Stab-in-the-back: Myth or inconvenient truth?

>>2386268
Myth.

There was no "stab in the back". Germany was fucking starving to death and their spring offensive failed. With the arrival of over 1 million americans it meant they were fucked

>>2386268

Complete myth. The Germans were utterly crushed on the Western Front by the time of the armistice, unable to even retreat as quickly as the Entente was advancing. That's not even getting into the situation on the home front, which was atrocious, with people literally starving the last winter and poised to do it all over again.

Germany lost the war, plain and simple.

>>2386279
Kinda wish the war had continued for another few months. At the very least that would shut all those "muh k/d ratio" idiots like Churchill when their army collapsed completely and millions of POWs started being taken for little loss.

Fpbp, spbp.

Fuck off, /pol/.

>>2386292
With hindsight, the Allies should have rejected the German request for an armistice and just pushed all the way to Berlin to really drive home to Germans that they had lost (though obviously at the time they had no way of knowing how it would turn out and very reasonably wanted to end the war ASAP)

>>2386293

How can two different posts be the best post?

They need to fight it out, Highlander style.

Reminder; the US army took more casualties in its one month 1918 offensive than it took in the entire veitnam war, the germans had stockpiles enough ammo to fight until 1924.

It is obvious the socialist revolution (started by sailors refusing to fight the royal navy) is what caused Willy to abdicate and left germany without leadership which allowed to socialists (((Ebert))) to fill the gap and negotiate a humiliating armistice.

>>2386323
you need more than bullets to fight a war

>>2386323

>Reminder; the US army took more casualties in its one month 1918 offensive than it took in the entire veitnam war, the germans had stockpiles enough ammo to fight until 1924.

But that's wrong you fucking retard.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_I_casualties

>WW1, U.S. 53,402 killed or missing, 116,708 wounded.

https://www.archives.gov/research/military/vietnam-war/casualty-statistics.html

>Vietnam War: Killed/missing 58,220 Wounded: 153,303

> the germans had stockpiles enough ammo to fight until 1924.

And the men to use that ammo? They don't count if they're pocketed or killed.

>>2386293
I don't think anyone had brought up /pol/ though?

>>2386349
The US casualties show that the german army could still fight,if the sparticus uprising had not occured it could withdraw across the Rhine and hold that line effectively.

The germans agreed to a truce mistakenly thinking they would get Wilsons peace initiative, and the revolt in its rear forced it to accept harsher terms.

>>2386323
>the germans had stockpiles enough ammo to fight until 1924.

They had lost literally 7,000 artillery pieces in three days by that point and were retreating at a slower pace than the Entente/Americans were advancing.

>>2386323
well yeah...the Americans went through a miniature version of fall 1914 as they figured out how war worked.

The Germans had no reserves. Foch was in supreme command of all 4 allied armies in France and Italy.

The only thing a longer war would have done was increase American and Japanese involvement and changed how the peace went down. Maybe with a break up of Germany and maybe with a Japanese occupation of the Russian Far East.

>>2386392
*three months

They had little left to fight with.

Reminder that Versaille was too kind.

>>2386323
>Germany admiralty: fuck it, let's make a suicide run on the British Grand Fleet
>Sailors: fuck that I want children

The real world isn't like a movie. Men need proper motivation and "muh honour" doesn't work on starving men who know the war is lost

>>2386388
The Spartacist Uprising occurred in 1919 after the war and was crushed by the paramilitary Freikorps. The Spartacist uprising wasn't as large as a full scale war. 3,000 died, but compared to the carnage that was the First World War that seems almost trivial. A solid chunk of the death toll probably also came from executions of the Spartacists by Freikorps members.

>>2386406
Agreed. The German Offensive ground to a halt when the German soldiers realized their enemies were well supplied and cozy. They started surrendering en masse after that.

>>2386406
So sailors disobeying lawful orders and revolting does not constitute a stab in the back to the german military?

>>2386420
The "stab in the back" as understood by its advocates was performed by politicians.

>>2386388
>The US casualties show that the german army could still fight,


Of course it could still fight, but it couldn't still win, and the longer the war lasted, the worse the peace would be.

>,if the sparticus uprising

The SPARTACIST uprising happened after the armistice, you idiot.

>occured it could withdraw across the Rhine and hold that line effectively.


No, it couldn't. They couldn't even effectively retreat from the lines they were opposing the Entente in.


>The germans agreed to a truce mistakenly thinking they would get Wilsons peace initiative,

The Germans agreed to a truce because it was a coinflip as to whether or not the Entente would be in Berlin before mass starvation set in.

>>2386420
If a majority of the military no longer wants to fight, then is it really a stab in the back?

>Allies reject Armistice
>continue to push into Germany killing more Germans and taking tens of thousands additional prisoners and hundreds of additional guns
>stop at the Rhine
>Italians sweep in through what used to be Austria and occupy Germany's industrial interior while it is literally completely undefended
>let the Germans attempt to turtle up
>continue blockade
>laugh as winter hits and hundreds of thousands to millions of more Germans die
>if they try to launch another offensive with what tiny strength they have left it becomes an even bigger fiasco than the Spring Offensive where they were at the peak of their power
>the French, Americans, and British crush it in a lopsided slaughter with their 2-1 superiority in men and 5-1 superiority in guns
>after that fails continue blockade until the Germans are forced to admit complete and total defeat lest their entire population starve to death

why couldn't we get this timeline?

>>2386446

Because it's retarded. There's none, ZERO reasons to believe that the Allies would stop at the Rhine, and if the armistice doesn't happen, they'll just keep advancing.

This ridiculous myth is the reason why the Allies had to raze Germany and let the Soviets rape it into oblivion. Only utter, undeniable, absolute defeat would keep nationalist retards from making up conspiracy theories like that.

File: 1468814125543.jpg (19KB, 320x320px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 320x320px

>Ludendorff Gives Lenin and his associates a free ride to Russia to spread discontent
>Lenin succeeds brilliantly, toppling the old aristocracy and gets Russia out of the war
>This in turn causes the Russians fighting the Germans to defect, spreading Communist ideology to German troops
>This spreads to German cities, creating leagues of socialists who want out of the war
>German government has to spend time and resources to curtail Socialist activity

So basically:

HOL UP
U SAYIN
WE OUR OWN SABOTEURS N' SHEET

The only thing that could have saved Germany was the success of either of the Paris offensives.

