Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 10/2/2014 10:48:27 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/2/2014 10:54:53 PM EST by sheldonap90]
If the Germans had not sank any American ships Or did any of the other things they did to piss us off during WW1 and American had not joined the war who would of won?


Would they still be fighting?
Link Posted: 10/2/2014 10:49:07 PM EST
Don't forget the Zimmerman Telegraph. That pissed us off too....
Link Posted: 10/2/2014 10:50:28 PM EST
France and England owed us two billion dollars. If they lost we wouldn't have gotten paid. We were going to enter the war. Wilson would have found an excuse.
Link Posted: 10/2/2014 10:51:39 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/2/2014 10:52:54 PM EST by veritas_rasa]
Both sides were pretty well spent. As determined by the French's monitoring of the German's cables, Germany was anxious to end the fighting.
I expect that eventually an accord would've been reached — most likely to Germany's detriment.
Link Posted: 10/2/2014 10:53:18 PM EST
Originally Posted By sheldonap90:
If the Germans had not sank any American ships Or any of the other thigns they did to piss us off during WW1 and American had not joined the war who would of won?


Would they still be fighting?
View Quote


This post hurts my head.
Link Posted: 10/2/2014 10:54:53 PM EST
The Rise of Hitler and the Nazis would have probably not have happened. Let that bake your noodle for a bit.
Link Posted: 10/2/2014 10:58:55 PM EST
Thank Churchill for the Lustitania.
Link Posted: 10/2/2014 10:59:01 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/2/2014 10:59:18 PM EST by bigstick61]
Originally Posted By sheldonap90:
If the Germans had not sank any American ships Or did any of the other things they did to piss us off during WW1 and American had not joined the war who would of won?


Would they still be fighting?
View Quote


The war was heading towards a negotiated settlement before the U.S. joined the war. The German and Habsburg empires would have largely remained intact as a result, most likely. Not sure what effect that would have had on events in Russia, but you wouldn't have seen the rise of the Nazis. There probably would have been no war in Europe in the 1940s; it probably would have been a Pacific affair and perhaps later than when it began. In any case, the world would have been the better for the U.S. not entering the war.
Link Posted: 10/2/2014 11:10:54 PM EST
The Germans would have had a good shot at winning in 1918. The Russians had just exited the war, which freed up some German troops. The French army had widespread incidents of mutiny and desertion in the Spring of 1917, and was highly questionable as an offensive force. The German offensive in the Spring of 1918 was quite effective and could easily have led to a collapse of morale in the UK and French armies.
Link Posted: 10/2/2014 11:12:24 PM EST
Originally Posted By sheldonap90:
If the Germans had not sank any American ships Or did any of the other things they did to piss us off during WW1 and American had not joined the war who would of won?


Would they still be fighting?
View Quote

What's with the WWI part?

Link Posted: 10/2/2014 11:31:50 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By bigstick61:
The war was heading towards a negotiated settlement before the U.S. joined the war. The German and Habsburg empires would have largely remained intact as a result, most likely. Not sure what effect that would have had on events in Russia,
View Quote


Assuming a peace along the lines of the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk, probably the Soviets would have been in control of Russia in the immediate aftermath. The Germans would have dominated the Baltics, Ukraine, and Poland, either directly or via puppet regimes. I can't see the German government allowing the Soviets to remain in power for long in the postwar period, though. The net result would have been German domination of Central Europe, and likely some sort of restored Russian monarchy.

If the Germans had any sense they'd accept status quo ante in the West, but that assumes strategic sense not in evidence.

Woodrow Wilson is one of history's greatest monsters.
Link Posted: 10/3/2014 12:01:26 AM EST
Originally Posted By sheldonap90:
If the Germans had not sank any American ships Or did any of the other things they did to piss us off during WW1 and American had not joined the war who would of won?


Would they still be fighting?
View Quote



I think "sunk" is the word you seek.
Link Posted: 10/3/2014 12:11:01 AM EST
We were fighting WW2 long before it became an official war. The only thing that might have changed is that without direct support, the Brits may have starved, or a lot more people would have died. Or both.
Link Posted: 10/3/2014 12:12:54 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By GrandfatherCoyote:
The Rise of Hitler and the Nazis would have probably not have happened. Let that bake your noodle for a bit.
View Quote


The Treaty of Versailles opened the doors for that. Would the treaty have been the same? Most likely. WW1 all we did was really throw some reinforcements in near the end.
Link Posted: 10/3/2014 12:14:39 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By M82Assault:


The Treaty of Versailles opened the doors for that. Would the treaty have been the same? Most likely. WW1 all we did was really throw some reinforcements bodies on the fire, near the end.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By M82Assault:
Originally Posted By GrandfatherCoyote:
The Rise of Hitler and the Nazis would have probably not have happened. Let that bake your noodle for a bit.


