Play Supremacy 1914 for FREE on PC, iOS or Android: 💥 s1914.onelink.me/TX2k/KingsandGeneralsUSandWW1 Receive an Amazing New Player Pack, only available for the next 30 days!
It is often said that there was no winner in WW1, but there actually was one winner: the USA. The rest of the Entente, though victorious, were all indebted, some had fighting on their soil, and all had huge numbers of casualties. The US, though, was the holder of most of that debt and suffered comparitively few casualties in the war. US industry also boomed during and after the war as European industry was recovering from the war.
benefits of being a rich industrial nation isolated/protected from the rest of the world by an ocean, the same phenomena was seen with Britain to a lesser extent previously in history
+Zeerich Even though the British didn’t lose as many men or damage to their lands, they lost a MASSIVE amount of capital and incurred huge debt. Territorial extent is decieving, since the financial losses had weakened their grip on the colonies going forward. Ireland gained independence, Indian independence movements grew, and Canada and Australia became increasingly aware that the UK was unable to properly them if push came to shove. The entire Empire was much more fragile going forward. This came to a head in WW2 by Japan pushing the British Navy in the Pacific and easily seizing Singapore. The British could barely spare anything to give to Australia and New Zealand to defend themselves. The British were forced to give the US naval bases in exchange for destroyers, again strengthening America at the expense of British power going forward. Britain threw everything. they had into WW2, and completely exhausted their resources. It is little wonder that the Empire began to disintegrate after the war.
The biggest loser was Great Britain. World War 1 not only saw the United States surpass Britian as the most powerful nation on Earth... A roll it wouldn't fully take on until World War 2... But also began the countdown to the end of the British Empire and Britian's status as a relevant nation. World War 2 only sped up Britian's decline as a serious power by about 2 or 3 decades. By the end of World War 1, it was only a matter of time before Britian's Empire fell apart. The Suez Crisis was America's way of rubbing it in that Britian was no longer a credible power in Europe or the world.
Fun fact about America’s involvement in the Great War: Although perceived as an upcoming superpower with a relatively large capable standing military, America was very underprepared when entering the war. In fact American troops had to pay the French for tanks and the British for their helmets hence why the Americans wore the “Dough Boy” helmet. It wasn’t until later that America had their logistics and equipment ready.
Adding to this, modern American military aircraft amounted to less than a full squadron, and American units were double sized because there were simply not enough officers to handle large numbers of soldiers. Their battleships had to undergo retraining because they weren't up to the wartime standard of the royal navy they were operating alongside, and in total only a few divisions were actually ready when the declaration came. Romania for contrast started the war with an army almost triple the size of that of the US, with similar supply problems
@Doom Boom How is that lies? -Russia fighting in World War 1 played a huge role in the Bolsheviks claiming power and creating the USSR -The Treatie of Versailles and its unfair treatment of Germany led to the rise of Hitler and his Nazi party, which would be the culprits behind World War 2 -Italy, despite being on the winning side, pretty much gained nothing from it. This paved the way for Mussolini's rise to power. -Portugal lost manpower and money in the war, without gaining anything substantial to compensate. This just increased the resentment towards the Republic, and played a part in it being replaced by a dictatorship which later would be led by Salazar
@@lisboah treaty of Versailles didn't led to nazi rise. Don't spout debunked theories. Germany debt was forgiven for large part. The great depression started it.
This is really helpful for me to understand how much more complicated and long-coming the US' involvement with WWI was. It can feel like the US joining the war was almost a knee-jerk reaction or simply something we did because that was what people wanted to do across the globe at that time. It's good to see that these things didn't just happen out of nowhere.
U.S. was extremely isolationist, but there was increasingly anti-German sentiment, and German-Americans cut off their ties to the Fatherland (why many stopped speaking German and assimilated). There were many acts of sabotage that upset the American public and changed minds
There are always more details to history that we have yet to know. The US entering WW1 was a bit more complicated, but it is ironed out since the Germans kept on sinking cargo ships crewed by Americans, and then attempting to rile up Mexico against America with the Zimmerman Telegram, were enough for President Wilson and the Congress to declare their part in the war.
Welcome I’ve been on this for about 2 years you should also check up epic history tv their Napoleon series was the best series I’ve ever watched and historymarche
Germany's actions constituted a legal grey zone in international law and arguably was against it. The rules were that you had to board a ship first and inspect it or take control of it yourself.
You know that failed when you realized that when peace was signed in July 1918, war was still going on, and would be until 1922, between Hungary and Romania, Greece and Turkey, White Russians and Red Russians, Red Russians and Poles, as well as many other smaller conflicts. Also, by 1922 when the guns were finally silenced, Communism had taken hold on Russia and fascism was just born in Italy so, it didn't make the world safe for democracy neither, actually the opposite.
There was a civil war in México (the mexican revolution), and the attention of the USA was at the south of its frontier. In 1914 and 1917 the USA invaded México, but the revolutionary government came to an agreement with the USA, just in time to the USA intervention in the great war. Germany unsuccsessfully intended to increase the conflict between Mexico and USA with the Zimmerman telegram.
@Hidden Aspects the Russian provisional government was trying to stem the German invasion and prop up Romania. Their pro war continuation stance made them unpopular while the bolsheviks agitated for peace and sapped their support
German agents were integral in the Mexican Revolution, Francisco Madero had German agents close to him and Pancho Villa was supplied Machine guns and had German advisors. German agents (double/triple agents) were also in the U.S. and working out of San Antonio (advising the US Army as well). This was partly why the Border Wars happened.
Not exactly invading Mexico, though several bandits would be wreaking havocs, which the would-be-famous General Patton took part in inventing "Mechanized Warfare", with machine guns mounted onto cars. Other than that, it's still Wild West closing.
More about the USA invasion of Mexico: During the civil war the Americans seized the port of Veracruz because some us sailors got drunk and mistakenly entered a Mexican base they weren't supposed to enter. The Mexicans apologized, but Roosevelt order the navy to take the port anyway. During the war general Pancho Villa attacked one of his enemies ( I think it was Obregón, can't remember) but the attack was repel. Villa blamed the US for giving guns and other material to Obregón and in reprisal he attack the city of Columbus, New Mexico in march 1916. Because of this, a few days later the US ordered the invasion of Mexico, called today "The Punitive Expedition". 10,000 men commanded by General Pershing invaded the country with the purpose of capturing Villa, the Punitive Expedition served as a test of US military logistics and strategy before American troops declared war and arrived to fight in Europe in June 197. Although the expedition was a failure and they never captured villa, Pershing gained some useful field experience before fighting the Germans. George S. Patton also participated in the expedition as a lieutenant.