Either that or Italy remaining neutral.

They could have won it, but didn't.

Case closed.

>>2386460
Yes there are zero reasons to stop at the Rhine, but tell me, considering the US took 50k casualties climbing some hills, how many could they take doing an opposed amphibious operation to get an army across the Rhine?

>>2386497

Depends a lot on what kind of shape the Germans make it to the Rhine with, but probably considerably less, given how increasing numbers of German troops were surrendering on contact instead of actually fighting.

>>2386268
Why is the cartoon depicting him as a chef?

>>2386388
>I discuss subjects that i literally know nothing about
go back to /pol/ already

>>2386474
>Either that or Italy remaining neutral.

this x1000000

File: images.jpg (3KB, 123x90px) Image search: [Google]

3KB, 123x90px

>>2386640

File: judenputsch.jpg (447KB, 1524x1262px) Image search: [Google]

447KB, 1524x1262px

The "stab in the back" is a half-truth. It's true that Germany was completely defeated in 1918, that it couldn't keep going in the war. Still, it was a dickish move by the Jews to try to take control over Germany in its hour of greatest need. This opportunism and blatant treason single-handedly destroyed 200 years of assimilation. No German could ever trust a Jew again after that.

I mean, imagine the United States go to war against China and loses, the economy collapses, society is hardly hit. At this moment, when Americans need unity to get things together, the entire Italian-American population tries to take control of the country in order to install an authoritarian mafia state. What do you thing regular Americans would think of Italians afterwards?

It's true. If Britain won, then that would mean the Ottoman Empire would collapse, and Britain would have occupied Palestine. The Jews stabbed Germany in the back by promising Britain that they would bring America into the war as long as the Jews can have Palestine.

>>2386667
>implying the Spartacist rebellion wasn't against the SPD government created when the German military revolted

File: aiEJH.gif (763KB, 500x275px) Image search: [Google]

763KB, 500x275px

>>2386667
This.

Always the fucking Jews.

>>2386406
unless you're the IJN
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Ten-Go

>>2386667
>this retarded image
You might be misinformed the first million times you post it, but by this point I'm pretty sure you are purposefully disingenuous.

>>2386268
Spoon feed me, what kind of hat is that and why does the Jew have tits?

>>2386667
>a dickish move
No, it fucking wasn't. There is no such things as a "dickish" move when it comes to politics and power. They were simply trying to take control of the country.

File: 800px-Louis_le_dernier3.jpg (222KB, 800x1171px) Image search: [Google]

222KB, 800x1171px

>>2386817
Phrygian cap

>>2386853
Thanks anon.

>>2386851
6 million Jews died as a result.

>>2386662
Actually, he is attacking the credibility and knowledge of your arguement, which is an arguement in itself. Sorry you are anti intellectual, populist meme mind scum.

>>2386859
Nice meme.

>>2386936
He attacks my knowledge with a back to pol meme, sorry but dont defend morons who think their vacuous opinions matter

>>2386999
You had already been replied to by others and were objectively shown to be speaking with zero knowledge (for example about the spartacist uprising). So, again, go back to /pol/ where you can meme about shit you don't know with others from your hugbox.

>>2387007
This thread is about the perceived stab in the back theory

I have posted in this thread in good faith while all you have tried to do is shoot me down with your memes, you have failed because no-one has provided any evidence that the socialist uprising in 1918 was not a stab in the back, except with broad "the german army was finished anyway" memes.

I said it could withdraw behind the rhine and stop the allies and what do I get? No argument just your a moron

All of your responses are not adding to the discussion so maybe you should leave

File: fuckniggers.jpg (166KB, 657x777px) Image search: [Google]

166KB, 657x777px

>>2387007
>OOMMGGGZZZ OPINIONS I CANT HANDLE THEM
>SOMEBODY BRING TAMPONS MY VAGINA IS LEAKING
either an ugly woman or a pretentious manbaby posting, you can guess by the way the post formed, nothing but insults and low-quality ccusations
posters like you are truly scum, you accuse everybody of what you're guilty of in the first place

>>2387020
Are you literally retarded? The spartacist uprising happened well after the war was over, and was against the new social democrat government. This has already been answered in >>2386407 and >>2386427.

>>2387026
Good post, anon. I truly wonder why some people request that /pol/tards go back to their containment board after seeing your invaluable contributions.

>>2387026
Quit replying to bait

File: 1476042189803.jpg (28KB, 360x254px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 360x254px

>>2387033
you can go to reddit history board if you want history with heavy kool-aid leftist ideology leaning discussion

>>2387045
I guess having an at least minimum knowledge of the end of ww1 and the spartacist uprising before discussing them instead of repeating /pol/ memes is being a leftist.

File: 1435929903608.png (205KB, 394x422px) Image search: [Google]

205KB, 394x422px

>>2387051
jokes on you I don't even know what happened in the last 30 years because history is being twisted for ideological gain

>>2387029
Just to save you from more retardation

>The first acts of revolution were triggered by the policies of the German Supreme Command and its lack of coordination with the Naval Command. In the face of defeat, the Naval Command insisted on trying to precipitate a climactic battle with the British Royal Navy by means of its naval order of 24 October 1918. The battle never took place. Instead of obeying their orders to begin preparations to fight the British, German sailors led a revolt in the naval ports of Wilhelmshaven on 29 October 1918, followed by the Kiel mutiny in the first days of November. These disturbances spread the spirit of civil unrest across Germany and ultimately led to the proclamation of a republic on 9 November 1918. Shortly thereafter, Emperor Wilhelm II abdicated his throne and fled the country.

The revolutionaries, inspired by socialist ideas, failed to hand over power to Soviet-style councils as the Bolsheviks had done in Russia, because the leadership of the Social Democratic Party of Germany (SPD) opposed their creation. The SPD opted instead for a national assembly that would form the basis for a parliamentary system of government

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_Revolution_of_1918–19

>>2386406
It worked for the Japanese.

>>2387071
The german revolution does not equate the spartacist uprising, you giant retard. The spartacist uprising started in 1919.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spartacist_uprising

>>2387085
Im aware the sparticist revolution started in 1919, im saying the socialist revolution of 1918 contributed to the stab in the back claim.

