wasn't even waiting so much as the krauts stated they were open to talk and willing to cave to several demands which the entente was willing since as people keep trying to drill into your head, they weren't looking for an unconditional surrender, they would enforce one if it came down to it but it wasn't their main goal

>>17897458
>krauts
I'm wagging my finger. You better cool it with the Europhobia.

>>17897451
>it wasn't exactly reasonable to predict
The French prime minister said there would be another war in 29 years. Pretty much nobody in germany accepted they had lost the war, Berlin had not been conquered, no german towns had been levelled, they just got a huge chip on their shoulder because they were blamed for the war

>>17897458
oh ok and the ottomans and bulgarians were also back stabed no?
Funny how it all comes down to DA JOOS and nothing else

>>17897452
>the army eats only bread and nothing else, the civilians? fuck them the army has grain.
>hun what do you mean uprisings??

>>17897460
>the french prime minister
he was pretty much stating that because France wanted to enact far greater war reps on Germany and was cock blocked by the other Entente powers, in other words its was pretty much him blowing hot airs over not getting more and just happening to be right

>>17897460
The French were just mad that USA and Britain blocked them from literally annexing everything west of the Rhine, which was the French demand during the Versailless negotiation, apart from the war reparations.

They wanted a permanently crippled Germany but UK and USA said no.

>>17897425
Oh look its the Amerimutt nazi chud. What a surprise its you.

>>17897437
Ask for peace and only peace not an armistice.
>>17897441
Worked out for the Turks.
>>17897444
Do Paris and London look like cities of victory?
You are neither French nor British, you are not even Western shut the fuck up White people are talking.

>>17897472
>you're not a Europhobe?
>shame on you scum
Just admit you hate him because he's white and move on if that's all you have to say.

>>17897473
>worked out for the Turks
several years after Britain had already demobilized and gotta out of war mode, and in a completely different context since Britain pretty much already got what it wanted and didn't have an real stakes for it, while Turkey was able to muster an actual fighting force, something that Germany was starting to lose the luxury of since no matter how you try to cope, their soldiers were becoming far more prone to just giving up or just fucking off

>>17897452
Your pdf literally spends the first 5 pages acknowledging that half a million Germans died from starvation even after the armistice had been signed because the blockade was still enforced :)

>to the conclusion of the state of hostilities, the continued food blockade brought about a quarter of a million additional deaths among the civilian population of Germany, within its post-1919 boundaries.

>A Swedish newspaper in January 1918 published reports from the German life insurance companies that the death rate of the civil population was beginning to compete with the death rate on the battlefields.’* Dutch workmen employed at Krupps, Essen, in 1918 reported widespread underfeeding, with the diet made up almost entirely of potatoes and deteriorating by the week. Dysentery was widespread.


HAHAHAHA

>spergs out about ww1 yet his beloved hitler would have been a failed hobo without it
>talks about europe yet is discusting mutt no european will touch with a 10 foot pol
>worhsips europe , never been there
>knows nothing about europe besides hitler

>>17897477
>White.
We literally have video confirmation of what the average nazi larping jew-kwetcher /pol/ user looks like, and they are anything but white :')

>>17897487
Sorry I forgot to put American in there.

That's literally how most American Germanic larpers look like. Hes probably a fucking spic who found out he is 13% German and "very proud of it", so now he spends every day lecturing us Europeans on Europe and European identity and culture and history :')

>>17897446
>they didnt want unconditional surrender
That is my point.
>jews at work here too
Yeah the Donmeh in the Ottoman Empire were working against the Ottomans as they were a barrier to a jewish state.
Those countries however DID have invading forces. The Ottomans defeated the British invasion the first time and proved that within less than 6 months Turkey could still defeat Britain in a war, which they literally did, they literally defeated the Allied forces in a war winning their independence.
>allied
Serbian troops were in Austria-Hungary and their army was defeated in the field and scattered, not so with Germany.
Bulgaria could have fought on.
Did everyone just forget Turkey literally defeated the Allies in 1919?
>take revenge
with what? These armies were exhausted, everyone wanted an end to the fighting.
Hitler was literally right about the jews sabotaging Germany, its not even a question, if it was a question its also a separate though related question to Germany's defeat in WWI.
>more ground in 1918
not saying much given the context.

>>17897461
The Bulgarians were beaten on the field but could have kept fighting.
The Ottomans literally had an armistice, resumed fighting, THEN FUCKING WON!!!!
>da joos and nothing else
literally no one is saying, but you have to strawman because to accept the enlightened view which is WWI's outcome was multifactorial and jewish sabotage was one of the factors would vindicate Hitler.
which you cannot allow at all despite its truth.
>>17897465
The civilian food situation was stable, this was just grain for the army. you should know the material before replying to me.
I am glad you have stopped saying the army had zero food, thats a start.
>>17897472
thank you mr Walesa, now hop on your tractor and get the fuck out of here, Whites only.

>>17897478
>several years
>May 1919 was several years after November 1918
HAHHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHA

>>17897481
wow its almost like Germany should have kept fighting because the food they had was the food they had and surrendering literally brought about zero benefit or alleviation to their situation.