I am belgian, and i have some familly history to share. I have some great-great grandparents who manage to escape a execution peloton in the sack of Leuven by the German army. It seemed like all of the german armies were not on the same foot when it came down to executing civilians. The peloton of soldier who was going to shoot my forebare and their 3 childrens (one of which became my great- grandfather) held their fire because a german cavalry unit was passing by and they would apparently not do that in front them. At that moment, my great-great-grandparents took their children in their arms and ran towards the cavalry, making it impossible to shoot at them, allowing them to escape. They ended up emigrating to Canada where some of my family still lives to this day.
Excellent analysis but misses an elephant in the room: USA enterd the war because it gave hilarious war loans to the Entente, but when Russia, which was tying down millions of Central Powers' troops, began faltering in early 1917. (February Revolution) US decided to join to make sure the Entente wins so that there are no issues with repayment. Germany got wind of that and desperately started looking for useful allies - like Mexico (which was in a civil war and there were some skirmishes with US as well as US occupation of Veracruz to channel the civil war in the desired direction) and hence the Zimmerman telegram, which, once intercepted and decoded by UK served as a nice propaganda material to USA to make entry into WW1 easier with the US public (which ironically just voted Wilson president on an anti-war platform).
Not entirely correct, Germany was working deals with Mexico and Japan long before the Mexican Revolution. One could say German agents helped propagate the revolution because they wanted regime change that was friendly to them. Porfirio Diaz was a tyrant and friendly to U.S. interests.
@@Native_Creation True, but an offer of German-Mexican military alliance agains the USA was not on the agenda from the start. The biggest thing the analysis missed is Russia. The entire Eastern front which is very much overlooked in most WW1 histories was about to collapse when USA entered the war on the Entente side.
@@VersusARCH True, but this video concerns the reasons for the US to join. And since they did not and do not and probably will never give a boatload of crap about any eastern front in any World War, they tend to "overlook it".
@@Wulfrygg US joined EXACTLY because the Eastern front was about to collapse and that is what this analysis as well as pretty much any other history I read omits to say. US was afraid that Entente with neither Russia nor US help might be beaten in France. Also a huge neutral Russia could trade with Germany thus undermining the British naval blockade. There is a reason why it was called the WORLD war. Events on one front affected the others.
This is just totally wrong. America didn't give loans to the Entente, US businesses did. America did not enter the war because of money, but rather because of German aggression turning US public pro-war.
I've heard of the Lusitania and the Zimmerman Telegram, but I apparently could stand to learn more about my country's complicated involvement with WW1 for sure lol. WW1 was complicated in general. Thank you for the informative video guys! Stay well out there everybody, and God be with you, friends. ✝️ :)
The Lusitania was sunk two years prior to US entry. I was taught it was the casus beli, but it's hard to imagine the public thinking much about it two years later. Look how fast we forget now.
So, based on the comment section, I think a video covering the development and history of the Geneva Convention would be very informative. Also covering the Hague convention of 1907 to explain why the British were willing to smuggle contraband in the medical ship Lusitania and why the Germans were viewed to be in violation of it by attacking the Lusitania. Many comments seem to not understand how these conventions helped develop our current views of the conduct of war.
Not off topic but I’ve been watching just about every video and your artwork, graphic storytelling and even your motion graphic are so much better and getting stronger with each video you produce. Especially the faces and portrait “painting”…much more lifelike a not as choppy…there is always that learning curve. If there is one thing, most of the time I’m watch this on my iPad Pro and the inserted graphic boxes are hard to read. EXCELLENT channel. My favorite though. Keep the info coming!
That was a great vid. Truly thanks. A little thought: If German navy was able to breakthrough the British embargo and reach American supplies-for-sale in 1914 I guess both the world and the war would be really really different today. However the German Admiralty's resistance to fight with British surface fleet face to face and instead insisting on using submarines caused this outcome. If I remember correctly even the Kaiser Wilhelm said after the war "My own navy betrayed me" or something to that effect. And the Great German navy after the war simply scuttled anyway.
Pretty sure he said that the navy betrayed him because the 1918 revolution that ended his reign started with a sailors revolt in Hamburg. Not because the admiralty had their own ideas how to conduct naval warfare.
The Germans were as unwilling to risk their battleships as the Brits were after Jutland. From this point on it was only a fact of "who's gonna be portraid as the biggest jerk?" And since the Brits got that covered with the "Rape of Belgium" it was clear, who the baddies were. I would argue, that if the Germans would have used their propaganda to "show" how their population is starving because of the British embargo, the US might have stayed neutral. Even with subs in the war, considering they were warned by the Germans to NOT board british ships. Multiple times mind you.
@@Wulfrygg The US public had little say about the war, in fact when war was declared hardly anyone actually volunteered a draft had to be invoked, and also wilson made it a felony to avoid the draft creating a secret police charged with enforcement. The majority of the public were aware of how germany saved Lincoln in the Civil War and how beneficial the economic and trade policies negotiated between them were for the whole of society. Also it made zero sense to aid and abet Britian who was up until this day our greatest nemesis. The war was done against the will of the american people - and done because at that time the powers that controlled England also had control of the United States.
Excelent, as always. The graphics go from strength to strength, narration is just epic. Factual, underplayed, great delivery and all the better for it, makes it more engaging. It is a tragic thing happening in the Ukraine, a video by you on this would be great, though of course the horror of it is still playing out
What about the Balfour Declaration? Benjamin Freedman said that was the reason the US entered WW1. He made an eloquent speech about it in 1961 which you can watch online for free.
What is interesting about WWI, unlike WWII where the virtually all Americans supported the Allies, plenty of American citizens fought oversees against the Allies. Plenty of Americans who were of German, and Irish ancestry simply hated the French or British due to their forefathers being oppressed by either power. They either deserted to the enemy or flat out mutineed like during the Argonne Offense, where American officers killed more of their own soldiers than the Germans did.
@@Zeerich-yx9po I think plenty of Americans loved their country they just weren't willing to fight and die for the Allies who had a history of oppressing their ancestors
@Hidden Aspects it was the Americans fault it got torpedoed. Just like the reason ww2 became a thing because America. The worst is president who fucked the world so much is Woodrow Wilson aka a hack.
@@JayT1560 actually no I’m not do some research. The ship had civilians on it but they used them to disguise the ammo and war supplies it was carrying. Yes America started ww2 by supporting the entente instead of staying neutral. Woodrow Wilson wanted to get into ww1 he already chose a side when it first started. Also believing all the fake intel about atrocities that never happened. You might ask how did America start ww2 one by letting the uk and France cripple Germany to complete destruction because they really didn’t want another power to compete with them. The us didn’t mediate the treaty of Versailles letting Germany fall into authoritarian chaos. Also on Japan the entente never gave them what they deserved for helping in the war so Japan decided to take what they were owed then some. Same thing with the Cold War it was the wests fault for supporting a genocidal dictator aka Stalin. The west should have never of helped the Russian people in ww2 for that reason because look at it today Russia now has another dictator threatening to nuke the world if he so desires. Who’s fault is that the west.