Can you not perceive that in my posts?

>>2387093
>Im aware the sparticist revolution started in 1919
Are you? Let's see:
>The US casualties show that the german army could still fight,if the sparticus uprising had not occured it could withdraw across the Rhine and hold that line effectively.
>if the sparticus uprising had not occured it could withdraw across the Rhine and hold that line effectively
Either you believe that german communists were able to break causality or you were spouting shit about something you knew nothing about. You tell me.

>>2387104
One spelling error and you go autistic spaz?

This is why you shouldnt be posting

>>2387109
>spelling error
:^)

File: amused_003_video_games.png (18KB, 614x604px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 614x604px

>>2387109
Suddenly, it's a spelling error to think that something could've been prevented by something that happens a year later.

Holy shit, the rationalizations you /pol/-retards employ.

>>2387118
So just to be clear.
You're claiming that because he mistakenly conflated the Spartacist uprising that occurred in January with the separate but still Marxist revolts of November (a mere two months earlier), that somehow makes his linking Marxism with Germany's precipitous surrender unreasonable?

>>2386268
dem titties tho

>>2387157
That's not me.
Attributing an effect to a supposed cause that takes place after the effect is unreasonable to anyone that isn't hopelessly retarded, which is why he had to backtrack massively. The only reason he mentions/cares about the spartacist uprising is because he is repeating /pol/tard propaganda like a mindless drone, which tries to link it to the german defeat because jews were overrepresented in the spartacist uprising, but not in the kiel mutiny.

>>2387026
How fucking small is that guys hand?

>>2387171
Your the one bringing the pol baggage into a history thread

Sad

>>2387198
Not really. I'm calling /pol/ propaganda what is objectively /pol/ propaganda. For example the pic in >>2386667 purposefully mixing the german revolution and the spartacist uprising comes from /pol/.
But whatever anon, it's not what the discussion is about.

>>2387171
>Attributing an effect to a supposed cause that takes place after the effect is unreasonable to anyone that isn't hopelessly retarded,

Not when the events occurred within months of each other and involved the same participants (the Spartacists were founded in 1915 and would logically have participated during the November revolution), in which case it is a perfectly understandable error to make.

>>2387212
but the German revolution and the Spartacist uprising cannot be separated as the Spartacist uprising was simply the Spartacus League continuing their revolutionary actions against their more "moderate" comrades in the SPD when they were prevented by them from forming a a government that mirrored that of the Soviet Union.

Pretending that the two are unrelated is highly dishonest.

>>2387216
You are just trying to rationalize your position now ("would logically have participated" is not a fact, it's a desperate speculation). They were not part of the mutiny that started the revolution, in fact their leaders were in prison and the spartacus league dissolved.

>>2387224
>the Spartacist uprising cannot be separated as the Spartacist uprising was simply the Spartacus League continuing their revolutionary
The spartacist uprising was a small part of the german revolution that happened well after it had started. Implying that the leader of the spartacus league leaded the german revolution and that they caused the german defeat is, again, disingenous (and logically impossible). It's a lie for obvious political reasons.

>were prevented by them from forming a a government that mirrored that of the Soviet Union
More /pol/ memes. German communists were more like mensheviks.

>>2387257
>would logically have participated" is not a fact, it's a desperate speculation
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spartacus_League
>Its period of greatest activity was during the German Revolution of 1918, when it sought to incite a revolution by circulating the newspaper Spartacus Letters.[2]

Yes they were clearly dissolved and sitting at home twiddling their thumbs.

>>2387331
Yes, after Liebknecht and Luxemburg were freed from prison, which was three days before armistice.....

>>2387331
>>2387350
Going to sleep. Maybe some other kind anon will take on the role of educating you.

making pretend you can completely separate the German and spartacist revolutions seems wonky desu

>>2387357
>Educating = making you agree with my viewpoint
Fuck off back to Facebook you kike

>>2386268
Truth, thats why removing Jews helped Germany win next big war.

Oh wait ...

>>2386268
Germany woild absolutely still have lost, and decisively, but not so badly that the treaty would be signed the way it was. Also, the 1918 revolution was horrific and came when Germany was at it's weakest, so it's no surprise anyone was bitter about it.

>>2387020
how would they deal with the naval blockade and the possibility of an allied offensive through the now surrendered Austria?

>>2386398
What should Versailles have done? Split Germany in half?

>>2386268
My question is, if the uprisings were a stab in the back, does that mean , that had britain lost the war, would they blame it on the micks who started the 1916 uprising and genocide the micks?

>>2387792
reinstate the holy roman empire

>>2387795
Ireland was more like a colony of GB, it's different than a minority culture within your homeland.

>>2387792
Cancel Unification, mutilate Prussia (giving Poland its rightful clay would be one of best ways to do it).
Additionally blame Germany/Prussia for all things and support individual Germans states identify as opposed to general german one.

>>2386308
They also should have relocated Germany back to the Ruhr, but of course the Americans had to ruin it like everything else

>>2387792
cut all german trigger fingers

File: czech_patrol_sudetes.gif (221KB, 797x504px) Image search: [Google]

221KB, 797x504px

>>2387938
none of that would've been necessary if France and the UK hadn't tolerated Hitler for so long, and handed him Czechoslovakia bound and gagged.

>>2386420
>The military stabbed the military in the back

really fries the neurons

>>2386268
A larger percentage of the Jewish population fought in the German Army than most groups. There were entire Jewish battalions.

>>2386667
>muh heritage Americans believe they're Italians

File: 1393517011993.jpg (70KB, 749x532px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 749x532px

>>2386268
Germany lost at the Marne

>>2386268
Of course it wasn't fucking true. Germany lost the war fair and square, well as much it can be for a war.

The whole anti-Semitic occult thing had a long history in Germany and isn't really surprising that it went into overdrive when Germany faced some of the worst conditions in the those post ww1 years. They were already struggling even before the great depression.

The united states was the only one who got the right idea that grinding Germany's face into the dirt and trying to humiliate them and shower them in debt as much as possible probably wasn't the brightest idea. Which is why reconstruction and rehabilitation was much more focused on after ww2.