The Treaty of Versailles opened the doors for that. Would the treaty have been the same? Most likely. WW1 all we did was really throw some reinforcements bodies on the fire, near the end.



Fixed it for you.

Link Posted: 10/3/2014 12:14:49 AM EST
Link Posted: 10/3/2014 12:17:38 AM EST
Link Posted: 10/3/2014 12:33:50 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By M82Assault:
We were fighting WW2 long before it became an official war. The only thing that might have changed is that without direct support, the Brits may have starved, or a lot more people would have died. Or both.
View Quote


Yeah, but he was asking about WW1.

I have to wonder about the possibility that after Russia bowed out, France and England might have known that Germany would shortly have rested reserves and the ability to potentially force a conclusion on their own terms.
Then again, the British embargo of Germany was hurting them badly at home. And if the implications of the Zimmermann Telegram are true, that Germany was so desperate for allies they were promising goodies to Mexico in exchange for help against a potential future enemy...they might have been less froggy about a negotiated peace.
Link Posted: 10/3/2014 12:36:49 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By M82Assault:


The Treaty of Versailles opened the doors for that. Would the treaty have been the same? Most likely. WW1 all we did was really throw some reinforcements in near the end.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By M82Assault:
Originally Posted By GrandfatherCoyote:
The Rise of Hitler and the Nazis would have probably not have happened. Let that bake your noodle for a bit.


The Treaty of Versailles opened the doors for that. Would the treaty have been the same? Most likely. WW1 all we did was really throw some reinforcements in near the end.


We helped it turn from a stalemate to a decisive end, but not to good effect. Thousands of Americans died so that thousands more could die again in Europe. It needn't have been so on either count. One of the few conflicts in which we really should have stayed out.
Link Posted: 10/3/2014 12:37:54 AM EST





With both world wars it was same: Germany only had a chance if it could win quickly. Once it became a war of attrition Germany loses every time because it has limited resources. Britain and France both had colonies and territories out side Europe from which to draw men and raw materials. German only had what was within its borders and what it could take from neighbors.




Link Posted: 10/3/2014 12:43:47 AM EST
[Last Edit: 10/3/2014 12:44:57 AM EST by Mariner82]
The other interesting question(that is unanswerable) is "if WW1 had ended differently, either with Germany winning, or at least not losing with such draconian terms of surrender, would there have been a WW2?"
Link Posted: 10/3/2014 1:35:19 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By 86Tiger:





With both world wars it was same: Germany only had a chance if it could win quickly. Once it became a war of attrition Germany loses every time because it has limited resources. Britain and France both had colonies and territories out side Europe from which to draw men and raw materials. German only had what was within its borders and what it could take from neighbors.




View Quote


Germany had an overseas empire as well (although not nearly as vast as that of the British, or even the French). It was the Austro-Hungarian Empire that only had little Tsingtao to its name overseas, but it also encompassed a rather large part of Europe. The Germans actually acquitted themselves well in their colonies and the adjacent oceans. Germany's army in Africa was never defeated, IIRC.
Link Posted: 10/3/2014 1:38:28 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Mariner82:
The other interesting question(that is unanswerable) is "if WW1 had ended differently, either with Germany winning, or at least not losing with such draconian terms of surrender, would there have been a WW2?"
View Quote


While impossible to know for certain, it is unlikely that there would have been another war in Europe so soon on that scale, certainly not one with the character of WWII, which was borne of the political circumstances that led to its outbreak. If the Reds remained successful in the Russian Civil War, I could possibly see something against the Soviets, but it would not have been the same. I think Europe more broadly would have made an effort to check them. Japan's ambitions may have been delayed from coming into action if it did not retain all of Germany's Pacific colonies.
Link Posted: 10/3/2014 5:53:24 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By pighelmet:
Thank Churchill for the Lustitania.
View Quote



what's the deal here?
Link Posted: 10/3/2014 7:25:45 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By cavedog:
France and England owed us two billion dollars. If they lost we wouldn't have gotten paid. We were going to enter the war. Wilson would have found an excuse.
View Quote


Wilson?
Link Posted: 10/3/2014 7:26:15 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By GrandfatherCoyote:
The Rise of Hitler and the Nazis would have probably not have happened. Let that bake your noodle for a bit.
View Quote



Link Posted: 10/3/2014 7:35:29 AM EST
So if America had not been drawn into either WWI or WWII would we have become the worldwide power that we were post WWII?