@@JayT1560 If you wanna talk about how America help start the Second World War let’s talk about the League of Nations and the racism against an Asian power. Japan wanted to be on the same level as Britain and the west matching the west but they wouldn’t allow that. The same reason Japan became a war mongering nation in ww2 because America wanted to limit them because just like today America wants to be #1. You realize Wilson turned down a bill proposed by Japan to see Asians equal to the west good thing ole boy Wilson was racist.
Don't forget, after the failed Gallipoli campaign, Churchill was sacked and demoted to the admiralty. His first act was to re route American shipping closer to German u boats. The Lusitania was re routed.
@@greg_mca Gallipoli was in February. Churchill was first lord of the admiralty from 24 October 1911 - 25 May 1915 Lusitania was sunk in April. All happened in 1915. So I was a little off but you were way off
@@jamesp4132 the first landing at gallipoli (note my wording) was on 25th of April, delayed by weather, logistics, and reconnaissance. The HQ staff wasn't set up in the region until at least the 10th of April. The campaign began in February because that's when the initial movements of troops were made, not when the battle actually began. Lusitania sank in the first week of may, true, but that was only 2 weeks after the initial landings. Churchill was still in charge for the better part of the month, his demotion due to the coalition government taking place weeks later, so your original statement is still dead wrong. It also reeks of conspiracy theory, and is just plain daft. Nobody in the UK at the time would deliberately threaten vital trade shipments as well as ships, which were not easy to replace, let alone for such a petty reason
The timing of the video seems to perfectly match the current times of conflict escalation and the current attitude of American leadership to try everything it can to avoid a confrontation (even when they know the tools being used will eventually stop working or will force Nations like Russia and China to bypass measures by creating their own trade block).
It's just mind-boggling how many countries where involved in a period of roughly 50 years comprising of WW1 and WW2. Everyone wanted to have their say and as always the average Joe payed the price for it.
@Hidden Aspects You're right. But don't underestimate how many people just below the most powerful also always want to have their say. It trickles down through the ranks the constant wanting of more power and influence. If only the top wants something but there are not enough to willingly follow orders you're bot getting very far.
@@MintyLime703 Who says there wasn't anything else besides Europe and the Pacific during WW1 and WW2? That's why I mentioned the timeline of 50 years which is longer than the time covering WW1 & 2. It was the whole point of my original post. How many countries wanted to have their say around the period of WW1 and 2.
13:30 - Must be JP Morgan, Jr, as the JP Morgan (Sr), that most people think about (who fired Edison from his own company) was dead by 1913. A year before WW1 breaks out, and 4 years before the US enters the war.
love the amazing videos u guys do really interesting!! was wondering if you could do a playlist of videos or a video on the life and career of Harald Hardrada, he is common figure in many medieval conflicts and campaigns that your channel covers (western roman empire, first crusade, king of Norway and the invasion of Britain) and thought a video on him, made by you guys would be amazing thanks
Actually you didn't mention that below The Lusitania they were weapons to give to the British and the French soldiers and the Germans knew that so that's why they blew up the ship. The real reason why the US were militarily involved in WWI is because the British and the French were running out of men to fight the Germans because remember since the Russians backed out from the war in 1917 because of the Communist Revolution,the Germans were entirely focused on the British and French on the Western Front so the British made up that lie about the Zimmerman note to get the US into the war, so when the US got into the war it ended the war sooner by a German quick defeat.
I love the ability of some Americans to convince themselves that the US is the decisive factor for the victory. You act like if Germany, after years of war, was not running of men, and like if France and Britain had no colonies to provide additional men and a naval blockade that was starving Germany.
@@ItsLunaRegina Aaah the typical over patriotic American TH-cam historian who needs to believe that every time his country participated in a war, it did every thing and is the only reason for the outcome. What is this obsession to take credit for everything? You cannot accept that your country helped and participated for the final victory. No you must overstate its role and downplay that of others. And you talk about both world wars as it was the same situation. Just shows how few you care about history. The US role is far more important in WW2 than in WW1. In WW1, US death toll was 117,000 soldiers, accounting for 2% of Allied military dead, less than the French in Verdun only, and less that the Franco-British forces at the Somme. The Russians lost 1,8 million, the French 1,4 million, the British 1 million, the Italians 600,000, the Serbians 400,000, the Romanians 300,000. Sure America, that didn't have a proper army at the beginning of the war, that fought less than 6 months, and that was equipped with French and British aircrafts, tanks and helmets, 'IS the reason for the allies' victory'. The last major attack that the Germans could afford, the Spring Offensive, was launched 2 months before the Americans got their first fight, and was repulsed mainly by the French and British. The Hundred Days offensive, launched by the Allies and that put an end to the war, saw far more French and British casualties than Americans. The first large offensive launched by the Americans in the war was the battle of Saint-Mihiel in September 1918, so only 2 months before the armistice, in which most of the tanks and aircrafts were manned by Frenchmen. But please, enlighten me, what is the real story? I guess only the few battles in which the Americans were involved were decisive, right? Verdun and the Somme were nothing compared to the impressive battle of Cantigny, right? Out of the 6 millions Allied soldiers that died, the 117,000 Americans are the ones who won the war I assume? And the Germans were stronger than ever in 1918 right? I am sure the British blockade since 1914, and the more than 3 years of fighting did not impact them at all. And as soon as the Americans arrived, they took over the operations and the French and British just stood back and watched them beat a stronger than ever German army that was not depleted of resources and men at all. Is it what you believe?
Fantastic info on the financial aspects. I always thought the standard explications (zimmerman and sub attacks) were too weak as argument. Saving the Entente so they can pay their loans back, and to kick start an american industry in recession..... thats a no brainer.
Isn’t this crazy I have a class in an hour that’s going to be speaking on America’s involvement in WW1(HIST 11). Also a homework assignment involving President Wilson excerpt “Declaration of War” doc. Kings and Generals has great timing as always…
I always thought why the United States joined this war, I mean, they are far from the conflict, but then I realized the main reason why almost all conflicts have happened in this world; Money.
It's actually far earlier than that. It is argued that the 1905 Treaty of Portsmouth is what finally pushed Japan to see the US as an enemy due to how US meddling made Tokyo feel like it didn't won anything from Russia, a sentiment strong enough to incite riots in major cities in Japan and how certain provisions of the treaty (concerning China) is read out like the US has plans to make the Pacific its own turf at Japan's expense...
@@theotherohlourdespadua1131 The US always supported an open China policy, not allowing any power to monopolize access to China. And after 1905 the Japanese Navy also hyped up the potential threat of the US Navy to replace the defeated Russian Navy in order to retain their budget and importance vs the army in defense policymaking, regardless of diplomatic considerations.