>>2388378
>The united states was the only one who got the right idea that grinding Germany's face into the dirt

that was the French, not the U.S. America, or at least Wilson, wanted extremely light reparations if any, and to go back to status quo ante bellum as much as possible in western Europe.

What we got was something of a compromise between the two.

Fun fact: America loaned the money that would wind up paying most of the French war indemnity, but because America forgave its part of the indemnity against Germany, but not their loans to France and Britain, most of that indemnity went right back to the U.S. as the French had to repay their war debt.

>>2388378

The defanging of Germany after WWI was what caused WWII. Completely right IMO

>>2388385
>U.S. America, or at least Wilson, wanted extremely light reparations if any

That's what I was saying

>>2388392

Oh, sorry, I misunderstood you.

>>2386420
>government tries to fuck the military
>military says no
>FUICKING COMMIE JEWS BETRAYTEDS OUR MILITARY AND MADE US LOSE
is this what Stormfags actually believe?

>>2388388
Military cuts not so much. It would take textbooks to really explain ww2 properly. The whole world went crazy after ww1. The destruction, suffering, and misery shook the established outlook on things and led to a lot new thinking.

The harsh economic punishments put on Germany and than the depression exacerbating them further is what really drove the extremist takeover in Germany primarily.

The effect ww1 had the social fabric of the world afterwards is something that is immensely overlooked and forgotten. WW2 overshadowing it and driving away attention to itself is to blame imo.

>>2388411
It's what a substantial number of Germans of the time period believed,"stormfags" are irrelevant. Of course I'm sure every Marxist apologist on here feels they have a better understanding of the time period than the people who were actually there.

>>2388431
>I'm sure every Marxist apologist
I think you mean everyone who isn't a stormfag.
The myth was artificially disseminated by ludendorff (who obviously was interested in taking away his blame as much as possible), it's not something that arised through facts among the population.

>>2388448
Right and the Germans alive at the time, all those veterans who went on to form the freikorps and eventually the SA, clearly they were just a bunch of rubes who were too stupid to keep track of what was happening in their own lives, and notice if what Ludendorff was saying contradicted their own experiences.

>>2388476
German wartime propaganda was constantly exaggerating their victories and belittling their losses to make it seem like they were doing better than they actually were (both sides did this) so of course once they lose it's going to be surprising to the public. It's difficult to know what's actually going on when you're being fed misinformation, and the news back then were nowhere near accurate.

>>2388476
Do you actually believe this is an argument?
Plenty of people believed the stab in the back theory was retarded, how can you possibly know better than them. Plenty of people today believe in conspiracy X, how could you know better than them? Plenty of people today disbelieve in conspiracy X, how could you know better than them?
Pretty fucking retarded ad populum.

>>2388504
So the Marxist revolts were a conspiracy theory? They never actually happened?

>>2388496
The point is that it doesn't matter if Germany's loss was inevitable, a substantial number of German's felt betrayed by the Germans who revolted. A "stab in the back"doesn't have to be the ultimate cause of death to be a stab in the back, the apocryphal fact that Julius Caesar felt especially betrayed by his friend Brutus stabbing him is not negated by the fact that he was already stabbed twenty two times.

>>2387797
Lol

>>2388542
>sailors revolting after being sent in a suicide mission
>muh marxist revolts lost me the war
k

>>2388542
it's a consparicy theory it was the reason Germany lost the war

File: Goalposts.jpg (24KB, 256x202px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 256x202px

>>2388542

>It doesn't matter if the stab in the back myth was the way it was claimed to be. What matters are the feefees of the German people!

Myth of course

>>2388597
I never attempted to prove a prior claim asshole, and yes the FEELINGS of the people who were alive at the time are what matter because they were the motivations for the events that occurred you autistic jackass.

>>2388624

>Did [Historical event X] happen?
>Well, lots of people believed that it did, and they went out and acted on that belief!
>Yeah, but did it happen?
>y-y-y-you're autistic!


Were your mother and father brother and sister? This entire thread has been about whether or not there was a "stab in the back" to the German war effort, and saying whether or not people believed that to be the case is completely fucking irrelevant. You may as well go on about how the ACW wasn't really about slavery, it was about state's rights. Or about how millions of Soviets believed that NATO was going to invade them at any moment, and they needed to be prepared for that eventuality. Or any other damn fool thing.

>>2388563
The fact they were being ordered on a "suicide mission", does not negate the fact that a substantial number of them were Marxists.

>>2388641
It DID happen moron, Marxists DID revolt and hasten then end of the war, the fact that they would have lost the war anyway doesn't matter as the immediate cause of their loss was said mutinies.

>>2388659

>It DID happen moron,

Then funny how you haven't been able to prove it.

>Marxists DID revolt and hasten then end of the war,

The Marxist "revolt" (which was tiny and put down in a week and a half) happened after the Armistice was signed. 1919 is after 1918.

>the fact that they would have lost the war anyway doesn't matter as the immediate cause of their loss was said mutinies.

Who were not communists, and the decision to seek terms was made before they revolted, which is obvious because the chain of reasoning went

1) Germany wishes to seek terms of conditional surrender.
2) Navy high command realizes they haven't had a "proper" battle, wish to go out in a blaze of glory
3) Sailors mutiny over such an obviously suicidal idea.

>>2386645
>when you are Italian and you destroy 2 countries because you wanted some land
>when you dind't get said land and you create the ideology that start another world war
LOL

>>2388707
>The Marxist "revolt" (which was tiny and put down in a week and a half) happened after the Armistice was signed. 1919 is after 1918.

Except many if the mutinies and revolts that happened in 1918 were also Marxist in character you dishonest shit. The fact that the Spartacus league didn't feel they went fat enough does not suddenly change that.

>>2389141
>Except many if the mutinies and revolts that happened in 1918 were also Marxist in character you dishonest shit


[citation needed]

>>2386268
But of course, every defeat of Germans in history was only because of stabs in the back
>[Battle of Grunwald] The legend that the Knights were "stabbed in the back" was echoed in the post-World War I stab-in-the-back legend and preoccupied German historiography of the battle until 1945.

>>2389145
>[citation needed]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_Revolution_of_1918%E2%80%9319
So I guess it's pure coincidence that one half of the belligerents all happened to like the color red right?

