Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Spehss _]

WWI.

FFFFffuuuuuuuuuu how did I mix those up. brb committing sudoku

[Wolfhunter107]

"Europe today is a powder keg and the leaders are like men smoking in an arsenal … A single spark will set off an explosion that will consume us all … I cannot tell you when that explosion will occur, but I can tell you where … Some damned foolish thing in the Balkans will set it off."

...isn't that a quote from shortly before WWII started?

If I remember rightly, that's Bismarck predicting WWI about 20-30 something years before it started.

[Spehss _]

If I remember rightly, that's Bismarck predicting WWI about 20-30 something years before it started.

I realized that, yeah.

I haven't finished committing sudoku as penance for my dishonorable and shameful display. Hang on. I can only fill out so many number puzzles.

[Graknorke]

"Europe today is a powder keg and the leaders are like men smoking in an arsenal … A single spark will set off an explosion that will consume us all … I cannot tell you when that explosion will occur, but I can tell you where … Some damned foolish thing in the Balkans will set it off."

...isn't that a quote from shortly before WWII started?

If I remember rightly, that's Bismarck predicting WWI about 20-30 something years before it started.

It's hardly an impressive prediction though. Everyone knew it was going to happen, what else would all the militarisation be for?

[Shadowlord]

As a deterrent, to prevent a war, naturally.

> You wouldn't dare attack! Look at all my ENTANGLING ALLIANCES, and massive population to be conscripted into MASSIVE ARMIES, and we've developed MACHINE GUNS and BIPLANES and MUSTARD GAS!

It was the entangling alliances that made one assassination pull in pretty much everyone in Europe, as you know, and the rest (and obsolete military doctrines) that turned it into a giant quagmire with massive death tolls.

[Rolan7]

Climbed a firetower.
Wtf, my parents and I did this all the time when I was young. And it was scary, but...
I guess it was about as scary then too.
I thought I'd be over it for some reason though, and instead it seemed worse (maybe since I'm less used to physical fear. Young me faced a lot of fire, heights, spiders, silverfish...)
Just hit me hard, I had to keep three points of contact and take a few breaks to close my eyes and breathe. I forgot how *wrong* it felt.

...Started singing Diggy Diggy Hole as I climbed

[TD1]

A firetower?

[Rolan7]

They look kinda like broadcasting towers but not nearly *that* tall.  Here's a typical one:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/1a/Ash_Cave_Fire_Tower.jpg

Basically they're built in large forests, particularly on hilltops or mountain ridges.  Originally they were used by forest rangers to spot forest fires and report them ASAP.

They're not all that tall...  But they're almost all very *open*, like in that picture.  This one didn't have a canopy at the top, either, and it swayed in the wind.

Also the boards are always wood.  Wood directly exposed to the wind and rain...  I've climbed up ones where steps were missing.  That's why you stand on the sides where the metal connects to the wood, don't trust the wood.

[TD1]

Yea.... I wouldn't be going anywhere near one of those.

[scriver]

It's the secret behind why Americans are braver than Europeans.

Once you have climbed a derelict tower of death there is nothing left in the world that can scare you quite as much ever again.

[Loud Whispers]

I dunno, jumping off of tall things into the ocean give me more thrills than standing on tall things; but I guess in the former case you have to deal with your brain deliberately fucking your balance up so you're more likely to fall to your death whilst in the latter case when you find a spot without rocks and barracuda you're pretty much set unless something goes horribly wrong. Also don't jump off into the Atlantic, the Atlantic is not a kind ocean

[Lord Shonus]

As a deterrent, to prevent a war, naturally.

> You wouldn't dare attack! Look at all my ENTANGLING ALLIANCES, and massive population to be conscripted into MASSIVE ARMIES, and we've developed MACHINE GUNS and BIPLANES and MUSTARD GAS!

It was the entangling alliances that made one assassination pull in pretty much everyone in Europe, as you know, and the rest (and obsolete military doctrines) that turned it into a giant quagmire with massive death tolls.

You're overlooking that most of Europe's leaders and a fair chunk of the populace wanted war. France and Germany were still on edge from the outcome of the Franco-Prussian war, Britain considered the existence of the German High Seas Fleet to be an existential threat, and most of the other Powers were eager to settle long-standing feuds and border disputes (the exact details of which I am currently unable to remember) - it was simply hoped that with significant enough force the enemy would shatter quickly in the pattern of most post-Napoleonic conflicts outside of the American Civil War (which Europeans generally considered to have been the work of incompetent bunglers on both sides), not a drawn-out war-to-the-knife in the manner of the ACW. Those that didn't want the war regarded it as an inevitability, and sought to shore up their power base to avoid being the ones that shattered.

The "entangling alliances" were not the cause of the war. They were the opening shots.

[Loud Whispers]

Yeah, contrast with WWII where the entangling alliances were still there but the allies were much more hesitant to commit to actually fighting the Germans until they came knocking through Belgium

[Orange Wizard]

Yeah, I can't see the Fourth Reich EU going all stately quadrille on us from something happening between two nations outside it.
NATO is another matter, but AFAIK it doesn't require members to assist when another member is the aggressor (although I might have pulled that one out of my arse).

[Lord Shonus]

Yeah, I can't see the Fourth Reich EU going all stately quadrille on us from something happening between two nations outside it.
NATO is another matter, but AFAIK it doesn't require members to assist when another member is the aggressor (although I might have pulled that one out of my arse).

Article 5

The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence recognised by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.

Any such armed attack and all measures taken as a result thereof shall immediately be reported to the Security Council. Such measures shall be terminated when the Security Council has taken the measures necessary to restore and maintain international peace and security.
Article 6

[1]For the purpose of Article 5, an armed attack on one or more of the Parties is deemed to include an armed attack:

    on the territory of any of the Parties in Europe or North America, on the Algerian Departments of France [2], on the territory of or on the Islands under the jurisdiction of any of the Parties in the North Atlantic area north of the Tropic of Cancer;

    on the forces, vessels, or aircraft of any of the Parties, when in or over these territories or any other area in Europe in which occupation forces of any of the Parties were stationed on the date when the Treaty entered into force or the Mediterranean Sea or the North Atlantic area north of the Tropic of Cancer.

The North Atlantic Treaty is a purely defensive one, and Article V has been called into action exactly once, in 2001.