No Marshall plan, no rebuilding of Western Europe?

Would the middle east been carved up into "countries" that made no sense to the inhabitants?

Would the Ottoman Empire have collapsed?

Would the Arab Revolt happened?

Would the White Russians prevailed over the Red Russians?
Link Posted: 10/3/2014 7:36:38 AM EST
Allied powers. The war was pretty much over by the time America got involved.
Link Posted: 10/3/2014 7:39:15 AM EST
Did America really play a big roll on the ground in WW1? We were only there from spring to fall of 1918.
Link Posted: 10/3/2014 7:42:54 AM EST
[Last Edit: 10/3/2014 7:43:32 AM EST by GrandfatherCoyote]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By KA3B:



View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By KA3B:
Originally Posted By GrandfatherCoyote:
The Rise of Hitler and the Nazis would have probably not have happened. Let that bake your noodle for a bit.





I'm basing this on the idea that The Treaty at the end of the war may have been far different, and perhaps Germany would not have had a situation ripe for scapegoating Jews for the horrid economy, unemployment, etc... that directly led to people paying attention to assholes like Hitler and his bunch. It's quite possible the Nazis would have ended up an obscure, short-lived, marginalized political movement only really known about by a few topic-focused historians in academia somewhere. That's my guess. No way to ever know, though, obviously.
Link Posted: 10/3/2014 7:43:39 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By TheKahn:
Allied powers. The war was pretty much over by the time America got involved.
View Quote



This.
Link Posted: 10/3/2014 7:45:20 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By mcgredo:


Assuming a peace along the lines of the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk, probably the Soviets would have been in control of Russia in the immediate aftermath. The Germans would have dominated the Baltics, Ukraine, and Poland, either directly or via puppet regimes. I can't see the German government allowing the Soviets to remain in power for long in the postwar period, though. The net result would have been German domination of Central Europe, and likely some sort of restored Russian monarchy.

If the Germans had any sense they'd accept status quo ante in the West, but that assumes strategic sense not in evidence.

Woodrow Wilson is one of history's greatest monsters.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By mcgredo:
Originally Posted By bigstick61:
The war was heading towards a negotiated settlement before the U.S. joined the war. The German and Habsburg empires would have largely remained intact as a result, most likely. Not sure what effect that would have had on events in Russia,


Assuming a peace along the lines of the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk, probably the Soviets would have been in control of Russia in the immediate aftermath. The Germans would have dominated the Baltics, Ukraine, and Poland, either directly or via puppet regimes. I can't see the German government allowing the Soviets to remain in power for long in the postwar period, though. The net result would have been German domination of Central Europe, and likely some sort of restored Russian monarchy.

If the Germans had any sense they'd accept status quo ante in the West, but that assumes strategic sense not in evidence.

Woodrow Wilson is one of history's greatest monsters.






Wilson's re-election campaign slogan in 1916 was "He Kept Us Out of the War!"

And where were we the next year?
Link Posted: 10/3/2014 7:45:47 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By veritas_rasa:
Both sides were pretty well spent. As determined by the French's monitoring of the German's cables, Germany was anxious to end the fighting.
I expect that eventually an accord would've been reached — most likely to Germany's detriment.
View Quote

Except not on the level that caused Hitler to rise to power.
Link Posted: 10/3/2014 7:46:45 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By GrandfatherCoyote:
The Rise of Hitler and the Nazis would have probably not have happened. Let that bake your noodle for a bit.
View Quote

Neither would communism in Russia. Lenin wouldn't of been snuck in by Germany.
Link Posted: 10/3/2014 7:47:53 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By GrandfatherCoyote:


I'm basing this on the idea that The Treaty at the end of the war may have been far different, and perhaps Germany would not have had a situation ripe for scapegoating Jews for the horrid economy, unemployment, etc... that directly led to people paying attention to assholes like Hitler and his bunch. It's quite possible the Nazis would have ended up an obscure, short-lived, marginalized political movement only really known about by a few topic-focused historians in academia somewhere. That's my guess. No way to ever know, though, obviously.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By GrandfatherCoyote:
Originally Posted By KA3B:
Originally Posted By GrandfatherCoyote:
The Rise of Hitler and the Nazis would have probably not have happened. Let that bake your noodle for a bit.





