American Lives-One million Gone!

Should America have lost One Million soldiers to bring total defeat to Germany(WWI)?

  • YES, to avoid the known ills caused from WWI..

    Votes: 1 25.0%
  • NO, the ills were bad form WWI but the world survived

    Votes: 1 25.0%
  • Other, maybe there another way..

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Don't Know, the wimp answer..

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • they should have stayed at home and mind their own business in the first place

    Votes: 2 50.0%

  • Total voters
    4
  • Poll closed .

Jim Klag

Ike the moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
3,690
Reaction score
2,296
hens and eggs. the zimmermann telegram was a gigantic blunder and i don't think it was the cause but just the official reason.
The telegram itself was not the cause, but the opening sentence of the telegram was.

"We intend to begin on the first of February unrestricted submarine warfare."
 

5fish

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2019
Messages
10,626
Reaction score
4,544
how many of your doughboys would you want to send over for that? your numbers are coming right out of thin air.
Yes its all a S.W.A.G. but the Germans were beaten all but in name by November 1918. Their army was in retreat the home front was collapsing bringing a Republic but still people were starving... The American enter the fighting in earnest in March of 1918... I you look at the stats below we average 5555 deaths from March to Nov. 1918.

There were 53,402 battle deaths, including 50,510 in the Army, 431 in the navy and 2,461 in the Marines

United States War Dept. figures from 1924 for U.S. casualties were: total mobilized force 4,355,000; total casualties 350,300 (including killed and died from all causes 126,000; wounded 234,300 (including 14,500 died of wounds); prisoners and missing 4,500).[160]


Yes, my S.W.A.G. implies we loss 10,000 troops a month from Nov. 1918 to Nov. 1919 until our troops made it to Berlin. The Germans could not afford the causalities we could afford their public war weary and already had a huge anti war movement and it was demanding an end to the war... Our society was not even close to being war weary, yet...

The Germans had lost 2,037,000[65][66] war deaths in total 4.2% of the population. France was at 4.39% and the Brits 2.23% and the U.S. .13% so we could have taken heavy causalities for a while...

I will point out that it was the British pound and America troops is why the Germans lost WW one... The British like us in WW 2 was paying most of their Allies war cost... Yes my S.W.A.G has America Troops in Berlin by or before November 1919....
 

Jim Klag

Ike the moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
3,690
Reaction score
2,296
The British like us in WW 2 was paying most of their Allies war cost..
Interesting - the USA was much the largest creditor nation after WWI. A significant cause of the Great Depression was European nations gouging the former Central Powers to repay their war debts to the USA. Especially Britain. The only reason our allies paid any attention at all to Woodrow Wilson at Versailles was because they all owed us a shitload of money.
 

Kirk's Raider's

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 16, 2019
Messages
2,251
Reaction score
922
The telegram itself was not the cause, but the opening sentence of the telegram was.

"We intend to begin on the first of February unrestricted submarine warfare."
Then the US could just suspend shipping to the UK just like we did with Germany or Austria-Hungary.
Kirk's Raiders
 

Kirk's Raider's

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 16, 2019
Messages
2,251
Reaction score
922
Interesting - the USA was much the largest creditor nation after WWI. A significant cause of the Great Depression was European nations gouging the former Central Powers to repay their war debts to the USA. Especially Britain. The only reason our allies paid any attention at all to Woodrow Wilson at Versailles was because they all owed us a shitload of money.
Which if US Banks didn't loan there would be no US involvement in WW1.
Kirk's Raiders
 

Jim Klag

Ike the moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
3,690
Reaction score
2,296
Yep see battle of Jutland for starters. The Mexican Army circa 1917 was going invade the American South West?
Kirk's Raiders
Battle of Jutland? Either one of those fleets was twice the size of the US Navy.
 

Kirk's Raider's

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 16, 2019
Messages
2,251
Reaction score
922
Battle of Jutland? Either one of those fleets was twice the size of the US Navy.
Which doesn't negate my point that the German Navy was no threat to the US since they can't even break the Blockade although they died trying.
Kirk's Raiders
 

Jim Klag

Ike the moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
3,690
Reaction score
2,296
Which if US Banks didn't loan there would be no US involvement in WW1.
Kirk's Raiders
You play very fast and loose with the facts, sir. Our economy depended on exports. We were also paying the Allies to fight the battles. Who exactly would you have us export our goods to if not to Britain and France?
 

