>1914, German invasion of France and Belgium
Brussels falls to the German Army. The French 5th Army and most of the British Expeditionary Force is destroyed at Charleroi and Mons respectively. Only after the 1st Battle of the Marne did the German advance halt. British/French Artois Offensive fails. German Fokkers rule the sky.
>1916
German Army inflicts MASSIVE casualties at Verdun and the Somme. No major ground is gained by the Entente forces and the stalemate continues.
>1917
The British Arras Offensive is halted with heavy British and Canadian losses at Vimy Ridge. The British would lose more than 300 Air Crews during the offensive while the Germans lost 40.
At the same time, the French Nivelle Offensive leads to catastrophic failure and 50 French Divisions mutinying and refusing to go on the offensive. Americans arrive but don't take part in major offensives. In addition, the Germans halt the British advance at Ypres with the Battle of Passchendaele.
The British also launch a massive tank attack at the Battle of Cambrai with 12 Divisions again 2 German divisions. The Germans repel that attack as well.
>1918
Russia exits the war, freeing up veteran German Divisions to become Stormtroopers. The allied offensive at Amiens makes marginal gains, but nothing compared to the Spring Offensive by the Germans, which bought Paris into shelling range once again.
>The armistice was signed in November.
Tell me /pol/, how did the Germans lose WW1?
Stabbed in the back by Jews, Marxists, and Unionists who saw a chance for their own Bolshevik Revolution.
>>72507925
American education
>>72507925
>american intellectuals
>>72507925
The economy collapsed, and the war was becoming increasingly unsustainable in terms of manpower and money. Fiscal interests gave up on the idea of victory and instead looked to recoup their losses by pushing for a surrender and buying everything dirt cheap afterwards.
Germoney didn't lose, they surrendered because if the war went on, it'd a stalemate with massive casualties on both sides.
After the war there was an idea that Germany could have won and that the government sold out it's people. Hitler used this sentiment to gain popularity.
Shortages of food in Germany made support for the war drop (read about ersatz food, it's interesting.) And by 17/18 the war was turning in the allies favour. Britain had devised a creeping artillery barrage strategy.
>shell trenches
>Germans hide
>Germans now know an attack is imminent
>man guns
>huge casualties
>devise strategy to have barrage be constant, but creeps forward with advancing troops
>constantly shelling, enemy cannot man trenches quick enough to mount an effective defence
It seems like it's simple but at the time it was a massive breakthrough.
The eternal Austrian strikes again
>>72507925
Well, it depends. You have to remember the Empire never surrendered; the armistice was signed with the provisional government after Kaiser Wilhelm II was ousted.
So
>Why was the Empire ousted?
Because the economy was shit, and people were turning against the war effort. Germany simply couldn't provide the raw industry needed to maintain the war; bread was rapidly becoming mixed with fillers, rationing of consumer goods was at a peak, and a whole generation of young men had gotten injured already.
It's a bit more complicated, but essentially Germany was really just the first nation to break on the Western front; simultaneously, French forces were starting to mutiny. After the replacement of Petain in certain areas, there were reports coming back that officers were getting shot by their own men for trying to launch counter offensives.
Brits were facing a similar situation with the major difference being that they were starting to rely more and more upon their common wealth allies.
>>72508752
>It seems like it's simple but at the time it was a massive breakthrough.
It really wasn't that; it was more that the accuracy of artillery at that point was considered rather shit so combined arms tactics were rare up until the Spring offensive; you know, if you miss a shell, you've completely maimed your own men in the open, but the trench bound defenders... well... So, it was an idea, but no one was willing to attempt such a close interworking.
Also
>You will never be a cavalryman in the last substantial cavalry charge in the western world as combined tactics break the forward lines.
>>72508868
>>72509684
Holy fucking kek
Saved
is this really what they teach in american schools? scary
>>72509684
Awesome.
It's the kike's fault.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
>>72508486
>they surrendered because if the war went on, it'd a stalemate with massive casualties on both sides.
no, they surrendered because they would get fucking crucified if they continued
le stabbed in the back meme is something the nazis told themselves to make themselves feel better
>>72509853
>>72508100
Holy shit no need to get all pissy. I was just wondering because it seemed like the Germans did a fairly decent job. We all recognize that you were key in winning that war. I'm not making fun of France.
