Reporting For Duty
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Categories
The assassination of Franz Ferdinand
I am not sure how it will pick up, but today is the 100th anniversary.
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
Seriously though, the assassination is worth remembering. It was the beginning of a 31 year period horrific period that would change the world forever.
Using gas as weapons
Rise of communism
Rise of Hitler and Mussolini
Atomic weapons
Millions and millions of lives lost.
As for the double murder, it was one little cog in a huge machine leading to the sad World Wars of the 20th century.
With all of the various alliances (Allied Powers and Central Powers) I think you are right - it was a tinderbox someone only had to throw a match into. From the late C19th there was Anglo-German rivalry so it had to come to a head at some point sadly. And the line about the red in the mix is a very good way of putting things there, @DarthDimi.
Sorry, stupid typo.
I agree the war was waiting to happen. People were expecting it, many were even hoping for it.
Indeed, though they would soon learn the horrors of the trenches and "total war".
That said, the climate of unrest in Germany in the 1930s forced several talented scientists to leave the country, or even the continent, and eventually allowed them to achieve some amazing things far away from the battlefield. Just think about some of the most talented Europeans in the physics community doing wonderful things in the USA during the war. Then still, however, one wonders about the development of the first nuclear bomb, and how the impending doom of WWII triggered some of the work in that particular field, how in fact it may have sped things up.
On the one hand, I am fascinated by the amazing achievements of 20th century physicists and their advances in the field of quantum physics, genetic engineering, cosmology and so forth. On the other hand, I wonder if it was the proper century to make such advances; or worse still, if said advances may or may not in fact have assisted in the bloodshed, willingly or unwillingly. Reading about the great triumphs of 20th century physics, I always find the joy somewhat ambiguous. Yes, without these developments, you and I wouldn't be sitting in front of a computer screen now and our life expectancies may have been 20 to 30 years lower. But, without these developments, the world would probably be a cleaner place for the most part and warfare, though probably still among us, would at least be handled without dirty WMD's.
But is war inevitable? I tend to think that with less, much less people populating Earth, it may at least be less likely. I'm not sure though. We have been fighting wars since the dawn of Man. My only estimate is that if we have learned anything at all by now, and if there would be no more than one billion people on the planet, we might be a little safer. I'm not a trained historian or sociologist though so I'm really not sure. Also, I believe that if we could remove religion from the equation, if people were to commit to religion only when they are alone, not bothering other folks, warmongers would at the very least lose one of the most abused tools in warfare.
As for religion causing wars, consider this fact - Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union of Stalin killed more human beings combined than were ever killed in the name of religion and they were two of the most authoritarian, inhuman, evil, heathen and atheistical regimes in the history of the world. Yes, there was the Crusades, but those people were not true Christians, rather it was a bastardisation of that religion misinterpreted by men who had their own free will after all is said and done to act as they wished, whether for good or ill, but certainly not for the glory of God.
And sorry but the Crusaders were devout Christians. You can say they didn't worship properly, or did not understand properly the God they worshipped, but they were Christians.
This is the review I wrote for Amazon.com:
"The causes of the first WW always were unclear to me. How did it started? What were the events that lead to it? Who were the foremost leaders and how did they think? What about the alliances? How did that work?
Well, “The road to 1914, the War that ended Peace” will unfold the drama from 1871 forward, will clearly explain the building tension between the European Powers and set the table for what was to follow.
Margaret MacMillan work will make you an expert on the causes of WW1, and more importantly, will urge you to learn more about the war the Western World wants to forget. Highly recommended, high praise all around."
By the way, didn't the Nazis have this saying "Gott mit uns" (God with us), engraved on their belt buckles and such? I believe the Russians had a similar saying even.
Well yes, but Nazi Germany was more than Hitler or Goering as important as they were. Hitler also subscribed to the views of Alfred Rosenberg and agreed to remove "root and branch" the influence of the (Jew tainted) Christian churches from German society and in its place put neo-paganism.
It could be said that Hitler, Goering and Himmler all acted out of their beliefs in God and Christianity to do the horrendous things they did - they may even have thought that they were great Christians doing God's will but it would be a brave soul indeed that would merit it.
Yes, they did.
OK, there was anticlericalism as part of fascism more generally and Nazism more specifically but were they really acting in a Christian manner? I very much doubt it, only a label and had the Third Reich lasted beyond its twelve years I doubt Germany would have remained a Christian country. There was the leadership cult of Adolf Hitler "as Lord". In fact, children at school sang a song to that effect; the same was true of Mussolini in Fascist Italy whom Hitler modelled himself and his regime on.