>>2389198
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_Revolution_of_1918%E2%80%9319

You are incredibly retarded. Have you actually read that article? Those guys in red revolted against, not the Kaiser's government that was fighting the war, but against the Weimar Republic that had already got an armistice. That's why, when you look at the little graph, you see the Weimar republic on the same side as the German Empire.

The war was over by that point, and thus cannot be a factor in the loss of the war.

>>2389198
It's honestly painful how stupid you people are. Here's a previous version of the article before the weimar republic and the german empire were grouped together:
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=German_Revolution_of_1918%E2%80%9319&oldid=727151932

>>2386316
Orders don't have to have a unique maximal element my senpai

>>2386268
Yes and no. Yes the Socialist and Communist betrayed the war effort and the German revolution and subsequent civil war lead to the immediate end of the First World War, but it also wasn't DA JOOOOOOOS as /pol/ would have you believe. Germany was on the brink of starvation and her armies were being hammered back, they would have been defeated by 1919 and given an even worse peace deal. I honestly believe the world wouls be better if the war had gone on into 1919 and Germany had come under complete occupation and devided into 4 different nations.

>>2386360
We're on /his/, /pol/ is the dedicated boogeyman
If you disagree with someone on whatever topic, call him /pol/

>>2389503
>if he's repeating /pol/ propaganda and posting images and memes from /pol/, call him /pol/

>>2389503
/pol/ is a pretty appropriate bogeyman in a thread about a myth that the German far right and the nazis perpetrated.

>>2386323
>the germans had stockpiles enough ammo to fight until 1924.

War isn't won with ammo alone.
You need food, manpower, morale, and natural resources.

>>2386360
But /pol/ is a big promoter of the "stab in the back" theory. If you do adhere to this theory despite the objective amount of evidence that it is nothing but a myth, you do belong on /pol/ because
>you came from there
Or
>you'll fit right in with the other mouthbreathers

Yes.

>>2388496
>German wartime propaganda was constantly exaggerating their victories and belittling their losses to make it seem like they were doing better than they actually were
It wasn't just a matter of propaganda. Germany was holding out reasonably well - despite the numerical superiority of the enemy - which is what gave the officers confidence. The reason for this were more advanced defensive tactics - e.g. the defence in depth as it was proposed by the staff around Fritz von Lossberg. What should be considered however is that even though Germany had numerous successes at the tactical, military level, when it came to holding the enemy back, they were still losing the war. The loss took place at a larger scale though, as it was strategic in nature. Germany was losing a war of attrition, completely running out of resources. The large scale however was only apparent to the higher ups, not to the officers or soldiers at the front, who were holding out for the most part. Falkenhayn already told the Kaiser in 1915 or 1916 that the best they could achieve would be a stalemate in their favour. Despite the hardship at the front, the loss of the war came as a surprise to many German soldiers, including the officers, as they were seeing their tactics work out for the most part. After the war, the higher ups, most of all Ludendorff, who should have known better - and likely also did - didn't want to be blamed for the lost war. So they made use of this discrepancy in how people experienced the war, fuelling the myth that Germany could have kept fighting, despite the fact that the war effort couldn't have been kept up much longer and would have completely collapsed if the war had been continued much longer.

>>2390247 continued
In fact, the loss of WW1 worked out perfectly well for the military brass, who portrayed themselves as heroes who were betrayed by Jews, Communists, the press, etc.; the Kaiser was sacrificed but arguably he got away a lot better than his cousin in Russia. The blame was taken by the Social Democratic government of the Weimar government who took all the blame.

Instead of dismantling Germany or making the terms of Versailles harsher, the Entente should have tried the Kaiser and the military brass, like it was done in Nuremberg years after, and supported the Social Democratic government of Weimar with a fitting narrative of the megalomaniac German elite plunging Europe into war instead of further destabilising the situation by letting them shoulder most of the blame. That could have actually prevented WW2.

>>2390247
>>2390253


>I have never looked at the Hundred Days Offensive.

>>2390263
The consequences were a lot less dire than they may seem. The German forces consolidated reasonably well.

>>2386268
Myth with elements of truth. Soldiers in the field had no idea how bad things were on the home front, as far as they were concerned they were doing alright. They were still fighting in northern France and Belgium, not Germany.

So they figured that all these jewish newspapers and politicians telling them that they were going to lose were selling them out. After all, they were THERE. They saw how things were.

>>2386268
Truth. A German victory would have caused the bankruptcy of GB and would have led to a massive loss for the US (lend+lease)

File: dnvp-1932.jpg (82KB, 800x564px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 800x564px

>>2386620
It's some sort of phyrgian cap which is associated with soc-dems in 20th century german iconography.

>>2390271

They quite literally were unable to retreat in good order, had enormous numbers of troops surrendering upon contact for the first time, and had the offensive continued, you would have seen mass encirclements.

File: Schneider-CA1-4.jpg (259KB, 1016x717px) Image search: [Google]

259KB, 1016x717px

I swear to God I should type this out once and for all and just repost it everytime Stormtards come out of the woods.
The tl;dr is that German high command already knew they were fucked by July 1918. Specifically if we read the memorandum from the Kronprinz to the Emperor "It is certain that the shortage of raw resources for the war industry is leading us into an untenable situation [...] and even if the war industry remained capable of covering our military needs, it is certain that manpower resources will be incontestably insufficient in the near future". As such Hindenburg and Ludendorf knew that making peace was vital and regularly sent depeches to the PM. The thing was that the high command wanted the politicians to negotiate a peace before the German army was beaten to pieces, precisely because it would allow them to claim that "the german army was never beaten".
Now there are tons of Hindenburg shenanigans here like how he presumably burned all of the here mentioned correspondence on his side after the war and started claiming he was always a partisan of fighting till the end, but I can't be bothered to type all of that out.
Last thing: I've seen some retards claim that the german army had enough supplies to drag out the war. Nothing could be more wrong. They did indeed have over-production of small arms ammo, barbed wire and machine-guns but were already dangerously low on field guns and artillery (in 1918 a lot of the German infantry was captured allied pieces, with the percentage growing each month). But most importantly they could neither feed nor clothe their army, and even if you have all the ammo you need, it won't help you when you're naked and starving.

