A simple question but I am a simple person:
Why did Germany lose the First World War when battles on the Western Front never touched German soil and the Eastern Front was a victory for the Germans (Russian surrender / Treaty of Brest-Litovsk). On paper, it seems like they came out the strongest overall. Most of the fighting in the west was in Belgium and France.
So why and how did the Germans lose the war?
>>401853
Because their army was broken, and losing ground fast, by the standards of WW1 anyway, during the 100 days offensive.
If they hadn't quit, the Allies would have rolled all the way to Berlin, what with a 2:1 advantage on the front, more manpower reserves to draw upon, and not having a crippling blockade mess up the home front.
>>401853
Because WWI was a war of attrition, the point was to wear down the opposing army and totally demoralize them with boredom and frustration.
And Germans got fed up with the war and started a bunch of revolutions at once which ruined Germany's chance of any victory.
>>401853
Germany was blockaded to shit, and really in general didn't have great foreign support compared to the Entente, as the US was trading with them to a much greater extent. The strain on the homefront was beginning to intensify (see: 1917 Turnip winter). Germany was also stretched pretty thin when you consider the amount of reserves US/Britain/France could put to the table (consider the colonies for the latter two).
They weren't militarily defeated but that was an inevitability after the Ludendorff offensive failed and the US was able to bring tons of troops on the daily.
Population and morale. The German ruling party knew they couldn't win but were trying to hold on for some good terms. The people were tired of their family member laying dead on a field. The soldiers saw millions of death for nothing. The allies had put much more work into things like tanks which proved incredibly effective while the germans had put their money into other places.
>>401853
Here's an interesting fact: towards the end of the war, conveyor belts were made of human hair because they couldn't get rubber.
Things were falling the fuck apart.
Since this looks like a civil thread, can we also discuss how WWI was the death of the European noble caste?
>>401914
The cult of the offensive man. It appealed to the nobility leading to the literal death of the noble caste.
>>401914
Also a lot of nobles were terrible soldiers compared to officers with proper modern training so they got killed.
The Western Front was the most important front of the war, a lose there would be victory for the Allied forces. However, think not of how powerful Germany was, but rather of her allies. When Austria succumbs to the Serbs and loses a major battle(Doiran), Germany has to divert a huge amount of Forces from the West, back to the East.
This happens right after the Michael offensive, one of the deadliest(and largest) offensives of the War. This happened in the West, and was very successful, but it already began to weaken the Germany army with how many Germans were lost. Michael could have been successful, were it not for Doiran, Opp. Michael would have been a slow bleedout for the West, the US(who just entered the war) could not continue to supply extra troops from so far away.
All in all, Germany was clearly the most powerful, educated, well armed Power during the first World War, but it's allies were two dying empires against the strongest nations in the world at the time.
>>401914
Can we thank Bolshevism for this? Early 20th century socialism was on a lot of soldiers minds at the end of the war.
>>401853
They were starving and at the end of their rope. They made gains early in the war and held onto them for nearly four years, but they were running out of men, ammunition, and food.
To get an idea of just how bad things were for Germany, the few U-boat sailors (the best fed German soldiers of the entire war) who were captured found that their POW rations were far better than anything they got with the Navy.
They were on the verge of getting steamrolled when the war ended. Sure, some wanted to fight on (notably, the Navy was fully content to go out in a blaze of glory off the English Coast), but the German morale was shattered after the last of multiple "final offensives" failed decisively in 1918.
>>401983
A Cult of the defensive/artillery adopted by germany would have led the allies to slaughter on the german high ground. As joffre would have certainly sent his man far ahead with limited artillery support, perhaps with more causalities then the battles of the frontiers when the germans counterattacked. French's BEF certainly would have had no support. For that to be so however they would have had to have a thoroughly modern mind in charge, which means moltke being gone, falkenhyn isnt much better. Perhaps hindenburg could have done it.
>>401983
Honestly most of it was just the 1800's thinking mixed with the 1900s tech. If the people up top werent so stuck in their ways the war could have been much much different.
>>401853
Supplies, supplies, and foremost supplies.
Because the will of their people was broken and they didn't have a fanatical leader to lead them into total destruction
>>401866
>Germans were fed up
Those were Jews, anon.
>>401975
The Navy was not content to go out in a blaze of glory at all. Sailors mutined at the idea of being wasted pointless attacks. Which is an important factor in why the Germans surrenderd.