Yes, well certainly Nazism was based on the structure of the Roman Catholic church with a leader at the top right down to the bottom level.
But I'll not derail this thread any further.
I agree with both of you, it was bound to happen. It just happened to be Ferdinand's assassination that pulled the trigger. Otherwise, scenarios including Turkish genocide of Armenians, disruption in the Yugoslav and Balkan republics, or the Army and Navy among the European nations would have likely ignited WWI.
Still, Nazism came closest to where I live and though I'm two generations removed from the War, fear for a return of Nazism is in my blood. When I hear the talk that some of my pupils bring to school, in fact the talk that some of their parents bring to parent-teacher meetings, I'm creeped out. Man is his own worst student. 70 years have passed, and Nazi sympathies can be found in certain political movements across the world. Kids who hardly know what they're talking about consider Nazism 'cool'. Some people who are fed up with immigration issues openly express their desire for a Nazi solution to the problem. This is the kind of stuff that makes my stomach turn. Yes, there are problems - a total of 8 billion people being the biggest one - but gas chambers, racism and WMD aren't the solution.
Only James Bond is. ;-)
(Or at least condoms, emancipation and decent social and economical structures.)
As for the religious affiliations of the Nazis, I don't want a big religious discussion here either. But I will say they certainly were false Christians in the sense of what it means to be Christian. Other Germans at the time came together (along with Karl Barth, a Swiss theologian) and wrote one of the most moving, brief, and powerful declarations of being Christian during this horrendous time - and it was written in response to the "Christian" claims made by Nazis before and during the war. It is called the Barmen Declaration, if anyone would care to look it up. Again, I do not mean to have a big debate on Christianity, true or deluded, involved in wars, or any religious aspect of wars throughout history ... yet I feel compelled to mention Barmen because it was so strong and important and helpful to Christians, and because it was a response to Nazism.
Thank you for this post, @4EverBonded. This is exactly what I was getting at less eloquently above. The Nazis' "Christianity" was void, just like a void contract in English law, it never existed.
In any event, I find it fascinating that all things associated with the Nazi Party have become socially unacceptable (his name, his moustache, the Swastika, and so on), but not so with other dictators, like Mussolini, Stalin, Mao, or Pol Pot.
Did he admit he was not? I don't think there is evidence of this. Anticlerical, yes, sometimes, but he never outright rejected his Catholicism. I am not saying some Christians did not oppose him of course (and said Christian did oppose him because of their faith) but Nazi Germany was not a Godless country. Neither was Mussolini's fascist Italy, even though Mussolini was an atheist.
As for pope Pïus XII's attitude towards Germany and the whole World War II, his legacy is, to say the least, highly controversial.
But again, this is an entirely different debate. I guess one has to speak of World War 2 when both war are interrelated in many ways.
At the end everyone wanted to point the finger at Germany but France, Austria, Russia and to a lesser degree Britain were all responsible.
Jews suffered throughout Europe since the dark ages. Spain, France, Russia, Poland were as antisemitic as Germany.
WWI was the first of the bloody and war torn 20th Century. Some of the weapons of modern war were first used in this one. Also some of the tactics and words...anyway in WWI during the German invasion of Belgium, the Germans had to contend with " irriegulars, who they called "Franc Tireau" which terrorized their troops and led to brutal reprisals against civil populations that the Germans resorted to so they could combat the problem. They did not feel that these individuals were soldiors and did not deserve any "rules of war" assigned to POW's. They carried this attitude into WW2 as well.
In WWI they were called Franc Tireau...WW2 the term was "Partisans". We called them "insurgents" during the Vietnam War...and today we use the term "terrorists."
I was actually shocked when President Bush announced that captured terrorists would not be treated as POW's and there would be no reason to treat them "civilized"....right out of the German playbook.
Not surprising as he was one lucky individual,leaving early from his speech when the pillar bomb went off,the non exploding bomb in the brandy box on his aircraft,the fact that many Nazi salutes blocked off an assassins view as Hitler walked during the Pusch anniversary,the exploding bomb moved to behind a table leg in Hitlers 'Wolf's Lair' (Operation Valkyrie) etc.
Even Speer's admission (dubious though in my opinion) that he was going to gas the Fuhrerbunker,only to find the air vent chimney was extended heightwise when he was checking the area.
Having studied Hitler and the Third Reich for apporaching 2 years now,his luck is a BIG factor.