>>2387792
permanent occupation and French-Polish border on the Wesser

>>2390247
>"""""""""""reasonably well"""""""""""
I wasn't aware feeding your soldiers nettle soup and K-brot meant you were winning

File: Sentry-with-trench-mag-G98-Sept-19161.jpg (4MB, 2601x1770px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 2601x1770px

>>2390443
Dont bother , your wrong


By the end of the summer of 1918 Germany had spent her offensive potential and was probably incapable of winning the war outright, but so to was the offensive power of France and Britan

Only the US had the troops and morale to continue a war across the Rhine


The germans knew they could not win the war, and called a cease fire and negotiated to accept President Wilson's Fourteen Points

The Americans immediately accepted this, the British and French refused and it was only when Pershing would abandon the fight if the terms were not accepted, the other allies consented.

>There was no stab in the back
The treaty of versailles was signed in 1919, when germany was collapsing because of revolution and food insecurity.If the german army had still been in place in the ukraine germany would have been receiving regular shipments of grain


The real betrayal that allowed the Germans to "lose" the war was by President Wilson, who abandoned every one of his Fourteen Points and allowed the Imperial Powers to impose a Carthaginian Peace upon the prostrate German nation.

>>2390297
German soldiers were already malnourished at this point and surrendered in droves. They knew how bad things were, the civilians on the other hand only had the state propagand to rely on.

>>2390502
>The treaty of versailles was signed in 1919
They weren't about to restart the war after the armistice in 1918

>>2390502
>By the end of the summer of 1918 Germany had spent her offensive potential and was probably incapable of winning the war outright, but so to was the offensive power of France and Britan
This is just so utterly wrong. Just read any German accounts, they all talk about how they have nothing, no food and no firepower, but the brits and french had it all.

>>2390502
nice meme
When Max von Baden sued Wilson for peace via telegraph the 3rd October 1918, the response was that allies would only negotiate together and not before Wilhelm abdicated.
Nice reddit spacing too.

>>2390502
Get the fuck out you retarded wehraboo and stop with your dumb lies.

>>>/pol/ is that way

>>2389241
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=German_Revolution_of_1918%E2%80%9319&oldid=727151932
>Around 4 November, delegations of the sailors dispersed to all of the major cities in Germany. By 7 November, the revolution had seized all large coastal cities as well as Hanover, Brunswick, Frankfurt on Main and Munich. In Munich, a "Workers' and Soldiers' Council" forced the last King of Bavaria, Ludwig III, to abdicate.
>"Workers and Soldier's Council"
>LITERALLY a goddamn Soviet
Yeah you're right. it's just another "Red Scare", and I'm IMAGINING that there were Marxists involved in the November revolution.

It's just "Reds under the bed" hysteria people go back to sleep and ignore the crazy guys talking about mythical Marxists that according to other Marxists aren't actually Marxists and are just a figment of the paranoid reactionary imagination.

File: nvgs.jpg (21KB, 427x427px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 427x427px

>>2390502

>mfw Magazine loaded rifles from BF1 are real

>>2390543
can at least reply with a original response?
getting a but stale

If Germany actually had a proper communist revolution before the war it never would've been dragged into it.

>>2386293
>Im uneducated so i get triggered when people say anything about WWII

Fuck off, dickhead

>>2391210
>Can't even identify the proper war
>Calls others uneducated

ISHIGGITY NIGGITY BIX NOOD

Well, you want believe in military documents from german army or totalitarian propaganda from another loser regime?

>>2391405
>Well, you want believe in totalitarian propaganda from another loser regime or totalitarian propaganda from another loser regime?
???

>>2390705
It was a popular revolution. Socialist ideas were extremely popular among Europeans back then. After the war during the elections SPD got 37% of votes, DDP 18%, USPD 7%. Meanwhile conservatives from DNVP only 10%.

It wasn't just some small socialist conspiracy. The people wanted a change.

File: bernhard-von-bulow.jpg (33KB, 360x483px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 360x483px

>>2386268
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qyYeDpbAwlI

>>2386279
>>2386281
>>2386292
>>2386293
>>2386308
>>2386316
>>2386323
>>2386342
>>2386349
>>2386388
>>2386392
>>2386393
>>2386394
>>2386398
>>2386406
>>2386407
>>2386426
>>2386420
>>2386667

>>2387029
To be fair /pol/ uses the image to point out that Jews were behind communism in Germany. The two uprisings were from the same source.

Either way Hitler references both in Mein Kampf when he explains the stab in the back.

>>2387938
I'm just going to play DLG and wilson at the conference when clemencaue suggested created an independant rhineland state and a union between austria and bavaria.

1. Germans have a right to self determination
2. Britian wants access to German markets for trade which is easy with united germany and hard with land locked states
3. Britian wants a balance of power on the continent not French dominated one
4. Germany was already going to lose the corridor, alsace lorraine, sudetenland, saarland, memel, silesia, and more.
5. Germany was going to demilitarize the rhineland losing manpower and giving France the opportunity in a war to quickly invade Germany.

Of course the treaty was designed to create enemies on all of germany's borders and to give france a quick way in to germany but Deladier would squander all of this.

>>2390540
The response was 'we won't negotiate with the autocrats of germany' whatever that means.

>>2386268
I mean Allied forces never did actually reach mainland Germany by the time they surrendered but other countries like Austria and Turkey gave out and were ripe with revolts as was Germany itself.

>>2386388
>The US casualties show that the german army could still fight
Dumb dumb, it just showed the American army (which was 90% green) was still figuring out modern warfare. FFS.

>>2386446
>>Italians sweep
lol

>>2390531
>but the brits and french had it all.
Because of the Yanks. Our army and the French army were bled white and our governments were broke. What we had were secure loans thanks to the Americans, American troops and supplies, and still plenty of Canadians to call on.

>>2386268
a piece of NAZI propaganda to spread hate

File: lol nazis.jpg (469KB, 1530x1127px) Image search: [Google]

469KB, 1530x1127px

>>2386268
No, ass mad German nationalists and Revisionists Nazis made this up because they thought they could take on a group of countries several times the population size and manufacturing capability they had and win. And god forbid a Nazi has to admit a "master race aryan nation" made a really dumb fucking mistake.

Anyone who cries that it was Marxists are one of these aforementioned ass blasted nazis.

