It's Too Bad the Weimar Republic Never Had the Equivalent of Our 14th Amendment to Enforce. Would Have Saved the World a Lot of Trouble.

@whowasthatmaskedman

I agree with Marshal Ferdinand Foch, that the Versailles Treaty was too lenient on Germany.

"This is not Peace. It is an Armistice for twenty years."


That's revisionist history.

Germany actually got more money in loans from the United States that it paid out in war reparations! And then it defaulted on those loan payments in 1932 - and then proceeded to build the world's strongest military in less than a decade. *

Pretty amazing for a "bankrupted" nation.


* "No, the 1919 Treaty of Versailles was not responsible for World War II. What "everyone knows" about the infamous treaty ending World War I is wrong."
by Jerry D. Morelock, PhD, Colonel, U.S. Army, Ret.
2017

@beckyromero OK. I think we can agree that the outcome as it was, was the worst possible. It left a wounded lion to heal and hate.. Either disassemble the nation , as was done with Germany after WW2. Or assist it to transform and remake itself as something new. As was done with Japan.😷

@whowasthatmaskedman

Germany's borders were altered and Austria-Hungary was "disassembled."

Poland was free again. Ukranians and Finns were given their freedom. Czechoslovakia was created.

I don't think any of that was bad.

However, Foch wanted perpetual occupation of the Rhineland and the Allies political leaders rejected that.

The British later didn't have the stomach for enforcing the reparations.

The United States was more interesting in detangling itself from foreign affairs during the Roaring Twenties.

Mussolini came to power and the League of Nations failed to counter Italy's invasion of Abyssinia in 1935. They chose not to act - and that weakness was a signal to Adolf Hitler that should test British and French resolve.

The Weimar Republic didn't counter "The Big Lie" - and that helped the Nazi party gain popularity.

But the Weimar Government also secretely evaded terms of the Versaillies Treaty that enabled Germany's military to begin its build up.

The judge that sentenced Hitler for "high treason" in 1924 only gave him five years - and he was let out after one. Hitler even sent him a note of gratitude when he was chancellor.

The British and the U.S. in the 1920s foolishly decided naval disarmament would sustain the peace. The British were actually worried about U.S. naval strength exceeded its own and the Harding administration preferred lower taxes to military spending!

But the favorable terms to Japan (a 5-5-3 ratio in tonnage, 3 being Japan's) in the Washington Naval Conference is how Japan was able to build a navy stronger than either the British of the U.S. in the Pacific. Japan could never have hoped to have come that close in naval tonnage to either the British or Americans without that ratio being imposed by treaty.

Japan also got favorable treatment in the naval treaties that left important islands like Wake unfortified.

Too many U.S. military officials during the interwar period refused to take the threat of Japanese air power in the Pacific seriously despite Col. Billy Mitchell's warning, resulting in his court-martial in 1925.

(If you get the chance, watch "The Court Martial of Billy Mitchell" starring Gary Cooper, Ralph Bellamy and Elizabeth Montgomery (later of "Bewitched" fame - her screen debut was this movie). Some events are condensed for time but other it's accurate. And, yes, Gen. MacArthur voted against the court-martial. But other officiers fell in line with the Coolidge Administration's desire to silence Mitchell.)

And then the British compounded the problem in the 1930s with a separate naval treaty with Nazi Germany that allowed Germany to build U-boats (this after what the British Isles went thru in World War I !!!)

The Germans tested their modern Luftwaffe in Spain and pilots trained in Russia without repercussions. They also maintained a professional officer corps in the Wehrmacht. Regular military "volunteers" created a vast pool of trained reserves and regular police units were illegally militarized.

The French saw the British disinterest in enforcing the Versailles Treaty so they built the Maginot Line. But they did not complete it to the Channel lest Belgium declare its neutrality in the event war clouds formed (how'd that work out?). They also didn't fortify the line as strong as it could have been in the Ardennes. (And which way did Germany chose to invade France from to encircle Allies forces to the north in 1940?)

Prime Minister Stanley Baldwin hide the truth about Germany's rearmament from the British public and didn't engage in a robust rearmament program. His successor, Neville Chamberlain, naively thought time was on Britain's side, so he presented Czechoslovakia on a platter for Nazi Germany to carve up in 1938 with Poland in the kitchen being readied for the next course.

I could go on and on, but the real truth is that the outcome of World War I had very little to do with World War II.

It were the choices that political leaders in the West made and their of lack of intestinal fortitude during the interwar period that led to World War II.

@beckyromero I cant argue with any of that. I think it does highlight the lack of vision by the political parties, favouring the short term easy fixes by all concerned. In the case of Japan, they really were only dealing with America as far as the terms of surrender and the form of the rebuild were concerned, which made things a lot simpler. While after WW@ the threat of Russia on the horizon did align Western Europe, which was shattered, with US thinking..the result being less chaotic..😷

@whowasthatmaskedman
Don't let the Brits off the hook!