Jim Klag

Ike the moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
3,690
Reaction score
2,296
Which doesn't negate my point that the German Navy was no threat to the US since they can't even break the Blockade although they died trying.
Kirk's Raiders
So, you admit we were dependent on the Royal Navy to keep the Germans at bay but we weren't supposed to lend them money. I call bullshit.
 

5fish

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2019
Messages
10,626
Reaction score
4,544
Which if US Banks didn't loan there would be no US involvement in WW1.
Kirk's Raiders
A snap shot...


The Allies had much more potential wealth they could spend on the war. One estimate (using 1913 US dollars) is that the Allies spent $147 billion on the war and the Central Powers only $61 billion. Among the Allies, Britain and its Empire spent $47 billion and the U.S. $27 billion (America joined after the war started) while among the Central Powers, Germany spent $45 billion.[2]


France a snap shot... wiki..

The German invasion captured 40% of France's heavy industry in 1914, especially in steel and coal. French GDP in 1918 was 24% smaller than in 1913; since a third went into the war effort, the civilian standard of living fell by half. But thousands of little factories opened up across France, hiring women, youth, elderly, disabled veterans, and behind the lines soldiers. Algerian and Vietnamese laborers were brought in. Plants produced 200,000 75mm shells a day. The US provided much food, steel, coal and machine tools, and $3.6 billion in loans to finance it all; the British loaned another $3 billion.[47]

Considerable relief came with the influx of American food, money and raw materials in 1917. The economy was supported after 1917 by American government loans which were used to purchase foods and manufactured goods. The arrival of over a million American soldiers in 1918 brought heavy spending for food and construction materials.

France's diverse regions suffered in different ways. While the occupied area in 1913 contained only 14% of France's industrial workers, it produced 58% of the steel, and 40% of the coal.[48] War contracts made some firms prosperous but on the whole did not compensate for the loss of foreign markets. There was a permanent loss of population caused by battle deaths and emigration.[49]

The economy of Algeria was severely disrupted. Internal lines of communication and transportation were disrupted, and shipments of the main export, cheap wine, had to be cut back. Crime soared as French forces were transferred to the Western Front, and there was rioting in the province of Batna. Shortages mounted, inflation soared, banks cut off credit, and the provincial government was ineffective.[50]

UK in a snap shot... wiki


The economy (in terms of GDP) grew about 7% from 1914 to 1918 despite the absence of so many men in the services; by contrast the German economy shrank 27%. The War saw a decline of civilian consumption, with a major reallocation to munitions. The government share of GDP soared from 8% in 1913 to 38% in 1918 (compared to 50% in 1943).[6]

Despite fears in 1916 that munitions production was lagging, the output was more than adequate. The annual output of artillery grew from 91 guns in 1914 to 8039 in 1918. Warplanes soared from 200 in 1914 to 3200 in 1918, while the production of machine guns went from 300 to 121,000.[7]

In 1915, the Anglo-French Financial Commission agreed a $500 million loan from private American banks. By 1916, Britain was funding most of the Empire's war expenditures, all of Italy's and two thirds of the war costs of France and Russia, plus smaller nations as well. The gold reserves, overseas investments and private credit then ran out forcing Britain to borrow $4 billion from the U.S. Treasury in 1917–18.[8] Shipments of American raw materials and food allowed Britain to feed itself and its army while maintaining her productivity. The financing was generally successful,[9] as the City's strong financial position minimized the damaging effects of inflation, as opposed to much worse conditions in Germany.[10] Overall consumer consumption declined 18% from 1914 to 1919.[11]

Trade unions were encouraged as membership grew from 4.1 million in 1914 to 6.5 million in 1918, peaking at 8.3 million in 1920 before relapsing to 5.4 million in 1923.[12] Women were available and many entered munitions factories and took other home front jobs vacated by men.[13]

Germany... wiki

Total spending by the national government reached 170 billion marks during the war, of which taxes covered only 8%, and the rest was borrowed from German banks and private citizens. Eight national war loans reached out to the entire population and raised 100 million marks. It proved almost impossible to borrow money from outside. The national debt rose from only 5 billion marks in 1914 to 156 billion in 1918. These bonds became worthless in 1923 because of hyperinflation.[72][73]
 

5fish

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2019
Messages
10,626
Reaction score
4,544
I will add the Americans ... wiki... You can see the seed of world war two...

