Comments on: Why did Germany lose World War One?

By: dosen't matter

dosen't matter — Sun, 22 Apr 2012 21:58:46 +0000

worst information ever!!!!!!!! And FYI at near end of the war no german land was occupied by the allies, internal collapse was the main cause of them losing…

By: Zarathustra

Zarathustra — Wed, 28 Mar 2012 16:40:37 +0000

Hallo I´m German so please don´t be angry if I make some language mistakes.

Most informations of the article are right, but there are some points I can´t agree with.
Firstly, you are writing “Britain, France and Russia winning the war successfully”.
Im sorry, but that´s wrong. Of course Britain and France won, but Russia lost the war, they surrendered in the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk 1918. After war it was canceled, but Russia didn´t even exist than, because it became to the USSR.
In war they were defeated and after it they lost territory to the new Polish state.
Secondly, Germany don´t even lost the war because of France and Great Britain (I don´t write this, only because I´m German):
1914-1915 German troops conquered fastly big parts of France and Paris would be able to conquer.
In the same time Austria-Hungary lost everywhere against the Russian army, so Germany had to help them. In same time Russia attacked eastern Germany and 1915 Italy decleared us the war, so there was not enough troops for the western front.
German troops were still relatively effective on all fronts, you can see it on the winnings in the east and number of casulties, which mostly was smaller than the losses of the entente.
But until 1916-17 Germany was still economically at an advantage, so that French front was almost at the collapse, many allied soldiers in this time wanted do desert. This still happened in Italy and the disaster took its course there.
The Blockade of the british navy wasn´t so important, it only killed many civillians, but after the USSR surrendered, Germany got his food from the Ukraine, so the british blockade bekame senceless. 1918 Germany conquered the biggest part of the italian and russian war equipment and still one million soldiers from the eastern front became free for France.
The point because of that Germany still lost the war is the entry in war of the United States.
Without US troops and US equipement, then Germany would have won in the Spring Offensive 1918 (with new troops from the east), which was verry succesfull, but failed because of the big number of new coming US troops.
This was Germany’s own fault because of the submarine war (how you said).
And still one point: Germany didn´t start this war. It´s not like in world war two!

By: Renal

Renal — Mon, 19 Mar 2012 13:51:57 +0000

Some comments are always more terrible than the essay.
I agree with some of ur perspectives ‘cauze i’m dealing with the factors which caused Germans agreeing to an Armistice in Nov.1918
Ur essay helped me to check my points.
Thanks a lot.

By: Chase Unfried

Chase Unfried — Wed, 11 Jan 2012 23:28:02 +0000

“However, Germany’s Schlieffen plan completely failed”
Considering the fact that they never fully executed the original Schlieffen plan and the general acting on it was a coward, and always doubted everything he did, until he fucked it up, yeah. The Schlieffen plan would’ve probably destroyed what chance France had. Oh, and the French sucked, like every war.

By: Denis DAVID MSANGAZI

Denis DAVID MSANGAZI — Mon, 14 Nov 2011 19:40:02 +0000

nice answer…i give it 9/10

By: Jeff

Jeff — Sat, 23 Jul 2011 01:37:03 +0000

@delmar
I know you wrote your comment a few years ago, but the US (who entered the war in 1917) had little impact in actual battles compared to Britain, Canada, France, and Russia. When the US declared war, they needed 100 days to get to the European Front. The Germans knew this so they launched an offensive to through the Allies back into the sea. Canada (and elements of the British army) started a series of counter offensives which re-gained much land, and had a significant toll on the German armed forces on the Western Front, both in material and men. Saying US won WW1 and \’kicked ass\’ is ridiculous.

By: I am no expert

I am no expert — Mon, 13 Jun 2011 01:58:07 +0000

First of all, atleast the author had made an effort into writing this. I’m sure all you people criticizing this essay couldn’t do a better job. Though yes, I must agree that there are some main points missing, but it did give me some help when studying for my history exam. So, thank you

By: redburn

redburn — Sun, 24 Apr 2011 00:47:58 +0000

write an article about germany on ww2 and message me: my triond username is redburn

By: thechief

thechief — Wed, 30 Mar 2011 06:16:02 +0000

okay to begin with germany didn’t just lose the war, many other nations got screwed! brittan and france lost almost an entire generation of men. another thing the u-boat campaign was brilliant( i am not German) it attack Britain on all fronts, the english tried everything and the depth charges were very inaccurate plus when the British were trying to get any supplies through to england they had to be accompanied by two battle ships simply because the submarines were brilliant in destroying ships

By: Brewchief

Brewchief — Sat, 19 Mar 2011 05:42:11 +0000

“yo”, you really shouldn’t be lashing out at anyone in defense of this “essay”. It is riddled with so many inaccuracies and so oversimplified that it is UTTERLY USELESS as a history resource. There are many great resources to learn about history. This is not one of them.

Try going to a library and cracking a book. The more the better, as you will find many opposing viewpoints and documentation of historical events.