>>72510027
Sure, thats why the german jews/zionists made the balfourt declaration with the brits in order to get the US involved. This is what the backstabbing was about. Actual "germans" selling out their country.
>>72509684
K E K
E
K
>>72507925
At all those battles you mentioned, germans suffered massive casualties as well although just slightly less.
>>72510267
the us got involved because of domestic american political pressure and unrestricted german submarine warfare you fucking moron
>sink american ships
>kill americans
>zimmerman telegram
>ITS ALL A JEWISH CONSPIRACY WE DINDU NUFFIN
>>72507925
Read All Quiet On The Western Front
they could hardly keep feeding their own troops
>>72510027
eternal cucked anglo would have been curbstomped if it weren't for america-daddy saving your ass. sad.
>>72510187
if it weren't for usa, cuck france and uk would've gotten what they deserve
Everything was going well untill the socialists and the jews managed to cause strikes among the soldiers and labourers, who rebelled. Remember, communism originated out of Germany.
>>72510473
Right, US ships carrying ammo/support to the brits paid for by JP morgan. Just like this nice setup of the lisuthania was done. It´s not like the usually pro german newspapers suddenly started to produce anti german propaganda.
And the balfour declaration IS jewish consiparacy. You can read it in black and white and see how the connections of the international bankers (who had most of the US media in their pocket) international bankers were used to influence the US masses to get the people into accepting war.
America entered and cleaned up the mess.
>>72508868
/pol/ historian : france loose ww1 and usa do all the job with uk
>>72507925
>Tell me /pol/, how did the Germans lose WW1?
ever heard of August 8, 1918, the black day of the German army? Germany was finished, the soldiers demoralized, food and supplies scarce, hunger at home. In the West the German army was retreating everywhere, army commanders said Allied breakthrough was imminent, soldiers losing their confidence in leadership, including the Kaiser.
How did the lose?
>Serbia
>Indirectly caused the collapse of the Ottoman Empire, Russian Empire, German Empire and Austria-Hungary
>>72511142
please send us another Princip
>>72507925
Germany took roughly equal casualties to the Allies during Verdun and the Somme. Britain and France are more populous than Germany.
>>72507925
Sanctions, general war exaustion, pointless death.
The Germans launced an offensive shortly after Russia capitulated only to be stoped due to the lack of supplies. In that time the French made trenches and it was literally pointless to go on.
>>72511215
Also, Britain effectively won the only naval engagement in the war (despite losing more ships and men) because we started with more ships. Germany was placed under a crippling blockade which destroyed their economy.
>>72507925
Because of General Monash of the Australian Army.
>>72507925
Ya know that during both Somme and Verdun German losses were only slightly less massive?
Also - British and French had thousands of tanks. Germans had dozens.
>>72507925
the same way they lost WW2. Germany failed to ally the Americans, the British didn't.
>>72510187
>I was just wondering because it seemed like the Germans did a fairly decent job.
dude, plese read some real history sometimes, Germany in late 1918 was finished, even the emperor's guard started to mutiny.
>>72510718
Americans didn't like getting thousands of their civilians killed even if the ship did have some ammo on.
If you wage a campaign based on sinking civilian ships with submarines you shouldn't be surprised people hate you after a while.
>>72510718
you seem to forget Germany rejected all peace proposals and continued to push for a victorious war despite it was clear the USA had great sympaties for France. Kaiser Wilhelm II had sympathies for the Zionists too, but his proposal to have a state for the Jews was rejected by the Ottoman Empire.
>>72507925
War of attrition. The economy and the people just broke down. There was no backstabbing. People just didn't want to continue any more.
There could have been more of a balanced end to the war, if Germany had lasted until early 1919 or mid-1919, as the boost from "American soldiers" would have died down.
>>72510668
Communism originated in France
>>72511607
Nope. The Entente rejected all peace proposals until they forced a republican revolution.