The U.S. took over the financing of the Allies in 1917 with loans that it insisted be repaid after the war. The victorious Allies looked to defeated Germany in 1919 to pay reparations that would cover some of their costs. Above all, it was essential to conduct the mobilization in such a way that the short term confidence of the people was maintained, the long-term power of the political establishment was upheld, and the long-term economic health of the nation was preserved.[3
 

Kirk's Raider's

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 16, 2019
Messages
2,251
Reaction score
922
A snap shot...


The Allies had much more potential wealth they could spend on the war. One estimate (using 1913 US dollars) is that the Allies spent $147 billion on the war and the Central Powers only $61 billion. Among the Allies, Britain and its Empire spent $47 billion and the U.S. $27 billion (America joined after the war started) while among the Central Powers, Germany spent $45 billion.[2]


France a snap shot... wiki..

The German invasion captured 40% of France's heavy industry in 1914, especially in steel and coal. French GDP in 1918 was 24% smaller than in 1913; since a third went into the war effort, the civilian standard of living fell by half. But thousands of little factories opened up across France, hiring women, youth, elderly, disabled veterans, and behind the lines soldiers. Algerian and Vietnamese laborers were brought in. Plants produced 200,000 75mm shells a day. The US provided much food, steel, coal and machine tools, and $3.6 billion in loans to finance it all; the British loaned another $3 billion.[47]

Considerable relief came with the influx of American food, money and raw materials in 1917. The economy was supported after 1917 by American government loans which were used to purchase foods and manufactured goods. The arrival of over a million American soldiers in 1918 brought heavy spending for food and construction materials.

France's diverse regions suffered in different ways. While the occupied area in 1913 contained only 14% of France's industrial workers, it produced 58% of the steel, and 40% of the coal.[48] War contracts made some firms prosperous but on the whole did not compensate for the loss of foreign markets. There was a permanent loss of population caused by battle deaths and emigration.[49]

The economy of Algeria was severely disrupted. Internal lines of communication and transportation were disrupted, and shipments of the main export, cheap wine, had to be cut back. Crime soared as French forces were transferred to the Western Front, and there was rioting in the province of Batna. Shortages mounted, inflation soared, banks cut off credit, and the provincial government was ineffective.[50]

UK in a snap shot... wiki


The economy (in terms of GDP) grew about 7% from 1914 to 1918 despite the absence of so many men in the services; by contrast the German economy shrank 27%. The War saw a decline of civilian consumption, with a major reallocation to munitions. The government share of GDP soared from 8% in 1913 to 38% in 1918 (compared to 50% in 1943).[6]

Despite fears in 1916 that munitions production was lagging, the output was more than adequate. The annual output of artillery grew from 91 guns in 1914 to 8039 in 1918. Warplanes soared from 200 in 1914 to 3200 in 1918, while the production of machine guns went from 300 to 121,000.[7]

In 1915, the Anglo-French Financial Commission agreed a $500 million loan from private American banks. By 1916, Britain was funding most of the Empire's war expenditures, all of Italy's and two thirds of the war costs of France and Russia, plus smaller nations as well. The gold reserves, overseas investments and private credit then ran out forcing Britain to borrow $4 billion from the U.S. Treasury in 1917–18.[8] Shipments of American raw materials and food allowed Britain to feed itself and its army while maintaining her productivity. The financing was generally successful,[9] as the City's strong financial position minimized the damaging effects of inflation, as opposed to much worse conditions in Germany.[10] Overall consumer consumption declined 18% from 1914 to 1919.[11]