>>17897512
>okay they were starving but they should have kept fighting because, even if it would make that situation even worse

>>17897484
>>17897487
>>17897490
>The Whoresaw Pact is going to tell White Americans about their country

You are subhumanoids that lost to Germany repeatedly.
My people never once lost a war to Germany, we are ourselves Germans.
People who looked like me, vanquished people who looked like you.
People who looked like you have never defeated my country or my army.

You are the perpetual losers of history thats why even when my people win your wars for you, you still seethe uncontrollably when we point out that we dont actually hate Germans our kin.

>>17897514
>they were starving
but their army still had food and their civilians were going to take the hit anyway, how could it get worse if the pressure was already maximal and we saw they suffered anyway? It would have been to fight for peace in which the blockade is lifted as a stipulation.
>THATS IMPOSSIBLE THAT COULD NEVER HAPPEN
If Turkey can have a 6 month ceasefire before kicking the shit out of the Entente and finishing WWI with a victory then ya its possible anything is possible seething loonytroon.

>>17897516
Oh im sorry, did you feel personally attacked? :')

>>17897524
Yes when you insulted the United States I felt like you disliked me because of my country of origin. There are legitimate criticisms of America but you havent made them, only have ethnic animosity against your superiors.

>>17897538
Whatever mutt, keep lecturing us on Europe and Europeans.

By the way, Czechs dont want to be a part of Germany.
I know this upsets you so fucking much to hear xD

>>17897546
Literally who cares what the Czechs want? I have stuff in my fridge older than the Czech state.

>>17897520
>how could it get worse
because then they would get invaded, and Britain would be far less willing to oppose French demands of a harsher post war treaty
>but Turkey
you mean after the British disband a huge portion of their army, despite what you claim fighting only really kick started in the 20s, and said turkish forces were pushed back by the British, it was only after Britain decided it was not worth the political hassle to recruit more troop to crush it, in other words you are still looking at a very differnt context from when Germanys situation where they were facing a much large entente force, that was not only growing larger but was also getting several more avenues of attack

>>17897568
Not to mention, the French will absolutely burn down and loot literally everything in the Ruhr and probably most of west Germany, just as a return of favor for 4 years of turning France and Belgium into a hellscape, pillaging their industries, and then scorch earth everything when the German army retreated.

>>17897598
I doubt they would burn the Ruhr, not because of any benevolence but because they would certainly annex the area if it came to invading Germany

>>17897331
They had run out of soldiers and everyone was starving and surviving solely on turnip broth

>>17892729
Ebert and Scheidermann

>>17892770
2bf if there's armed people a few hundred yards away you were just at war with, celebratory shooting is a pretty retarded thing to do

>>17893217
>pandemic
no such thing. Maybe a light cold going round

>>17897331
and what caused these internal uprisings? Do you think the multiple years of total war may have contributed?

>>17892910
>he stab in the back myth
the myth is true but it was allied stabbed in the back by USA

>>17897280
>internal communist uprisings
and why they happen?

>>17898128
The Kaiser resigned and the communists thought they could occupy the power vacuum, the german soviet was declared in Berlin, and communists took over Bavaria and hungry

>nth naziboo revisinst thread about how everything is DA JOOOS fault and we'd all be living in a post scarcity utopia if not for DA JOOOS
I'm tired of reruns.

>>17898827
no one said this

>>17897546
>you Americans are upset over places you cant find on a map
are we?
>>17897568
>they would get invaded
says who? There is no reason a peace treaty necessitates an invasion of Germany.
>French demands
The French would have to invade on their own, Britain could very easily curtail France's ambitions using soft power and they had a motivation to.
>in the 20s
It began six months after the war and concluded in 1921.
You are trying to spin this as a separate conflict however its not.
It was more like an actual armistice and the fighting resumed shortly thereafter, and oh yeah, Turkey defeated the Entente.
>different context
not at all, Britain decided the juice wasnt worth the squeeze, There is no reason Britain would have a different mentality over a much more competent and capable army with much more resources at its disposal.

Say what you want about the German army but they were in a better state in 1918 than the Turkish army, and the Turks literally defeated the Entente lol.

If we want to be non-autists it isnt a stretch to say Turkey won WWI.

>>17897598
>France would
speculation. France had no such animosity after WWII a much more fanatically fought war.
Furthermore France would actually have to fight their way into Germany.
Your entire position relies on a collapse that didnt happen.

>>17892684
>german tongue
>german names
>german traditions
>german lifestyle
>AKSHUALLY THEY WEREN'T GERMAN, GERMANS HAVE LITERALLY NEVER DONE ANYTHING WRONG, IT'S ALWAYS SOMEONE ELSE'S FAULT

>>17899839
>Turks literally defeated the Entente lol.
The Entete never committed to the Tutkish Civil War.
Neither USA or Britain or Italy got involved in any fighting, and the French quit after a skirmish. Ottomans had already lost roughly half of her original size since 1914 and was effectively undone as a great power regardless if the Turkish revolution succeeded or not.
This is such a retarded argument. If the Germans had refused the armistice the allies would have pushed to Berlin if necessary, they weren't just going to quit. Your only strategy is to create a volksturm 2.0 and pretend like it's going to make more a difference than it did in 1945. The only thing it achieved in 1945 was creating another 1 million dead Germans and every city destroyed. The politicians in 1918 did the right thing by suing for peace before this could happen, the NSDAP government did the wrong thing by prolonging the inevitable defeat with the blood of every woman, child and elderly of every city that had to pay the price.

