Avoiding WWII

>>2649687
yes

>>2649687
no

I don't know

>>2649687
can you repeat the question?

>>2649687
either. the way it was, it was too harsh for germany to carry on normally without a war, but not so harsh as to cripple it enough to prevent from being capable of a war

>>2649687
Sort of

>>2649687
dubya dubya two was unavoidable
/thread

>>2649713
EPBP

We wouldn't have been born if it didn't happen.

>>2649687
To answer this simply look at modern history. Were the terms imposed on Germany after WW2 harsher than the Versailles treaty? If so, has there been a new war?

So what's the answer.

Here's another lesson from history regarding leniency or harshness in regards to a beaten enemy, it's a summary of Livy following the Roman defeat by the Samnites at the Battle of Caudine Forks:
>the Samnites had no idea what to do to take advantage of their success. Hence Pontius was persuaded to send a letter to his father, Herennius. The reply came back that the Romans should be sent on their way, unharmed, as quickly as possible. This advice was rejected, and a further letter was sent to Herennius. This time the advice was to kill the Romans down to the last man.

>Not knowing what to make of such contradictory advice, the Samnites then asked Herennius to come in person to explain. When Herennius arrived he explained that were they to set the Romans free without harm, they would gain the Romans' friendship. If they killed the entire Roman army, then Rome would be so weakened that they would not pose a threat for many generations. At this his son asked was there not a middle way. Herennius insisted that any middle way would be utter folly and would leave the Romans smarting for revenge without weakening them.

Versailles was a half measure, no half measures.

>>2649707
basically this, either conquer them or step the fuck off.

File: ready for the bbc.jpg (72KB, 469x600px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 469x600px

Not enough.

>Germany lost little land and what it did lose was mostly ethnically Polish
>Germany's industry was basically untouched by the war while they ravaged France's; the treaty did not balance that out
>Germany entered the war with Europe's largest continental GDP, exited the war with the same and underwent great economic growth until the depression
>reparations were designed to look much worse than they really were; French/British specifically designed reparations that Germany was able to pay
>total bill that Germany had to pay was $12.5 billion; to appease their populations at home, the allies designed the treaty to look like Germany was paying $33 billion. The Germans were able to turn this around and make it look like they were forced to pay far more than they could afford.

The conditions Germany offered as a PEACE arrangement in 1916 were much more harsh than what they got from what was a fairly unambiguous defeat. And let's not even think about comparing this treaty to what they imposed on the Russian Empire after they won that war.

>>2649721
You wouldn't have been born if your dad took another stroke to nut.

>>2649721
how is this a bad thing?

>>2649707
This.