>>402898
Germany was literally starving to death, and their army was starving with them. The Jews didn't do shit that the British blockade didn't do 100x worse.
>>402898
Right, all those sailors, they were all jewish, because Wilhelm had put extra effort into creating a kosher navy.
>>403773
Don't you understand, anon? It was Jewish Agitators! They're the reason the navy mutinied, not because they were starving while being confined to rusting ships for years at a time.
If it weren't for those evil Jews, the Kaiserliche Marine would have *totally* been content to throw itself onto its own sword to give its admirals a chance to reclaim their honor.
>>401853
Their army got completely shrecked. They just had the good sense to surrender before they got completely destroyed.
Consider, as late as 1944, German soil was untouched in WWII. But millions had died on the Eastern Front, the allies had landed in France, the Soviets alone would have been insurmountable, and they had lost the naval and air wars.
No one would doubt that if they surrendered in October of 1944, the Germans would surrender because they were defeated.
The situation was even worse in November 1919. Their army had been carved out. They weren't even capable of tactical offensives anymore. They just were capable of brief moments of tactical defense to cover blind, disorganized retreat, leaving behind equipment and supplies.
They were all spend. There were no fight left in the soldiers.
>>402092
The people up top were eminently aware of the problems of 1900s tech, and had spent the last few decades revolutionizing military thought on the matter.
The problem was disseminating that downwards. That called for a massive reorginazation of military training and education at the low level officer and NCO level. It's all good if the French General staff understands that tactics need to change, but haven't worked out what this means for teaching their colonel, teaching their majors, down to the level of what the french conscript gets taught.
The problem was, everyone was trying to do this WHILE the fighting was going on.
You can lose a war anywhere at all, why does the location matter?
Germany just didn't get invaded by the 1918 counter-offensive because they surrendered too quickly.
>>403787
This guys get it. Hunger is a Jewish conspiracy to make us think we have to consume their wares. I only drink things to keep Goldenberg where I want him. People in Africa aren't dying due to lack of food, it's lack of democracy.
>>403829
No, you idiot. Africans die from starvation because they are an "inferior" race created by Jews to trick us into thinking we need food.
This is why breatharianism is discredited by Jewish run academia and media at every opportunity. Because if people realized we didn't need any food, the whole Jewish Banking system would crumble!
>A week or so before the beginning of the German offensive in Flanders, in April 1918, I was attached to Infantry Assault Battalion and my orders were to establish and advance a first aid post. We went over the top against Portuguese divisions. It didn’t offer much resistance and we took them prisoner or they ran away faster than we could even run.
Near Merville I came to a British field hospital, completely intact and there I saw for the first time since years the abundance of material, of equipment which we didn’t know anymore about. Amongst other things I found cases full of surgical gloves. The German doctors had to operate with their bare fingers.
They had to go into the purulent and contaminated wounds with their bare hands and the only thing to wash our hands with was a kind of sand soap. Two parts of sand, one part of soap.
>>401853
>Why did Germany lose the First World War when battles on the Western Front never touched German soil
They surrendered when it was about to happen
>>401853
The stuff you mentioned is also main reason why was for German public so hard to accept harsh peace terms. Propaganda claimed to the last time they were still able to win.
Didnt the Kaiser resign? Leaving a power vacuum?
The lease radical revolutionaries were sent to negotiate the peace terms because Ludendorf was having mental breakdowns, and these inexperienced revolutionaries agreed to anything to stop the war(the still got a better deal than the Bolsheviks peace treaty)
>>401853
>Why did Germany lose the First World War
Influenza. Spanish Flu ended the war.
Ludendorff blamed the disease for directly affecting Germany's offensives in 1918.
>>404095
>Didnt the Kaiser resign? Leaving a power vacuum?
The Kaiser didn't resign, he fucking fled.
He ran away, insisting he was still in charge.
As for Ludendorf, he was removed even before the Armistice was signed. Though yes, because of nervous breakdowns.
And because he demanded an armistice.
>>401853
Exhaustion.
The Germans looked like they had the upper hand after the Russian's backed out of the war, but Germany paid a high price for Russian surrender, as well as keeping the Italian and Balkan front's stabilized for Austria-Hungary.
Germany knew that if they were to have any sort of victory, they had to gamble everything on a full charge towards Paris and pray that it knocks France out of the war.