>>17897376
Okinawa was Jap. They just deny it today because it's basically an American colony since '45

>>17899839
>France would be on their own
>like yeah bro the other entente power would like totally not join in for uh reasons and further lose out on the inevitable spoils of war
>especially right after every other central power member already surrendered or collapsed

>>17899923
>committed
semantics.
Looks committed to me tho.
>Ottomans lost half of their size
They lost non-Turkish regions.
>The Allies would have pushed to Berlin if necessary
Why? They couldnt choose not to and instead go for fair peace terms?
Whats the motivation? You're just magically demanding they fight their way to Berlin.
Why?
Is there any evidence theyd be willing to take 300,000-4m MORE casualties?
no.
>your only strategy
?????
My strategy is actually to use the German field army which still numbered in the millions in a war where 1000 men could fend off 20,000 men.
>1945
The German homeland was battered in 1945 before anyone even crossed the German border.
Germany in 1918 was pristine by comparison.
Not for nothing the Volkssturm and remaining Wehrmacht battalions (not even divisions but singular battalions) against significantly greater odds than the Germans in 1918 STILL managed to inflict over a million casualties on the opposition forces actually in Germany.

From a much worse position economically and militarily, and from a much worse position technologically (the Volkssturm have zero ability to fight aircraft while in WWI the aircraft were nowhere near as dominant on the field), they inflicted colossal casualties on the attacking forces.

WWI would have been far far too costly for Britain or France to continue if the German forces in 1918 were operating at even a fraction of the level they were in 1945.
>the only thing it achieved
You dont actually know how hard fought the invasion of Germany itself was do you?

>it was women and children paying the price
You say this out of moral grandstanding and ignorance.
The majority of Volkssturm were males over 55 or males under 16, both groups were not sheep to the slaughter as youd want us to believe, they punched up and punched up hard.
More invaders died than Volkssturm btw.
We also dont need a Volkssturm in 1918 as the German army was still huge compared to what it was in 1945.

>>17901148
>Looks committed to me tho.
And when were those British forces committed?

>They lost non-Turkish regions.
Ok
And Germany lost non-German regions.

>Why? They couldnt choose not to and instead go for fair peace terms?
Why do you constantly assume that they couldnt? They actually wanted to wait until 1919 just for the American juggernaut to really kick in, but the German lines collapsed much sooner than anticipated:

>Through October, the German armies retreated through the territory gained in 1914. The Allies pressed the Germans back toward the lateral railway line from Metz to Bruges, which had supplied the front in northern France and Belgium for much of the war. As the Allied armies reached this line, the Germans were forced to abandon increasingly large amounts of heavy equipment and supplies, further reducing their morale and capacity to resist.[26]
>The evidence of failing German morale also convinced many Allied commanders and political leaders that the war could be ended in 1918; previously, all efforts had been concentrated on building up forces to mount a decisive attack in 1919.
>With the collapse of Bulgaria, and Italian victory in the Battle of Vittorio Veneto, the road was open to an invasion of Germany from the south via Austria.[6]

The Germans had nothing left to resist with and all their allies had exited the war. What were the Germans going to do?
They were starving and their lines had collapsed, they had been largely pushed out of France completely, they lost more ground in 2 months than they ever did in 4 years. Every army in the Macedonian and Italian front was about to enter from Bavaria. American armies and heavy equiptment was being massed in France.
.

>>17901148
>My strategy is actually to use the German field army which still numbered in the millions in a war where 1000 men could fend off 20,000 men.
Which is exactly what they did in 1945. Volksturm and Wehrmacht looked strong on paper.
Didnt change anything except a disporportion of dead Germans between January and May, just to prolong the inevitable.

>The German homeland was battered in 1945 before anyone even crossed the German border.
So? The Wehrmacht was bigger than the Imperial German army in 1945, so by your logic they should have been able to resist.

>against significantly greater odds than the Germans in 1918 STILL managed to inflict over a million casualties on the opposition forces actually in Germany.
Yeah except in 1945 the casualty ratio was nearly 3:1 to the Red Army.
Lets not even begin to talk about the ratio with the western allies.
The fact that Wehrmacht even tried to keep resisting in 1945, from a military perspective, was pure insanity, and threw away lives for nothing.


>The majority of Volkssturm were males over 55 or males under 16, both groups were not sheep to the slaughter
Volksturm was nothing but underequipt, unsupported, untrained glorified militias that achieved nothing except getting a bunch of Germans killed basically just stalling for time. They were dead on arrival because they stood no chance whatsoever to win any battle against an actual military.

>We also dont need a Volkssturm in 1918 as the German army was still huge compared to what it was in 1945.
Your entire idea was to arm the german population, basically creating a volksturm, with the same fate.

>>17901148
>?????
Certificate.