excellent points, timj219. a good book which contains debate on the imperialist ambitions of german leaders prior to hitler is one called "From Bismarck to Hitler" and it discusses the issues of expansionist continuity in the young german state.

You cannot compare Emperor Wilhelm with Adolf Hitler. The Emperor was not an evil man, but raised in a tradition in which he was predetermined to have a lot of political power. He was also educated for the task. He tried to stop the war in July of 1914, but his Chancellor and the General Staff officers overrode those efforts. In a way, you can say that he had too little political power at that time, because he really did not want a war. Neither did Arch Duke Franz Ferdinand, assasined by Gavrilio Princip, a member of what we would probably call a terrorist group today. Ironically, Franz Ferdinand was probably the person of the Austrian Imperial family who was most interested in providing the serbs and other slavs within the empire with more political power.

Adolf Hitler was a man of minor education who happened to have a natural talent for politics and rethoric. He can be described as an evil man.

__________________
President Josiah Bartlet: Sweden has a 100% literacy rate. 100%! How do they do that?
Leo McGarry: Maybe they don't and they can't add.

The harsh conditions of the Versailles Treaty had a part in the making of WW2, but just a part. There were a lot of small steps leading down the road to the Second World War. The greatest importance of the Treaty was probably how the Nazis could use the harsh conditions in their propaganda, calling for revenge.

__________________
President Josiah Bartlet: Sweden has a 100% literacy rate. 100%! How do they do that?
Leo McGarry: Maybe they don't and they can't add.

The only similarity I cited was that both were despots surrounded by the threats of democracy and socialism and both chose war. Despite their many differences (including the magnitude of hitler's evil compared to the relatively paltry evil of the kaiser), that limited comparison is valid.

__________________
A nation of slaves is always prepared to applaud the clemency of their master who, in the abuse of absolute power, does not proceed to the utmost extremes of injustice and oppression.
Edward Gibbon

Treaty of Versailles is a good history lesson, when a nation loose a war, they shouldn't be punished as hard as Germany was punished in treaty of Versailles. Clemenceau was wrong, but at that time, things were so different. France and Germany(Prussia) were the best enemies and never trusted each other...

__________________

Ok, now I am confused. In an earlier post you stated: the neighbors of germany who had been so frequently invaded by the various germanic entities were frightened of that new german nation and wanted those areas as buffers. So it wasn't so much that the boundaries were drawn without regard to ethnicity as that they were drawn to protect germany's fearful neighbors.

Now, according to what you posted, Poland and Czechoslovakia were created to protect Germany's fearful neighbors. Do you see my confusion?

But that is not what happened. The only allied power to gain land (major land) in Europe at Germany's expense was France. The rest went to Poland, on the other side of Germany from France.

The wars of 1864 and 1866 cannot be labeled as German imperialism simply because Germany didn't exist. In addition to this, the war in 1866 was a German war through and through. The nations that lost territory were German. I'll give you the Franco-Prussian war as a war waged by Germany, even if it technically wasn't. Although, even in this case, any territory that was gained was still ethnically German. As for Germany's African colonies, do you also condem every other European major power for having theirs? World War 1 was not waged because of German imperialism. If anything, Germany was dragged into that war along with Russia, France, England, and eventually America. WW2, well, that era speaks for itself.

Again, I am confused. It seems here that you are almost saying Germany was justified in their course of action after it was united.

__________________
There can be no bystanders in the battle for survival. Anyone who will not fight by your side is an enemy you must crush.

We are at war with forces too terrible to comprehend. We cannot afford mercy for any of its victims too weak to take the correct course. Mercy destroys us; it weakens us and saps our resolve. Put aside all such thoughts. They are not worthy of those in the service of country.

When one looks at the mindset of the young German state, one has to look at the history of those states that made it up. I mean, hell, the land that became Germany was basically the battlefield for the entire 30 years war. One cannot blame them for having a chip on their shoulder. Indeed, in the case of Prussia, they were driven towards offensive strikes simply because their territory was a nightmare to defend. It had no real natural barriers to assist in its defence.

__________________
There can be no bystanders in the battle for survival. Anyone who will not fight by your side is an enemy you must crush.

We are at war with forces too terrible to comprehend. We cannot afford mercy for any of its victims too weak to take the correct course. Mercy destroys us; it weakens us and saps our resolve. Put aside all such thoughts. They are not worthy of those in the service of country.

Good points. In the case of the German High Command, they told Wilhelm that once his troops were on trains and mobilizing, there was no going back.