I'm basing this on the idea that The Treaty at the end of the war may have been far different, and perhaps Germany would not have had a situation ripe for scapegoating Jews for the horrid economy, unemployment, etc... that directly led to people paying attention to assholes like Hitler and his bunch. It's quite possible the Nazis would have ended up an obscure, short-lived, marginalized political movement only really known about by a few topic-focused historians in academia somewhere. That's my guess. No way to ever know, though, obviously.


So the worldwide depression (great depression) would not of happened?
Link Posted: 10/3/2014 7:49:36 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Miami_JBT:

Neither would communism in Russia. Lenin wouldn't of been snuck in by Germany.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Miami_JBT:
Originally Posted By GrandfatherCoyote:
The Rise of Hitler and the Nazis would have probably not have happened. Let that bake your noodle for a bit.

Neither would communism in Russia. Lenin wouldn't of been snuck in by Germany.


It's possible, certainly. Then to further wonder, that without a communist Russia, and no WWII in the 40s, what happens to nuclear weapons & power, the Space Race, America as a world Super Power, etc...
Link Posted: 10/3/2014 7:52:28 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By KA3B:


So the worldwide depression (great depression) would not of happened?
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By KA3B:
Originally Posted By GrandfatherCoyote:
Originally Posted By KA3B:
Originally Posted By GrandfatherCoyote:
The Rise of Hitler and the Nazis would have probably not have happened. Let that bake your noodle for a bit.





I'm basing this on the idea that The Treaty at the end of the war may have been far different, and perhaps Germany would not have had a situation ripe for scapegoating Jews for the horrid economy, unemployment, etc... that directly led to people paying attention to assholes like Hitler and his bunch. It's quite possible the Nazis would have ended up an obscure, short-lived, marginalized political movement only really known about by a few topic-focused historians in academia somewhere. That's my guess. No way to ever know, though, obviously.


So the worldwide depression (great depression) would not of happened?


I don't know. Does it? Did the results of the war cause it? Part of Germany's post-war economic problems were having to pay buttloads of money and materials to rebuild France during that depression... What if they had not been forced to do so?


Does the Spanish Flu spread across the world after? Hard to tell.
Link Posted: 10/3/2014 8:01:49 AM EST
I think by most standards both sides had lost by the time we showed up.
Link Posted: 10/3/2014 8:03:32 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By LanXang:
Did America really play a big roll on the ground in WW1? We were only there from spring to fall of 1918.
View Quote
Since both sides were bled white the morale factor on much more troops opposing
Germany had to count for something. You can only lose so many people.
Link Posted: 10/3/2014 8:13:01 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Miami_JBT:
Neither would communism in Russia. Lenin wouldn't of been snuck in by Germany.
View Quote


I find this to be one of the most ironic facts of the war and its after effects. Ludendorff was actually responsible for Lenin's return from exile.
Link Posted: 10/3/2014 8:15:48 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By GrandfatherCoyote:
The Rise of Hitler and the Nazis would have probably not have happened. Let that bake your noodle for a bit.
View Quote



I have heard this thrown around before as well as if Hitler would have got into art school, the Nazi party would have never got big.

Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile
Link Posted: 10/3/2014 8:16:34 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By BillofRights:



what's the deal here?
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By BillofRights:
Originally Posted By pighelmet:
Thank Churchill for the Lustitania.



what's the deal here?

British propaganda hid the fact she was carrying munitions. Second, her escort was recalled so she was unguarded at the time she was sunk. She was also traveling slower to save fuel. That made her a ripe target.

The other thing was the German Embassy tried to put an advert in the paper announcing it would sink ships. Hearst managed to get it yanked from his papers but the advert did appear. That factoid was quietly forgotten.
Link Posted: 10/3/2014 8:36:12 AM EST
I'd be speaking German in Alsace-Lorraine.
Link Posted: 10/3/2014 8:42:19 AM EST
Better question would be, What would have happened if Germany hadn't gone into Russia?
Link Posted: 10/3/2014 8:58:54 AM EST
[Last Edit: 10/3/2014 8:59:38 AM EST by Coopmandu]
Link Posted: 10/3/2014 9:00:59 AM EST
[Last Edit: 10/3/2014 9:07:17 AM EST by mousehunter]
<tinfoil>Do you really think the Germans attacked us? Bush ordered us to sink that ship... </tinfoil>

It was in England's best interest for us to enter the war. Much of the issues of today's world would be very different if we had not. Hard to say what would have ultimately happened - but our entry was probably directly responsible for the rise of Hitler and indirectly responsible for the chopping up of the middle east.
Link Posted: 10/3/2014 1:36:18 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By dirtyboy:
Better question would be, What would have happened if Germany hadn't gone into Russia?
View Quote


An even better question is what would have happened if the Germans had not attacked France but did attack Russia.