@@monokumaxd1943 I know WWI is different, I am just saying, It is pathetic that people today will say anything to be against the US, as if it is the most evil nation in the world.
I know you did alternate history on Wizards and Warriors recently. I suggest doing another one based on how different the 20th century might have been if President Wilson got his way and America had tried harder to lead the way to peace in the league of nations instead of just retreating back into isolationism.
At school I was taught that the Lusitania was the reason America entered WW1. I get that they wanted to keep it simple for non-American teenagers but this video showed me what a ridiculous narrative that was
I'm still just surprised Britains use of false flags on naval warships isn't considered a violation of the geneva convention Much like you failing to mention the Lusitania was carrying arms...But we don't talk about Britain using American civilians as human shields
False flags aren't a warcrime as long as they don't engage in combat under a false flag. If they raise their flag at the start of combat it's legal. And even if a civilian liner is carrying contraband, you are not supposed to sink it outright. What is supposed to be done is that the contry enforcing the blockade (in this case Germany) is supposed to stop the vessel and search it and then either seize the contraband and let the vessel continue, turn the vessel away, or evacuate the vessel and then sink it. Outright sinking it with total disregard for the civilians on board is a warcrime.
@@fyeahusa So a submarine would be sunk immediately upon surfacing Under this logic infantry should be allowed the same, changing uniform before attacking That's not even getting into falsified documents, making it legal to arm sailors on board and attack the crew while inspecting They're not recognized as such but it's no different.
@Commisar Yarreck You'll need to take it up with the failure of the Hague convention of 1907. Which Britain didn't sign, but Germany did sign. It was later superceded by the second Geneva convention of 1949 that covered maritime war. Per the Hague Convention of 1907, any opposing force had the right to stop, inspect, and even detain a Red Cross medical ship. He did not have the right to attack it at first sight, regardless of intel. Now, the issue would be if they had detained the lusitania and discovered the contraband, how to process the whole affair legally based on treaty commitments the Germans had.
the neturality trade actually has additional context; the US was sending more good to Britain than they were to Germany. It may be because they ordered more goods, but it could also be trade discrimination.
The Lusitania didn't look like that when she sunk. She was painted black on the superstructure and the funnels and the red bit on the hull was gold not red.
![“อ.เบียร์ คนตื่นธรรม” มาตามคำเรียกร้อง แหกศาสตร์ฮวงจุ้ย เตือนสติอย่างมงาย | แฉ 7 พ.ย. 67 [1/3]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/5fc4S3xBNfc/mqdefault.jpg)
![[UNCUT] The Loyal Pin ปิ่นภักดิ์ EP.15 (2/4)](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/qbHbshrA1f0/mqdefault.jpg)
Play Supremacy 1914 for FREE on PC, iOS or Android: 💥 s1914.onelink.me/TX2k/KingsandGeneralsUSandWW1 Receive an Amazing New Player Pack, only available for the next 30 days!
Oke
@@alfarizz2 halo bahj
@@alfarizz2 who are you
@@FauzyGamerz akwowkkw, Baru Juga Main tadi perang Victoria 2 langsung ada documenterynya🤣
@@hibban7306 anjime anim
It is often said that there was no winner in WW1, but there actually was one winner: the USA. The rest of the Entente, though victorious, were all indebted, some had fighting on their soil, and all had huge numbers of casualties. The US, though, was the holder of most of that debt and suffered comparitively few casualties in the war. US industry also boomed during and after the war as European industry was recovering from the war.
The us was without a doubt the only country that benifited from the world wars, without it wouldn't the superpower it was in the cold war and today
benefits of being a rich industrial nation isolated/protected from the rest of the world by an ocean, the same phenomena was seen with Britain to a lesser extent previously in history
+Zeerich Even though the British didn’t lose as many men or damage to their lands, they lost a MASSIVE amount of capital and incurred huge debt. Territorial extent is decieving, since the financial losses had weakened their grip on the colonies going forward. Ireland gained independence, Indian independence movements grew, and Canada and Australia became increasingly aware that the UK was unable to properly them if push came to shove. The entire Empire was much more fragile going forward.
This came to a head in WW2 by Japan pushing the British Navy in the Pacific and easily seizing Singapore. The British could barely spare anything to give to Australia and New Zealand to defend themselves. The British were forced to give the US naval bases in exchange for destroyers, again strengthening America at the expense of British power going forward.
Britain threw everything. they had into WW2, and completely exhausted their resources. It is little wonder that the Empire began to disintegrate after the war.
@@alphagamer9505 Wasn't worth the lives lost in the first one
The biggest loser was Great Britain. World War 1 not only saw the United States surpass Britian as the most powerful nation on Earth... A roll it wouldn't fully take on until World War 2... But also began the countdown to the end of the British Empire and Britian's status as a relevant nation. World War 2 only sped up Britian's decline as a serious power by about 2 or 3 decades. By the end of World War 1, it was only a matter of time before Britian's Empire fell apart.
The Suez Crisis was America's way of rubbing it in that Britian was no longer a credible power in Europe or the world.
Fun fact about America’s involvement in the Great War:
Although perceived as an upcoming superpower with a relatively large capable standing military, America was very underprepared when entering the war. In fact American troops had to pay the French for tanks and the British for their helmets hence why the Americans wore the “Dough Boy” helmet. It wasn’t until later that America had their logistics and equipment ready.
They rushed in men quicker then their supplies....
Yes and the poilu (french soldier) train the américain soldier
A bunch of white supremacist states going to war, twice, is the best thing that happened to the rest of the world.
Adding to this, modern American military aircraft amounted to less than a full squadron, and American units were double sized because there were simply not enough officers to handle large numbers of soldiers. Their battleships had to undergo retraining because they weren't up to the wartime standard of the royal navy they were operating alongside, and in total only a few divisions were actually ready when the declaration came. Romania for contrast started the war with an army almost triple the size of that of the US, with similar supply problems
@Doom Boom the US has been a nation run by war profiteers for just over a hundred years and still is today.
"The War would make the world safe for democracy and be a war to end all wars"
Oh the irony.
A few moments later :
Hitler: “ blitzkreig”
@Doom Boom Cry less
@Doom Boom
How is that lies?
-Russia fighting in World War 1 played a huge role in the Bolsheviks claiming power and creating the USSR
-The Treatie of Versailles and its unfair treatment of Germany led to the rise of Hitler and his Nazi party, which would be the culprits behind World War 2
-Italy, despite being on the winning side, pretty much gained nothing from it. This paved the way for Mussolini's rise to power.
