I agree with the stand that a world war was inevitable in 1914. It was naturally an irony, because world war was definitely an accident, but it was an inevitable accident; the accident was bound to happen. First, it can be seen as the result of an accident, which then set in motion a train of events which would not have happened but for the accident. The second explanation is that the war had structural causes, so deep as to make a general European war inevitable, sooner or later. Unintentional but couldn’t be avoided
* Can see from different articles that Austria and Serbians would definitely go into war. * German supported Austria Hungary to attack Serbia because of momentarily foolishness. Kaiser wanted to avenge his good friend, Archduke’s death. * Moreover, French and Russians were tied together strongly for each other’s protection against German’s rising power. * Neither would hesitate to attack Germany if they provoked them. * They were on a defensive side. Did not want war.
* Germany did not want Russia to get involved in the war. They wanted to mediate. * However, it was contradictory that they had already designed routes to attack French and attempting to upset the balance of power. They seemed prepared for the upcoming war * Even though Austria and Serbians would go to war, German felt the need to interfere and because of Russia’s interference, the triple Entente would definitely be dragged into war. It was not intended to be a world war but due to the complicated web of alliances, world war was undoubtedly going to occur. * World War 1 was inevitable for one reason. That reason was that Germany wanted a war. They had been planning actions for a war for at least ten years. The Von Schlieffen plan was the German plan to win the war and if they didn't come one mile from Paris, I might be typing in German right now. The Germans knew they could win a war and that is why they did what they did. *
* WWI was inevitable mainly because of Germany. Due to her militarism, the power vacuum in the Balkans, colonial rivalry, nationalism, and , most important, THE SYSTEM OF ALLIANCES! The latter was the most important because of the Triple Entente and the Triple Alliance. When A.H. declared War to Serbia, Russia started to mobilize her army. When this happened Germany created the Blank Cheque. After this, France joined. Later on Gr. Br would join because of the invasion to Belgium.
* General European diplomacy from all countries tended to be driven by absolutes, rather than a sense of compromise, with positions staked out at extremes and with little sense of "give and take". * Reinforcing #1 was the editorial bent of all European mass media, which tended towards what is now described as "Yellow Journalism" - hyper-partisan, hyper-nationalistic, and extremely uncompromising tones. This drove public opinion into very narrow, myopic, and self-centered views, which politicians obvious reflected. * Military planners drew on recent history in planning strategies and advising politicians - the prevalent view was that wars would involve a short-term "maximum effort", ending with a quick decision (either victory or defeat), and thus, that warfare was a good "quick-return" gamble. That is, the military viewed wars as a calculated risk, where the only stakes were relatively minor loss/gain of territory and a gain or loss of "national honor". In gambling terms, the military assumed that you were playing with table stakes (that is, one could lose no more than the existing military force); in reality, the industrialization of war meant you were gambling with the future of the entire nation (or "unlimited stakes"). * Military planning required tight timetables for mobilizations; thus, mobilization schedules drove diplomatic timetables (rather than the inverse), enforcing a very small window of time to resolve any crisis before war would break out. *...