As for Franz Ferdinand, you are quite correct. It is ironic, but Franz Ferdinand was the person who was going to give his assassins what they wanted. If they had taken the time to see what sort of man that he was and what his goals were, they probably wouldn't have tried to kill him.

Another great point.

__________________
There can be no bystanders in the battle for survival. Anyone who will not fight by your side is an enemy you must crush.

We are at war with forces too terrible to comprehend. We cannot afford mercy for any of its victims too weak to take the correct course. Mercy destroys us; it weakens us and saps our resolve. Put aside all such thoughts. They are not worthy of those in the service of country.

No I'm afraid I don't.
I don't see how that's different from what I said
These were the wars which establishd the german empire. You asked for them that's why I listed them.I don't know how much more clear I can make it that I don't regard germany's colonies any differently than I do those of other european countries.Not according to every history book I've read. The idea that germany was "dragged" into violating the neutrality of belgium and holland in order to invade france made me spit out my coffee.
No wonder you're confused. A couple sentences ago you wer convinced I condemned germany's african colonies and I never said that either.

__________________
A nation of slaves is always prepared to applaud the clemency of their master who, in the abuse of absolute power, does not proceed to the utmost extremes of injustice and oppression.
Edward Gibbon

You said that countries were created at the end of WW1 to protect Germany's fearful neighbors. I asked you which neighbors those were. You replied with Poland and Czechoslovakia. However, both of those countries were created at the end of the war and, thus, according to you were created to protect Germany's fearful neighbors.

You claimed that countries needed to gain territory to make it harder for Germany to gain access to their heartlands. I pointed out that, besides France (and that is even a stretch), that didn't happen. Therefore, your claim that land was taken to make it harder for Germany to reach their heartlands doesn't make sense.

No, I asked for examples of German imperial aggression. You listed wars that were not good examples, as I have shown. The wars of 1864, 1866 and 1870/1 are not valid examples because a German nation did not exist during those times. Also, WW1 is not a good example because Germany did not start it.

You never said you did. You made it sound that Germany's colonies was yet another reason Germany had to be punished after the war. If that was not your intent, then I apologize.

I claimed they were dragged into the war. I never commented on tactics.
You claimed Germany's colonies were examples of it's imperial aggression. That doesn't sound like a condemnation to you?

__________________
There can be no bystanders in the battle for survival. Anyone who will not fight by your side is an enemy you must crush.

We are at war with forces too terrible to comprehend. We cannot afford mercy for any of its victims too weak to take the correct course. Mercy destroys us; it weakens us and saps our resolve. Put aside all such thoughts. They are not worthy of those in the service of country.

You don't seem to have a clue about economics - having huge loans doesn't really help you, and it does count, wheter it is paid or not. The depression was much worse for germany than for, say, USA, Britain, France etc. In Germany the price for a stamp was 5 billion mark.

__________________
To fill a world with ... religions of the Abrahamic kind, is like littering the streets with loaded guns. Do not be surprised if they are used. - Richard Dawkins

Philosophy is questions that may never be answered. Religion is answers that may never be questioned

MY CAPSLOCK KEY IS BROKEN LOL - Will be stumbled upon several times on the web.

Clash

i do have a clue that world war one never entered german soil. the wartime devestation in france didnt lead to a prosperous post war economy.

wasnt the extreme depression over when hitler came to power anyway?

Just a quick note; WW1 battles were fought on German soil, mainly on the eastern front though. East Prussia was invaded by Russia.

Note quite. It didn't really end until Hitler increased military spending. This is much like America's situation at the time; our depression didn't end until the threat of war was growing and Roosevelt increased military spending.

__________________
There can be no bystanders in the battle for survival. Anyone who will not fight by your side is an enemy you must crush.

We are at war with forces too terrible to comprehend. We cannot afford mercy for any of its victims too weak to take the correct course. Mercy destroys us; it weakens us and saps our resolve. Put aside all such thoughts. They are not worthy of those in the service of country.

not extactly the industrial heartland of germany...

No, but part of the Prussian (Kaisers) heartland. Anyways, my point was that German territory was invaded.

__________________
There can be no bystanders in the battle for survival. Anyone who will not fight by your side is an enemy you must crush.

We are at war with forces too terrible to comprehend. We cannot afford mercy for any of its victims too weak to take the correct course. Mercy destroys us; it weakens us and saps our resolve. Put aside all such thoughts. They are not worthy of those in the service of country.