-Portugal lost manpower and money in the war, without gaining anything substantial to compensate. This just increased the resentment towards the Republic, and played a part in it being replaced by a dictatorship which later would be led by Salazar
@@lisboah treaty of Versailles didn't led to nazi rise. Don't spout debunked theories. Germany debt was forgiven for large part. The great depression started it.
@@lisboah and Mussolini wasn't even popular he given his position due to fear.
This is really helpful for me to understand how much more complicated and long-coming the US' involvement with WWI was. It can feel like the US joining the war was almost a knee-jerk reaction or simply something we did because that was what people wanted to do across the globe at that time. It's good to see that these things didn't just happen out of nowhere.
Obviously it didn't just happen out of nowhere and it definitely wasn't a knee-jerk reaction.
@@theblackswordsman9951 I am not a native english speaker but It wasn't what she wanted to say...
@old man strength We talked about it in school, same with Gulf of Tonkin.
U.S. was extremely isolationist, but there was increasingly anti-German sentiment, and German-Americans cut off their ties to the Fatherland (why many stopped speaking German and assimilated). There were many acts of sabotage that upset the American public and changed minds
There are always more details to history that we have yet to know. The US entering WW1 was a bit more complicated, but it is ironed out since the Germans kept on sinking cargo ships crewed by Americans, and then attempting to rile up Mexico against America with the Zimmerman Telegram, were enough for President Wilson and the Congress to declare their part in the war.
Question: Why did America join the Allies?
Answer: America needed to ensure that the Allies were able to repay their debts to them.
Exactly, send the young poor men to die, to further enrich wealthy
False
Lol, are you like 12?
To Zionists. They had to repay the Zionists.
Yes it was the big reason
Truly, fast becoming one of my favorite channels. Excellent content.
They are outstanding with their quality and uploads.
Welcome I’ve been on this for about 2 years you should also check up epic history tv their Napoleon series was the best series I’ve ever watched and historymarche
Short answer: They sent a shitton of supplies to the entente, and got super surprised when germans attacked their boats.
Every history class textbook ever until college haha. The full story earlier would probably make better critical thinkers out of young people.
Germany's actions constituted a legal grey zone in international law and arguably was against it.
The rules were that you had to board a ship first and inspect it or take control of it yourself.
Judging from the way wars have been going recently, no one really gives 2 Fs about international law when at war.
Exactly. Supply and aid one side and get mad when the other side starts attacking your supplies and aid
Well, they really showed us how to end all wars.
You know that failed when you realized that when peace was signed in July 1918, war was still going on, and would be until 1922, between Hungary and Romania, Greece and Turkey, White Russians and Red Russians, Red Russians and Poles, as well as many other smaller conflicts.
Also, by 1922 when the guns were finally silenced, Communism had taken hold on Russia and fascism was just born in Italy so, it didn't make the world safe for democracy neither, actually the opposite.
they actually did, this war led to the creation of nuclear bombs, no more war after a nuclear war 😂😂
@@drandersjiang You commies reallydo like your dictators,dont you eh?
@@chrisbowden4070 There is no war in Ba Sing Se, eh?
Yeah well, maybe Britain/France should have finished the job.
“Hello, I like money.”
- US on joining the allies
finally here someone gets it
If the Entente loses, we don’t get our money. Priorities
Stay out of this Napoleon, you've caused enough trouble😁😁
Hi I like senselessly killing each other over nothing.
-Britain, France and the rest of Europe
There was a civil war in México (the mexican revolution), and the attention of the USA was at the south of its frontier. In 1914 and 1917 the USA invaded México, but the revolutionary government came to an agreement with the USA, just in time to the USA intervention in the great war. Germany unsuccsessfully intended to increase the conflict between Mexico and USA with the Zimmerman telegram.
@Hidden Aspects the Russian provisional government was trying to stem the German invasion and prop up Romania. Their pro war continuation stance made them unpopular while the bolsheviks agitated for peace and sapped their support
German agents were integral in the Mexican Revolution, Francisco Madero had German agents close to him and Pancho Villa was supplied Machine guns and had German advisors. German agents (double/triple agents) were also in the U.S. and working out of San Antonio (advising the US Army as well). This was partly why the Border Wars happened.
Not exactly invading Mexico, though several bandits would be wreaking havocs, which the would-be-famous General Patton took part in inventing "Mechanized Warfare", with machine guns mounted onto cars. Other than that, it's still Wild West closing.
More about the USA invasion of Mexico: During the civil war the Americans seized the port of Veracruz because some us sailors got drunk and mistakenly entered a Mexican base they weren't supposed to enter. The Mexicans apologized, but Roosevelt order the navy to take the port anyway.
During the war general Pancho Villa attacked one of his enemies ( I think it was Obregón, can't remember) but the attack was repel. Villa blamed the US for giving guns and other material to Obregón and in reprisal he attack the city of Columbus, New Mexico in march 1916. Because of this, a few days later the US ordered the invasion of Mexico, called today "The Punitive Expedition". 10,000 men commanded by General Pershing invaded the country with the purpose of capturing Villa, the Punitive Expedition served as a test of US military logistics and strategy before American troops declared war and arrived to fight in Europe in June 197. Although the expedition was a failure and they never captured villa, Pershing gained some useful field experience before fighting the Germans. George S. Patton also participated in the expedition as a lieutenant.
If the US doesn't get involved in WW1 by betraying its sister nation Germany to help its arch-nemesis the UK - WWII never happens.
Amazingly well done video! Once again K&G has raised the bar for the quality standards of historical content on YT etc.
I am belgian, and i have some familly history to share.
I have some great-great grandparents who manage to escape a execution peloton in the sack of Leuven by the German army.
It seemed like all of the german armies were not on the same foot when it came down to executing civilians.
The peloton of soldier who was going to shoot my forebare and their 3 childrens (one of which became my great- grandfather) held their fire because a german cavalry unit was passing by and they would apparently not do that in front them. At that moment, my great-great-grandparents took their children in their arms and ran towards the cavalry, making it impossible to shoot at them, allowing them to escape.
They ended up emigrating to Canada where some of my family still lives to this day.
Flemish or Walloonian.
Blah blah, Entente propaganda
@@misterplayer7250 True as hell
Excellent analysis but misses an elephant in the room:
USA enterd the war because it gave hilarious war loans to the Entente, but when Russia, which was tying down millions of Central Powers' troops, began faltering in early 1917. (February Revolution) US decided to join to make sure the Entente wins so that there are no issues with repayment. Germany got wind of that and desperately started looking for useful allies - like Mexico (which was in a civil war and there were some skirmishes with US as well as US occupation of Veracruz to channel the civil war in the desired direction) and hence the Zimmerman telegram, which, once intercepted and decoded by UK served as a nice propaganda material to USA to make entry into WW1 easier with the US public (which ironically just voted Wilson president on an anti-war platform).