It's obvious in retrospect that defensive power was greatly underrated at the start of the war. Initially the French tried an offensive into Germany, called "The Battle of the Frontiers". It failed horribly with massive casualties.

I think the Germans could have plausibly stayed on the defensive in the West, and gone of the offensive in the East, the exact reverse of what actually happened. This probably would have kept the UK out, at least initially. Historically the French failed in their attempt to attack. I can see the Germans doing well in the East, maybe taking Warsaw in the first year, and shoring up the Austrians, who did poorly in the actual WW1. There would be OK odds of the Italians staying out. In year 2 the Germans could maybe enter the Baltics, and plausibly win the war in a negotiated peace, with status quo ante in the West and considerable gains in the East. The German Navy would have been very interesting vs the French navy.

Ultimately I think the UK would have entered but probably not for a period of a few months.
Link Posted: 10/3/2014 1:42:01 PM EST
The right side won because America doesn't fight on the wrong side.
Link Posted: 10/3/2014 1:44:37 PM EST
Originally Posted By sheldonap90:
Would they still be fighting?
View Quote

No, H1N1 ended the war.
Link Posted: 10/3/2014 2:00:09 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Tomtbo:






Wilson's re-election campaign slogan in 1916 was "He Kept Us Out of the War!"

And where were we the next year?
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Tomtbo:
Originally Posted By mcgredo:
Originally Posted By bigstick61:
The war was heading towards a negotiated settlement before the U.S. joined the war. The German and Habsburg empires would have largely remained intact as a result, most likely. Not sure what effect that would have had on events in Russia,


Assuming a peace along the lines of the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk, probably the Soviets would have been in control of Russia in the immediate aftermath. The Germans would have dominated the Baltics, Ukraine, and Poland, either directly or via puppet regimes. I can't see the German government allowing the Soviets to remain in power for long in the postwar period, though. The net result would have been German domination of Central Europe, and likely some sort of restored Russian monarchy.

If the Germans had any sense they'd accept status quo ante in the West, but that assumes strategic sense not in evidence.

Woodrow Wilson is one of history's greatest monsters.






Wilson's re-election campaign slogan in 1916 was "He Kept Us Out of the War!"

And where were we the next year?


I've seen some of his personal correspondence and that of other close to him (such as Colonel House) and it seems he really wanted to go to war, even though the American public did not. He also seems to have had a personal hatred for both Catholics and monarchies and two of the central powers were ruled by Catholic monarchies and thus especially drew his ire (which became clear at the end of the war and when the treaties ending it were made) and he was also an Anglophile. The Lusitania and Zimmerman telegram (as well as a couple of other incidents relating to Mexico) provided the excuse and something that could be used to turn popular opinion. They were rather flimsy for a casus belli, at least for retaliation to that degree (especially the Lusitania incident; IIRC she was carrying arms and supplies for the British, which made her a legitimate target), but it was enough for Wilson.
Link Posted: 10/3/2014 2:08:32 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Brutusfennicus:
The right side won because America doesn't fight on the wrong side.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Brutusfennicus:
The right side won because America doesn't fight on the wrong side.


That certainly is the popular view among those Americans who are actually conscious of WWI (sadly, quite a few are not).

In the end I think it was the Austro-Hungarian Empire whose side had the most just cause. I like the following analogy for Americans:

The Austrian ultimatum that followed the assassination of the crown prince was harsh, but not excessively so. As an analogy, Americans must imagine what would have happened in 1914 if a Mexican secret organization, aided and trained by the Mexican Army and protected by the acting vice-president (provided such a rank existed), had murdered the vice-president of the United States in San Antonio or Miami, the name of that imaginary organization having been the annexation of Texas. The Serbs accepted the Austrian ultimatum except for its salient point: the request that Austrian plainclothes detectives be given permission to enter Serbia in order to continue their investigations. It might be argued that this was precisely what the Serbs could not allow--not because it conflicted with their dignity and sovereignty (as they claimed), but because too many things had to be covered up. Money and material promises might have loosened certain tongues.


I recall reading the shock by ordinary citizens that other powers would side with murderers (which the Serbian regime certainly was; it came to power through murder of the previous dynasty).
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top