>>2394504
this

>>2392734
>neofolk
tips

>>2392034
>It wasn't just some small socialist conspiracy.
NO ONE CLAIMS THIS.
The stabbed in the back "myth" is that Communists betrayed the German war effort and forced Germany's surrender, which objectively happened. The fact it was a "popular" movement is irrelevant.

The stabbed in the back "myth" is only a myth to those who can't stand to live in a world where Nazis aren't purely irrational lunatics who should be freely beaten in the streets. Germany was objectively stabbed in the back by international Marxism and it's no surprise that Marxists have done their best to downplay this.

>>2395738
Why did they launch invasions if their internal problems were so convoluted? Why were they trying to impose a system on the world that they couldn't even make work for themselves?

>>2395738
>and forced Germany's surrender,
Except that's not what happened

>>2394615
>If you acknowledge that Germany's surrender was precipitated by Marxists taking advantage of low morale among troops and starting revolts across Germany, clearly you must be a Nazi intent on invading Poland.

Why do Marxists go out of their way to turn everyone into Nazis? Is it some sort of weird political shit-test from a feminine ideology that desperately wants to be put back in it's place by a strong authoritarian regime?

>>2395757
What the hell are you talking about?

>>2395801
If Germany couldn't reconcile their own internal politics what made them think it was a good idea to impose their faction on everyone else? Would you play ball if the goalie was drunk?

>>2395786
I'm not going to dance in circles with you Red. If you want to pretend that mutinies and general strikes organized by "Workers and Soldiers Councils" had nothing to do with Germany's surrender that's your business.

>>2395812
Again, I have no idea what you're talking about, repeating the same thing over again doesn't explain anything.

>>2395789
>feminine ideology

Why do stormfags go out of their way to fetishize every political faction they're up against? Is it some sort of bizarre reaction to interracial and tranny exposure?

I'm far from a prude, but my word.

>>2395819
Except Ludendorff already described the situation as hopeless and they had started looking for peace terms before the revolution. The revolution was a symptom of Germany's hopeless situation and loss rather than the cause of it.

>>2395837
Ludendorf had lost his nerve and become defeatist

>>2395824
They invaded the world with a broken heart, and that looses.

>>2395845
You're completely delusional if you think Germany was starring down anything other than defeat in 1918, especially after the spring offensive.

>>2395789
Because, depspite every Nazi's insistance, in every fucking instance Marxists=/=Jews. And Don't you go citing the Spartacus shit. That happened after WW1 so no, that didn't cause Germany to surrender. Also

>Marxists taking advantage of low morale among troops and starting revolts across Germany,

You're a fucking idiot. Marxists were taking advantage that Germany was practically a ruined nation from WW1. Had the war gone beyond their failed offensive, Berlin would of probably starved had Entente not gotten there before that. Germany also faced a shortage of raw materials. Combine this with the fact that the government was ordering practical suicide runs on the Entente forces, It's not hard to see why there were revolts in the final days of the war. Germany was beat and throwing more men at the Entente would of delayed them for few more months at most. The citizens were miserable, the military was as well. The government made them go on for the sake of "muh national pride". So of course they revolted, life sucked. But it wasn't because of precipitation by "Jews or Marxists" but rather because Germany devoted all of it's being to fight a war against a group of powers with a much larger population and manufacturing base then it had and lost. It isn't rocket science.


Oh wait, it's probably rocket science because a stupid fucking Nazi like you can't see how men would revolt if they barely had basic necessities in their country. Nationalism doesn't mean shit to a starving man.

>>2395832
I do it because I know it will provoke a reaction.

>>2395886
>Nationalism doesn't mean shit to a starving man.
It's not as though continuing the war at that point was sensible from a nationalistic point of view either.

>>2386308
>though obviously at the time they had no way of knowing how it would turn out and very reasonably wanted to end the war ASAP
No, the obviously DID know that it would've ended with a victory, since THEY ALREADY WON.

Their victory was complete. So devastating and absolute that they could wreck the entire country.

Nobody signs a peace treaty like that unless they absolutely know there is no way around it.

Germans were fucked and they knew it.

>>2395871
Is that why the allies were still fighting in france, and not germany?

>>2395922
Because a rout isn't instantaneous.


>>2395904
You're right, but you see, Nazis only see "muh racial pride and fatherland" as the only drivers of men.

>>2395886
>NAZI!
>NAZI!
>NAZI!
Booooring.
I haven't once brought up Jews in this discussion, all I have said is that Marxist revolts were the immediate cause of Germany's surrender, just as they were the immediate cause of Russia's withdrawal from the war, or is that just another "myth" spread by evil Nazis too?

>b-but the people were miserable!
>defeat was inevitable!
Right and that's why the Russian war effort collapsing had nothing to do with all the Marxists running around too right?

>>2395972
In Russia there was quite a lot more Marxists running around.

>>2386268
The German army was stabbed in the back. However, not by Hindenburg or ludendorf. They were stabbed in the back by bankers and war profiteers, just like every other national army fighting in the great war, save a few of the smaller nations like Serbia

>>2395922
Where do you think things were headed after the Hundred Days Offensive? Germany basically shot its load with the spring offensive, what makes you think Germany had any chance against the continued blockade and USA's economic might and manpower backing up the allies? People in parts Germany and Austria-Hungary were literally on the brink of death due to cold and starvation because of the huge lack of food and materials caused by the British blockade. The army was in tatters and the Hindenburg line didn't hold. The war wasn't winnable and the Germans should have counted themselves lucky the war wasn't brought to their homes except in small parts of Elsass-Lothringen/Alsace-Lorraine and Prussia.

>>2386388
Germany lost at the Marne. WWI became a war of attrition, a war they could never win against The Entente and their global empires. Even if they still could fight, what the fuck besides a prolonged suffering for their own starving people could they possibly achieve?

>>2395972
>all I have said is that Marxist revolts were the immediate cause of Germany's surrender

The successful blockade and the fact they were starving out their troops surely had nothing to do with it.

>>2396010
Money for banks and arms/materiel production magnates

>>2395995
Which is why the October revolution in Russia was a "success" while the Spartacist uprising in Germany was put down.

Interesting how both Imperial Russia and Imperial Germany experienced two stage revolutions provoked by Marxists, I'm sure it's all just a coincidence though.