Not entirely correct, Germany was working deals with Mexico and Japan long before the Mexican Revolution. One could say German agents helped propagate the revolution because they wanted regime change that was friendly to them. Porfirio Diaz was a tyrant and friendly to U.S. interests.
@@Native_Creation True, but an offer of German-Mexican military alliance agains the USA was not on the agenda from the start.
The biggest thing the analysis missed is Russia. The entire Eastern front which is very much overlooked in most WW1 histories was about to collapse when USA entered the war on the Entente side.
@@VersusARCH True, but this video concerns the reasons for the US to join. And since they did not and do not and probably will never give a boatload of crap about any eastern front in any World War, they tend to "overlook it".
@@Wulfrygg US joined EXACTLY because the Eastern front was about to collapse and that is what this analysis as well as pretty much any other history I read omits to say. US was afraid that Entente with neither Russia nor US help might be beaten in France. Also a huge neutral Russia could trade with Germany thus undermining the British naval blockade. There is a reason why it was called the WORLD war. Events on one front affected the others.
This is just totally wrong. America didn't give loans to the Entente, US businesses did. America did not enter the war because of money, but rather because of German aggression turning US public pro-war.
I've heard of the Lusitania and the Zimmerman Telegram, but I apparently could stand to learn more about my country's complicated involvement with WW1 for sure lol. WW1 was complicated in general. Thank you for the informative video guys!
Stay well out there everybody, and God be with you, friends. ✝️ :)
The Lusitania was sunk two years prior to US entry. I was taught it was the casus beli, but it's hard to imagine the public thinking much about it two years later. Look how fast we forget now.
This could not have came sooner! I have an exam on this topic today! Thank you so much for this!
Ingore it all utter crap.
Update: Passed Test. Actually remembered things because of video like Zimmerman Telegram for instance.
So, based on the comment section, I think a video covering the development and history of the Geneva Convention would be very informative. Also covering the Hague convention of 1907 to explain why the British were willing to smuggle contraband in the medical ship Lusitania and why the Germans were viewed to be in violation of it by attacking the Lusitania.
Many comments seem to not understand how these conventions helped develop our current views of the conduct of war.
^
Imagine being so wealthy, you're giving loans to multiple sovereign nations to fund a total war.
Well he was the intermediary, not the creditor.
Imagine just printing money out of air.
Great Britain did that too during the Napoleonic Wars....
Funding both sides of every war since Napoleon..creating mass media pharma etc. We're guinea pig slaves
Wasn't the Lusitania carrying arms?
Yes it did
Shhhhh
It's okay when we commit war crimes and use civilians as human shields
Y-E-S
Of course it did. Does Irak have oil?
Yes. There is a very good film on the sinking of Lusitania available on TH-cam for free. Highly recommended.
Not off topic but I’ve been watching just about every video and your artwork, graphic storytelling and even your motion graphic are so much better and getting stronger with each video you produce. Especially the faces and portrait “painting”…much more lifelike a not as choppy…there is always that learning curve. If there is one thing, most of the time I’m watch this on my iPad Pro and the inserted graphic boxes are hard to read. EXCELLENT channel. My favorite though. Keep the info coming!
I LOVE that this channel is on the WW1 issues. Cannot wait! So Excited
That was a great vid. Truly thanks.
A little thought: If German navy was able to breakthrough the British embargo and reach American supplies-for-sale in 1914 I guess both the world and the war would be really really different today. However the German Admiralty's resistance to fight with British surface fleet face to face and instead insisting on using submarines caused this outcome. If I remember correctly even the Kaiser Wilhelm said after the war "My own navy betrayed me" or something to that effect. And the Great German navy after the war simply scuttled anyway.
..
Pretty sure he said that the navy betrayed him because the 1918 revolution that ended his reign started with a sailors revolt in Hamburg. Not because the admiralty had their own ideas how to conduct naval warfare.
@@DeHerg Oh, OK. Thanks.
The Germans were as unwilling to risk their battleships as the Brits were after Jutland. From this point on it was only a fact of "who's gonna be portraid as the biggest jerk?" And since the Brits got that covered with the "Rape of Belgium" it was clear, who the baddies were. I would argue, that if the Germans would have used their propaganda to "show" how their population is starving because of the British embargo, the US might have stayed neutral. Even with subs in the war, considering they were warned by the Germans to NOT board british ships. Multiple times mind you.
@@Wulfrygg The US public had little say about the war, in fact when war was declared hardly anyone actually volunteered a draft had to be invoked, and also wilson made it a felony to avoid the draft creating a secret police charged with enforcement.
The majority of the public were aware of how germany saved Lincoln in the Civil War and how beneficial the economic and trade policies negotiated between them were for the whole of society.
Also it made zero sense to aid and abet Britian who was up until this day our greatest nemesis. The war was done against the will of the american people - and done because at that time the powers that controlled England also had control of the United States.
Excelent, as always. The graphics go from strength to strength, narration is just epic. Factual, underplayed, great delivery and all the better for it, makes it more engaging. It is a tragic thing happening in the Ukraine, a video by you on this would be great, though of course the horror of it is still playing out
Nicely informative video. My compliments to all those who made this video a reality.
Thank you , K&G .
🐺
YES A WWI VIDEO WAITING FOR A WWI VIDEO FOR AGES. Good job as usual K&G!! :D
Great video! It was fun trying to remember events and flashbacks to my US History class. Would love more videos on WWI!
As a man who's family served in both world wars and fhe civil war I enjoyed this
What about the Balfour Declaration? Benjamin Freedman said that was the reason the US entered WW1. He made an eloquent speech about it in 1961 which you can watch online for free.
Great documentary. Thank you Kings and Generals Team.
Amazing video, very entertaining and informative.
Kings and Generals is my favorite military history channel on TH-cam, keep it up guys. Much love from the USA. 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸
Thank you so much for making this video. Unfortunately relevant
What is interesting about WWI, unlike WWII where the virtually all Americans supported the Allies, plenty of American citizens fought oversees against the Allies. Plenty of Americans who were of German, and Irish ancestry simply hated the French or British due to their forefathers being oppressed by either power. They either deserted to the enemy or flat out mutineed like during the Argonne Offense, where American officers killed more of their own soldiers than the Germans did.
@@Zeerich-yx9po I think plenty of Americans loved their country they just weren't willing to fight and die for the Allies who had a history of oppressing their ancestors
" where American officers killed more of their own soldiers than the Germans did" I've never heard of this - do you have a source for your allegation?
Great video! Dig deep enough and the reason is almost always money.
German-Americans after the sinking of Lusitania: "Why you all looking at us like it was our fault?!"
@Hidden Aspects no not realy
@Hidden Aspects it was the Americans fault it got torpedoed. Just like the reason ww2 became a thing because America. The worst is president who fucked the world so much is Woodrow Wilson aka a hack.
