Who was in the wrong here?

>>3060635
Kaiser Wilhelm II, Tzar Nicolas II, Count Leopold Berchtold and Heinrich von Tschirschky + a slew of other military and diplomatic folks

>>3060635
>3 germans and a turk

They are all wrong by default.

>>3061749
>Tzar Nicolas II
No, he wasn't

>>3061801
>No, he wasn't

He was, he tried to pull the same disastrous game of bluffing which got him mangled less than a decade earlier by the Japanese.

If he did not have the Imperial Army mobilise there would have been no war. Yes its true he wasnt a war mongerer but without his actions the conflict would have been limited to Serbia and the world war would have been averted.

>>3061835
>Japanese & German aggression is your fault, now sit in the corner while we ravaging Serbia
Wow, just wow

>>3061835
The tzar in WWI is like the Japanese emperor in WWII, he didn't have much choice, and was waved around like a flag by persons more powerful than him.
Willy had a similar fate as WWI went on, and Germany became a defacto military dictatorship led by that ugly dwarf who founded the nazi party later, whats his name Ludendwarf or whatever.

>>3060635
Arm*nians

>>3062030
>The tzar in WWI is like the Japanese emperor in WWII, he didn't have much choice, and was waved around like a flag by persons more powerful than him.

The idea that Hirohito was just a pawn is coming under new scrutiny. I dont really see the evidence being there for Nick being like that the Russian military knew they were unprepared for War and did not wish it, likewise aside from ordering it Nick personally cancelled the mobilisation for 2 days based on a telegram he received from Willy something which a war mongering ministry would not have allowed a puppet to do.

>Willy had a similar fate as WWI went on,

Doesnt change the fact that he played the role of a massive hawk in the July Crisis and lead up when he had full control.

>>3062087
Nicky was in power at all times, he was just a cardboard zero flavor no opinions man who agreed to whatever was suggested to him.
In that sense, he didn't rule, since he just nodded to his ministers who made decisions.

>>3062092
Come now you are treating him like an a mechanical being, he always had the choice when it come to accepting or rejecting advice and was no mere puppet.

Indeed just look at instances where he acted against advice from those around him - such as when it came to mobilisation, him taking personal command of the Army or for him to abdicate before it was too late.

I would say he was less a cardboard man and more of a mercurial man who was in his stubborn monarchism.
>since he just nodded to his ministers who made decisions.

Which minister told him to suspend the

>>3062108
Ignore, I failed to get rid of a dodgy argument

">since he just nodded to his ministers who made decisions.

Which minister told him to suspend the"