At the same time, Italy was pepping for their offensive to regain the loss at Caporetto, which was set to destroy the Austro-Hungarian forces no matter what. and Britain was charging across the Middle East into the Ottoman's heartland. With those fronts now beyond saving, a western front victory was the only way to gain victory or at least good terms in the peace.
But the Allies had greater manpower, resources, food supply, and the defensive advantage. Their only job was to stop the German army in its tracks, and the Central Powers would lose any offensive capabilities for the rest of the war.
The Germans gave it a good run for their money, making it to the Marne River again, but the already exhausted army was finally running on nothing but fumes at the end of the Spring Offensive.
German high command knew that the Spring offensive's failure meant that there was no chance of realistically winning the war anymore, and to hold out and defend the German homeland would be a useless gesture that would only get hundreds of thousands more killed. Coupled with all the social and political instability and riots/mutinies by the population and military, the Germans had to sue for peace or risk being completely destroyed from the inside out.
>>401853
By the end of the war Germany couldn't have held the front any more. They were completely out of resources while being completely outnumbered. Even before they were massively outnumbered and its a miracle they even held out that long.
>>402898
>the Turnip Winter didn't happen
>>401853
the blockade made life hell
austrian surrender meant they would be steamrolled from the south
>>401853
Literally all cause of Ludendorff being a fucking idiot. This guy actually to take everything including the kitchen sink at the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk which meant about 1million troops had to remain in the East to prevent slav uprising.
That 1 million would have been easily enough for German offensives in the West to actually work towards the end of the war.
>>406503
actually decided*
>>401853
>Why did Germany lose the First World War
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_Revolution_of_1918%E2%80%9319
tl;dr
>communists revolt
>kaiser is exiled
>chaos ensues
>republic is formed
>republican government immediately surrenders
>RIP german empire
>>408445
>people think that the German Revolution was a cause of Germany's defeat and not a result
Germany couldn't feed it self and fell from the inside.
>>408445
>commanders and leaders
>Rosa Luxemburg
>Kurt Eisner
>Karl Radek
>Leo Jogiches
>Ernst Toller
>Gustav Landauer
>Eugen Levine
>Paul Levi
Yet retards ITT are tripping over themselves saying Jews had nothing to do with it
>>408469
>people don't remember the fact that the Germans were getting BTFO on the Western Front constantly and the military leadership of the Second Reich resigned and let the civilians take power to deflect some of the blame
What is the Hundred Days Offensive, faglord.
>>408454
neither the kaiser nor ludendorff would ever have considered a surrender.
only after the revolution had placed new (anti-imperial and pro-republican) forces into the positions of power did surrender become an option. the revolution directly led to germany ending the war by surrendering to the western allies.
this of course leads us to asking about what caused the revolution?
>massive war exhaustion across the country
>dire military situation on the western front
>huge number of fallen soldiers with barely any gain to show for it
>heavy shortages of all kinds of goods due to naval blockade and war economy
>allied nations (austria-hungary and ottomans) failing hardcore
in 1918 the war was impossible to win for germany. the western allies had such a massive advantage in manpower and materiel, there was no way for germany to defeat them.
still, had ludendorff stayed in power, germany would have kept up the fight, hoping that the allies would rather accept an armistice than expend hundreds of thousands of soldiers in an offensive push into german territory.
only thrugh the revolution did the war come to a sudden and swift end.
It wasn't a military defeat so much as a cultural one. The country was collapsing from within and was literally starving to death. Rather than watch their enemies march all the way to Berlin while their people revolt, they surrendered.
Surrounded, blockaded, divided army, had to divide it further as time went on, fewer and weaker allies, constantly outpacing supply and communications.
Take your pick man
>>403871
Top kek
on the italian front a new officer arrived and wanted to check his unit out in the front
he met one soldier who reported the unit is fully present
when the officer asked where are the rest he showed him the bunker where the lads were playing cards barefeet because they had no boots to wear
>>401853
War on two fronts, massive loans from German banks to fund the whole thing, British blockades, the Kaiser was sidelined by Ludendorf and Hindenburg, their allies collapsed and the German people had had enough of war.
>>401861
JIDF plz go.
>>408522
>neither the kaiser nor ludendorff would ever have considered a surrender.
Ludendorff was the one that demanded the German government seek an immediate armistice.
How they planned to win if they has like twice less resources?