Trade unions were encouraged as membership grew from 4.1 million in 1914 to 6.5 million in 1918, peaking at 8.3 million in 1920 before relapsing to 5.4 million in 1923.[12] Women were available and many entered munitions factories and took other home front jobs vacated by men.[13]

Germany... wiki

Total spending by the national government reached 170 billion marks during the war, of which taxes covered only 8%, and the rest was borrowed from German banks and private citizens. Eight national war loans reached out to the entire population and raised 100 million marks. It proved almost impossible to borrow money from outside. The national debt rose from only 5 billion marks in 1914 to 156 billion in 1918. These bonds became worthless in 1923 because of hyperinflation.[72][73]
My point wasn't that Germany had more wealth but it wasn't worth the cost of sending American men to fight on behalf of American Bankers.
Kirk's Raiders
 

Kirk's Raider's

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 16, 2019
Messages
2,251
Reaction score
922
So, you admit we were dependent on the Royal Navy to keep the Germans at bay but we weren't supposed to lend them money. I call bullshit.
The Germans were never a threat to the US in 1917. The German fleet was bottled up not because France and the UK cared about American maritime security but because they cared about their own maritime security. Since 1898 the US has chosen for the most part to fight not because it is attacked ( Pearl Harbor being an exception to the rule ) but out of choice.
WW1 was not fought by the US because we were attacked but to safeguard American Bankers.
Kirk's Raiders
 

Kirk's Raider's

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 16, 2019
Messages
2,251
Reaction score
922
You play very fast and loose with the facts, sir. Our economy depended on exports. We were also paying the Allies to fight the battles. Who exactly would you have us export our goods to if not to Britain and France?
Just suspend trading with the UK and France or tell them cash and carry. Both the British and French fifty odd years earlier where more then delighted to sell weapons to the Confederacy. The US could look for other trade partners or try import substitution. American lives should Trump trade.
Kirk's Raiders
 

rittmeister

trekkie in residence
Staff member
Administrator
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
5,185
Reaction score
3,438
Just suspend trading with the UK and France or tell them cash and carry. Both the British and French fifty odd years earlier where more then delighted to sell weapons to the Confederacy. The US could look for other trade partners or try import substitution. American lives should Trump trade.
Kirk's Raiders
the us sold cash and carry to us - the pic shows the u-merchantman deutschland on july 10th, 1916 in baltimore.


pic is from the wiki-article above
 

Jim Klag

Ike the moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
3,690
Reaction score
2,296
The Germans were never a threat to the US in 1917. The German fleet was bottled up not because France and the UK cared about American maritime security but because they cared about their own maritime security. Since 1898 the US has chosen for the most part to fight not because it is attacked ( Pearl Harbor being an exception to the rule ) but out of choice.
WW1 was not fought by the US because we were attacked but to safeguard American Bankers.
Kirk's Raiders
Without the British fleet, the German Navy most certainly would have been a threat and our loans helped pay for that British fleet. Going to war is an odd way to "protect bankers." War does nothing but put those bankers at risk.
 

rittmeister

trekkie in residence
Staff member
Administrator
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
5,185
Reaction score
3,438
The telegram itself was not the cause, but the opening sentence of the telegram was.

"We intend to begin on the first of February unrestricted submarine warfare."
that's what i said, right?
 

Kirk's Raider's

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 16, 2019
Messages
2,251
Reaction score
922
the us sold cash and carry to us - the pic shows the u-merchantman deutschland on july 10th, 1916 in baltimore.


pic is from the wiki-article above
Yes but for some reason the British are special so they get credit and US Ships go directly to the UK. The British sold God knows how many arms to the Confederacy although yes they sold weapons to the Union and basically the CSN was British privateers in all but name but we still love them and the Germans not so much. Go figure.
Kirk's Raiders
 

rittmeister

trekkie in residence
Staff member
Administrator
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
5,185
Reaction score
3,438
The US going to war against Germany had nothing to do with a few Rebels in Mexico.WW2 was a war of choice not defense.
Kirk's Raiders
you may want to correct that to WW I, i guess. in WW II. you were attacked by japan and got (a very convenient) declaration of war from the austrian madman.
 
Top