>>2395972
The primary reasons for both Germany and Russia's withdrawal from the war was material conditions and military losses. Revolutions wouldn't have happened in Germany or Russia if they were doing well. Though in Russia the revolutionaries themselves brought about the peace, while in Germany peace was sought by the imperial and then republican government without the hard left revolutionaries. Ironically the first round of Russian revolutionaries under Kerensky actually kept the war going and it's ultimately a large part of the reason why they lost power to the bolsheviks.

>>2396026
Wouldn't be the first time a bunch of revolutions happened simultaneously, spurred by other revolutions. It happened in Europe previously around the time Stirner was writing, actually.

>>2396009
Again, the germans still controlled parts of France, and the allies had not conquered any german territories.

In negotiating an armistice, why were the germans forced to accept humiliating terms?

Either it couldnt fight anymore(your position)

or

Socialist revolts in germany weakened its negotiating position

>>2396022
I never said they didn't.
The fact your house was on the brink of collapse due to dry rot and a shifting foundation does not change the fact that the immediate cause of your being homeless is that a pyromaniac burned your house down.

>>2396058
Except they would have collapsed regardless, the revolution was a product of the failure of their war effort, not the other way around.

Goddamn, you have drunk deep of Mein Kampf. Never go full Hitler.

>>2396058
what if the pyromaniac was a natural consequence of the house being in that state? is it really a stab in the back if something such may happen in any nation put into th same situation?

File: Wilhelm11.jpg (37KB, 580x386px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 580x386px

>>2396053
They had no negotiation position. They were practically out of France at the end of the hundred days offensive. The war was lost and everyone knew it. The only thing that might have been gained by continuing the war was continued deterioration of conditions for all Germans, further humiliation, perhaps even worse terms and maybe the stab in the back myth wouldn't have been a thing.

It's not some game where you need tally up territory points to decide who's winning.

File: French war aim.png (203KB, 3223x2324px) Image search: [Google]

203KB, 3223x2324px

>>2396096
Also here is an example of how Germany might have been humiliated far worse.

>>2396053
>in a parallel reality hitler is toppled in 1944 and a "humiliating" peace is reached before the country is occupied and raped into oblivion
>mfw some stormfag would be claiming that he was stabbed in the back and germany wasn't even occupied at the time so they were doing okay

>>2395898
It doesn't provoke a reaction, it makes you out for the depraved fetishist you are on the inside. I recommend figuring out a better way to trick people into following you.

>>2396132
>French plan 1915
that was by a party that barely got any votes, no?

>>2396152
I'm honestly not sure about the source and I didn't mean to present it as the actual war aims. But the Rhineland part is definitely relevant, because there were serious desires on France's part to either annex or otherwise separate the Rhineland, a vital region, from Germany. It's pretty unclear what they would have gotten away with considering the USA was breathing down their necks though and I don't know much about balkanisation ambitions beyond that.

>>2396135
If germany had negotiated peace in 1944 they would have done alot better than 50 years of occupation and rape

>>2396094
>is it really a stab in the back if something such may happen in any nation put into the same situation?

Yes.
The same way that just because your relationship is on the rocks now that you got laid off from your job and you spend the day smoking pot and watching daytime TV, doesn't make it any less of a backstab when when your wife cheats on you, even if stuff like that may happen in any relationship placed in the same situation.

File: 1433440574176.png (283KB, 680x694px) Image search: [Google]

283KB, 680x694px

>>2386667
>Posts and image so wrong and well spread there exists images explaining it is wrong as well as memes making fun of it
>Considers his opinions valid in any way

File: 1424455799446.png (515KB, 738x649px) Image search: [Google]

515KB, 738x649px

woogi boogi wite boiz

>>2396308
is it a stab in the back in the context it was used though?
the term was used in such a way that it was avoidable and would have been avoided if it wasn't communists or Jews had beenaround?
is it wrong to say people went with whoever that promised peace and it conventially turned out to be the communists since they did promise peace and had proben to be succesfull already in Russia?

>>2396323
>Posts and image so wrong and well spread there exists images explaining it is wrong as well
Would be interested to see them

>>2396141
>claims it doesn't provoke a reaction
>proceeds to project all over the place and claim I'm trying to get people to "follow me"
k

>>2395972
> Marxist revolts were the immediate cause of Germany's surrender,

That is a myth though. That's like attributing a bridges collapse to the teenagers graffiting it, not the engineers who built it.

>>2386268
Why does that jew have nicer tits than me?

>>2396329
Yes.
Betrayal is betrayal and a substantial number people of Germany felt betrayed by the actions of people who preferred peace over dignity. You can't just call them wrong for feeling betrayed just because you don't share the same priorities as them

>>2396368
Right just like it's wrong to attribute the signing of the Brest Litovsk treaty of 1928 to the mythical newly installed Bolshevik government that never actually existed. Russia's withdrawal was inevitable due to poor morale and shortages, the Marxists agitating in the streets and barracks leading to the eventual mythical overthrow of the Tsarist government had nothing to do with it and was just an example of historical coincidence.

>>2396459
*Brest Litovsk treaty of 1918

>>2396459
The analogy would actually work if Kerensky has signed the armistice but you were blaming the bolsheviks. Actually, the tsar would have had to be negotiating an armistice before the revolution to be a good analogy.

>>2396459
Again, same thing. Russia was a failing state with a people not having basic necessities. The Tsar mismanaged his way into ruin. The following revolution was a symptom of this, just not some magical occurrence. And it's not really fair to compare Russia to Germany. Russia's Revolution was massive. The Spartacus revolt was tiny in comparison. tiny enough that a shitty volunteer milita put them down.

Again, Marxists didn't cause Germany to lose the war, it was years of fighting countries with more manufacturing and population than them. Marxists were merely a symptom of the countries decay, not a cause.

>>2396546
Country's

File: 3997430845_234d2a697c_b.jpg (230KB, 1024x594px) Image search: [Google]

230KB, 1024x594px

>>2396546
>tiny enough that a shitty volunteer milita put them down.
The freikorps were veteran stormtruppen picked by the german army

>>2396565
While his description of them as a shitty volunteer militia is inaccurate, I've never seen them described as "veteran stormtruppen picked by the german army" either. They were voluntary organisations made up of veterans and not just stormtruppen.