The Washington Naval Treaty, signed by the United States, the United Kingdom (including on behalf of you guys down under), France, Japan and Italy sunk (literally) more Allies naval capital ships than the Central Powers did during the war.

That's how the Japanese were able to build up to the 5-5-3 ratio.

Not only did the U.S. scrap 16 existing battleships, but a ten-year "Battleship Holday" commenced per the treaty. Then we didn't even build up to allowable limits!

The Brits were allowed to exchange two old ones for the Rodney and Nelson but although they had big guns (16") they were slow. Rodney would have never caught Bismarck in 1941 had not the German's battleship rudder been damaged in a torpedo attack by aircraft. Those two battleships were the only two battleships that Britain built betweem the Revenge class in 1913 and the King George V class in 1936. The Brits then made the mistake designing the KGV's with 14" guns instead of 16" like Bismarck would later have. The Prince of Wales paid for that mistake during the Battle of the Denmark Strait.

Immediately after the Treaty, the Japanese embarked on building four modern battleships and four modern battlecruisers, with a goal of eight and eight for each.

The Washington Conference came about due to Congress rejecting President Woodrow Wilson's proposed naval buildup in 1919 (above and beyond the "Big Navy Act" of 1916) and the election of Republican Warren Harding in 1920.

Article XIX of the treaty prohibited fortication of Pacific bases with the exceptions of the existings ones on Singapore, Pearl Harbor and the Phillipines.

That left Wake, Midway and others vulnerable to attack.

Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto, mastermind of the attack on Pearl Harbor, would say of the treaty: "Anyone who has seen the auto factories in Detroit and the oil-fields in Texas knows that Japan lacks the power for a naval race with America... The ratio works very well for Japan – it is a treaty to restrict the other parties."


-------


Article XIX

The United States, the British Empire and Japan agree that the status quo at the time of the signing of the present Treaty, with

Page 253

regard to fortifications and naval bases, shall be maintained in their respective territories and possessions specified hereunder:

(1) The insular possessions which the United States now holds or may hereafter acquire in the Pacific Ocean, except (a) those adjacent to the coast of the United States, Alaska and the Panama Canal Zone, not including the Aleutian Islands, and (b) the Hawaiian Islands;

(2) Hong Kong and the insular possessions which the British Empire now holds or may hereafter acquire in the Pacific Ocean, east of the meridian of 110° east longitude, except (a) those adjacent to the coast of Canada, (b) the Commonwealth of Australia and its Territories, and (c) New Zealand;

(3) The following insular territories and possessions of Japan in the Pacific Ocean, to wit: the Kurile Islands, the Bonin Islands, Amami-Oshima, the Loochoo Islands, Formosa and the Pescadores, and any insular territories or possessions in the Pacific Ocean which Japan may hereafter acquire.

The maintenance of the status quo under the foregoing provisions implies that no new fortifications or naval bases shall be established in the territories and possessions specified; that no measures shall be taken to increase the existing naval facilities for the repair and maintenance of naval forces, and that no increase shall be made in the coast defences of the territories and possessions above specified. This restriction, however, does not preclude such repair and replacement of worn-out weapons and equipment as is customary in naval and military establishments in time of peace.

---------


If you intend to attack, isn't it better to limit your opponents' ability to defend its territories than worry about the defenses of your own?

Full treaty text:

https://www.ibiblio.org/pha/pre-war/1922/nav_lim.html


--------

The Naval Act of 1916 (aka the "Big Navy Act"), passed by Congress and signed by President Wilson, was to fund the construction of ten 42,000 ton battleships, 6 battlecruisers, 10 cruisers, 50 destroyers and 67 submarines - with completion by 1923.

At the end of the war, the Navy recommended in 1919 that an additional 12 battleships and 16 battlecruisers be built.

We wouldn't have had to worry about anything the Japanese (who were actually our Allies in WWI) would have done. And our Navy would have easily surpassed the Royal Navy in strength.

President Wilson was looking forward to the day when the United States Navy would reign supreme on the waves ("Let us build a Navy bigger than hers and do what we please" he told an aide).

@beckyromero I am not letting the Brits or anyone else off. But the fact is that only America had the post war resources to fund supervise and oversee the rebuilds and as a result it was done more their way. Of course the french claimed more than they were entitled to or they could hold. As did the British..But the Americans were there holding thre line into the korean war and the iron curtain cold war era..😷

@whowasthatmaskedman

I added edits you may not have seen. 🙂

@whowasthatmaskedman

Remember, no "rebuilding" of Germany was necessary after World War I. The war in the West was mostly fought on French soil. It was the French civilian population that suffered from destroyed towns and occupation, not the Germans.

@beckyromero I was refering to WW2 for any rebuilding. The WW1 was purely Punitive..