@@GermanicGoosicus You are wrong on so many levels.
@@JayT1560 actually no I’m not do some research. The ship had civilians on it but they used them to disguise the ammo and war supplies it was carrying. Yes America started ww2 by supporting the entente instead of staying neutral. Woodrow Wilson wanted to get into ww1 he already chose a side when it first started. Also believing all the fake intel about atrocities that never happened. You might ask how did America start ww2 one by letting the uk and France cripple Germany to complete destruction because they really didn’t want another power to compete with them. The us didn’t mediate the treaty of Versailles letting Germany fall into authoritarian chaos. Also on Japan the entente never gave them what they deserved for helping in the war so Japan decided to take what they were owed then some. Same thing with the Cold War it was the wests fault for supporting a genocidal dictator aka Stalin. The west should have never of helped the Russian people in ww2 for that reason because look at it today Russia now has another dictator threatening to nuke the world if he so desires. Who’s fault is that the west.
@@JayT1560 If you wanna talk about how America help start the Second World War let’s talk about the League of Nations and the racism against an Asian power. Japan wanted to be on the same level as Britain and the west matching the west but they wouldn’t allow that. The same reason Japan became a war mongering nation in ww2 because America wanted to limit them because just like today America wants to be #1. You realize Wilson turned down a bill proposed by Japan to see Asians equal to the west good thing ole boy Wilson was racist.
Don't forget, after the failed Gallipoli campaign, Churchill was sacked and demoted to the admiralty. His first act was to re route American shipping closer to German u boats. The Lusitania was re routed.
Lusitania was sunk before any landings were made at gallipoli. Churchill was sacked much later than that
He wasn’t sacked but stepped down after he couldn’t bear the loss of so many men
@@greg_mca Gallipoli was in February. Churchill was first lord of the admiralty from 24 October 1911 - 25 May 1915 Lusitania was sunk in April. All happened in 1915. So I was a little off but you were way off
@@jamesp4132 the first landing at gallipoli (note my wording) was on 25th of April, delayed by weather, logistics, and reconnaissance. The HQ staff wasn't set up in the region until at least the 10th of April. The campaign began in February because that's when the initial movements of troops were made, not when the battle actually began. Lusitania sank in the first week of may, true, but that was only 2 weeks after the initial landings. Churchill was still in charge for the better part of the month, his demotion due to the coalition government taking place weeks later, so your original statement is still dead wrong. It also reeks of conspiracy theory, and is just plain daft. Nobody in the UK at the time would deliberately threaten vital trade shipments as well as ships, which were not easy to replace, let alone for such a petty reason
@@greg_mca it's not a theory it's a fact. Churchill even wrote about it himself.
Really well done video!
The timing of the video seems to perfectly match the current times of conflict escalation and the current attitude of American leadership to try everything it can to avoid a confrontation (even when they know the tools being used will eventually stop working or will force Nations like Russia and China to bypass measures by creating their own trade block).
love the inclusion of cold war channel music!
Anybody else noticed?
This explanation is better than anything, I have ever heard in any hysterical class.
14:29 As History Matters elegantly put it: "Dead Men Have Bad Credit"
Always nice to see a video featuring my country on K&G
The Kingsmen tricked Woodrow Wilson into joining the conflict.
Exactly
Because Willson went at the last minute and wanted to play the big massiah across the world what a chump😤🤬
And he did a good job on that
@@Jhqwulw Not really
Wilson’s hand was forced because of the Zimmerman telegram
@Flavius Belisarius The last Roman has spoken
@@eyuin5716 You write Money wrong
W. Wilson straight up trying to sell arms to both sides?? That's tough
My grandfather was in World War 1 he had a 12/14 inch shell casing souvenir and used it as a front door stop.
Follow the money should be the title behind every single war
This question always interested me and thank Kings and genrals for making a detailed video about it.
It's just mind-boggling how many countries where involved in a period of roughly 50 years comprising of WW1 and WW2.
Everyone wanted to have their say and as always the average Joe payed the price for it.
@Hidden Aspects You're right. But don't underestimate how many people just below the most powerful also always want to have their say. It trickles down through the ranks the constant wanting of more power and influence.
If only the top wants something but there are not enough to willingly follow orders you're bot getting very far.
@@MintyLime703 Who says there wasn't anything else besides Europe and the Pacific during WW1 and WW2? That's why I mentioned the timeline of 50 years which is longer than the time covering WW1 & 2.
It was the whole point of my original post. How many countries wanted to have their say around the period of WW1 and 2.
13:30 - Must be JP Morgan, Jr, as the JP Morgan (Sr), that most people think about (who fired Edison from his own company) was dead by 1913. A year before WW1 breaks out, and 4 years before the US enters the war.
Because if the central powers won, the allied nations couldnt pay back their loans. America had no other reason but getting their investment back.
@@feedyourmind6713 Why is it relevant here?
love the amazing videos u guys do really interesting!! was wondering if you could do a playlist of videos or a video on the life and career of Harald Hardrada, he is common figure in many medieval conflicts and campaigns that your channel covers (western roman empire, first crusade, king of Norway and the invasion of Britain) and thought a video on him, made by you guys would be amazing thanks
Actually you didn't mention that below The Lusitania they were weapons to give to the British and the French soldiers and the Germans knew that so that's why they blew up the ship. The real reason why the US were militarily involved in WWI is because the British and the French were running out of men to fight the Germans because remember since the Russians backed out from the war in 1917 because of the Communist Revolution,the Germans were entirely focused on the British and French on the Western Front so the British made up that lie about the Zimmerman note to get the US into the war, so when the US got into the war it ended the war sooner by a German quick defeat.
I love the ability of some Americans to convince themselves that the US is the decisive factor for the victory. You act like if Germany, after years of war, was not running of men, and like if France and Britain had no colonies to provide additional men and a naval blockade that was starving Germany.
@@ItsLunaRegina Aaah the typical over patriotic American TH-cam historian who needs to believe that every time his country participated in a war, it did every thing and is the only reason for the outcome. What is this obsession to take credit for everything?
You cannot accept that your country helped and participated for the final victory. No you must overstate its role and downplay that of others. And you talk about both world wars as it was the same situation. Just shows how few you care about history. The US role is far more important in WW2 than in WW1.
In WW1, US death toll was 117,000 soldiers, accounting for 2% of Allied military dead, less than the French in Verdun only, and less that the Franco-British forces at the Somme. The Russians lost 1,8 million, the French 1,4 million, the British 1 million, the Italians 600,000, the Serbians 400,000, the Romanians 300,000.
Sure America, that didn't have a proper army at the beginning of the war, that fought less than 6 months, and that was equipped with French and British aircrafts, tanks and helmets, 'IS the reason for the allies' victory'.
The last major attack that the Germans could afford, the Spring Offensive, was launched 2 months before the Americans got their first fight, and was repulsed mainly by the French and British.
The Hundred Days offensive, launched by the Allies and that put an end to the war, saw far more French and British casualties than Americans. The first large offensive launched by the Americans in the war was the battle of Saint-Mihiel in September 1918, so only 2 months before the armistice, in which most of the tanks and aircrafts were manned by Frenchmen.
But please, enlighten me, what is the real story? I guess only the few battles in which the Americans were involved were decisive, right? Verdun and the Somme were nothing compared to the impressive battle of Cantigny, right? Out of the 6 millions Allied soldiers that died, the 117,000 Americans are the ones who won the war I assume? And the Germans were stronger than ever in 1918 right? I am sure the British blockade since 1914, and the more than 3 years of fighting did not impact them at all. And as soon as the Americans arrived, they took over the operations and the French and British just stood back and watched them beat a stronger than ever German army that was not depleted of resources and men at all. Is it what you believe?
Interesting video !
JP Morgan got filthy rich off this war
How ironic that the “war to end all wars” would be the gateway to one of the most horrific wars in recent history.
Beautiful video
Here after watching the Kingsman.. so much accuracy in the plot..
Insert History Channel Ancient Aliens Guy Meme: I'm not saying it was bankers... but it was bankers.
Thanks for the good video
Great Video
Fight for Freedom of Militiary-Industriral complex trade
Epic! Please more videos of WW1!!!
We need more ww1 documentary!
Nice video
Greed becomes the precursor of war.
I enjoyed Erik Larson's book /Dead Wake/ about the sinking of the Lusitania.
Fantastic info on the financial aspects. I always thought the standard explications (zimmerman and sub attacks) were too weak as argument. Saving the Entente so they can pay their loans back, and to kick start an american industry in recession..... thats a no brainer.
Nice!
Your map shows Newfoundland as part of Britain, a nice little bit of accuracy.
It's kind of amazing how many people are commenting while obviously having not watched the video.
Isn’t this crazy I have a class in an hour that’s going to be speaking on America’s involvement in WW1(HIST 11). Also a homework assignment involving President Wilson excerpt “Declaration of War” doc. Kings and Generals has great timing as always…
I always thought why the United States joined this war, I mean, they are far from the conflict, but then I realized the main reason why almost all conflicts have happened in this world; Money.
DAMN YOU WILSOOOOOOOOOOOON!
Finally a sponsor that isnt a vpn or mealprep 😂
it was Wilson who unilaterally vetoed Japan's League of Nations bill on racial equality, which pushed them into viewing America to be the enemy in WW2
The same Japan that few all others as inferior.
It's actually far earlier than that. It is argued that the 1905 Treaty of Portsmouth is what finally pushed Japan to see the US as an enemy due to how US meddling made Tokyo feel like it didn't won anything from Russia, a sentiment strong enough to incite riots in major cities in Japan and how certain provisions of the treaty (concerning China) is read out like the US has plans to make the Pacific its own turf at Japan's expense...
@@theotherohlourdespadua1131 The US always supported an open China policy, not allowing any power to monopolize access to China. And after 1905 the Japanese Navy also hyped up the potential threat of the US Navy to replace the defeated Russian Navy in order to retain their budget and importance vs the army in defense policymaking, regardless of diplomatic considerations.
Me and my bros hate Woodrow Wilson.
Porque? Cus he waited to join the war or cus he joined it in the first place?
@@monokumaxd1943 Both
Oh no, somebody salty the Nazis lost.
@@zkatom3773 I mean Germany during WWI wasn’t “evil” per se. The conflict wasn’t as black and white as WWII.
@@monokumaxd1943 I know WWI is different, I am just saying, It is pathetic that people today will say anything to be against the US, as if it is the most evil nation in the world.
By financing both sides in almost all wars around the globe since WWI
Wow thank you for the insights and especially, the unbiased information. Blessings.
I know you did alternate history on Wizards and Warriors recently. I suggest doing another one based on how different the 20th century might have been if President Wilson got his way and America had tried harder to lead the way to peace in the league of nations instead of just retreating back into isolationism.
A video about Ali Pasha and the Ottomans would be very good
Dead men have bad credit, that’s why
Please do the same video for WWII
At school I was taught that the Lusitania was the reason America entered WW1. I get that they wanted to keep it simple for non-American teenagers but this video showed me what a ridiculous narrative that was
Woodrow Wilson looks a bit like Gus Fring in the thumbnail lol
The answer to that question is far too spicy for youtube.
*To everyone who flips through the comments, health to you and your loved ones.❤️❤️❤️*
A video about the impact of German Unification would be great.
Great
The us doesn't need any invitation to enter a war
I'm still just surprised Britains use of false flags on naval warships isn't considered a violation of the geneva convention
Much like you failing to mention the Lusitania was carrying arms...But we don't talk about Britain using American civilians as human shields
False flags aren't a warcrime as long as they don't engage in combat under a false flag. If they raise their flag at the start of combat it's legal. And even if a civilian liner is carrying contraband, you are not supposed to sink it outright. What is supposed to be done is that the contry enforcing the blockade (in this case Germany) is supposed to stop the vessel and search it and then either seize the contraband and let the vessel continue, turn the vessel away, or evacuate the vessel and then sink it. Outright sinking it with total disregard for the civilians on board is a warcrime.
@@fyeahusa
So a submarine would be sunk immediately upon surfacing
Under this logic infantry should be allowed the same, changing uniform before attacking
That's not even getting into falsified documents, making it legal to arm sailors on board and attack the crew while inspecting
They're not recognized as such but it's no different.
@Commisar Yarreck You'll need to take it up with the failure of the Hague convention of 1907. Which Britain didn't sign, but Germany did sign. It was later superceded by the second Geneva convention of 1949 that covered maritime war.
Per the Hague Convention of 1907, any opposing force had the right to stop, inspect, and even detain a Red Cross medical ship. He did not have the right to attack it at first sight, regardless of intel. Now, the issue would be if they had detained the lusitania and discovered the contraband, how to process the whole affair legally based on treaty commitments the Germans had.
Over there! Over there! Send the word! Send the word! Over there!
the neturality trade actually has additional context; the US was sending more good to Britain than they were to Germany. It may be because they ordered more goods, but it could also be trade discrimination.
This video pointed out that the British navy blockaded trade with the Central powers - so by default the US could only trade with the Entente powers
please do a video about world war 1 & world war 2 korean war
8:08 Huh, I didn't know Stimson was Secretary of War 30 years before WW2 as well
The Lusitania didn't look like that when she sunk. She was painted black on the superstructure and the funnels and the red bit on the hull was gold not red.
Please continue the series on crime syndicates
Coolness
You doing anything on the Kokoda campaign?