An Analysis of Fritz Fischer's Book 'Germany's Aims in the First World War'

World War One was the war to end all wars. This was going to be a short and swiftly-fought war, with almost the entirety of the European continent under the control of the German Empire. The German plan was focused entirely on this war being swiftly fought, and as a result of the prolongued fighting that actually did take place, the plan was derailed and brought to its knees. Two bodies of literature written about this time period, “Absolute Destruction” by Isabel Hull and “Storm of Steel” by Ernst Junger, both take a look at the events surrounding the creation and destruction of this plan, as well as how it was executed throughout by the soldiers that fought it. Both of these books detail these events very differently; While Isabel

This paper focuses on the underlying causes of world war I instead of just immediate causes. In this article, I will answer the question what were the underlying causes of world war I. ("DBQ: What Were the Underlying ...", 2010, p. Doc 1) Some of these causes consist of militarism, nationalism, and imperialism. The immediate causes of the war were the ones that set it off but the underlying causes are the ones that had been building up over time. ("DBQ: What Were the Underlying ...", 2010, p. Doc 1)

The Schlieffen Plan is commonly – though misleadingy – identified with the German western offensive at the start of the First World War in August 1914, which began as a campaign of rapid movement but ended in deadlock and trench warfare. The plan is generally seen as a desperate gamble almost certain to fail, and its recklessness is counted as part of Germany’s war guilt – the plan held out the false promise of a quick victory, and so it underpinned the “short war illusion” that led Germany into a long war of attrition, ending with her defeat and collapse in 1918. This analysis confuses two quite different moments in history. The Schlieffen Plan was not designed to meet the strategic challenge Germany faced in 1914,

Many historians argue that the reason for Germany going to war was due to the aggressive behaviour of Germany in the build up to the war. Throughout this essay I will be addressing this issue looking at whether Germany was responsible for the outbreak of a general European war in August 1914. There are many factors which contribute to the outbreak of the war from a short-term trigger such as the assassination of Franz Ferdinand to the long-term annexation aims Germany implemented in the years building up to the war, the most important reason was Germany’s aggressive foreign policy, they had provided

In addition to the damaging consequences of the First World War with the requirements of the Treaty of Versailles, certain features of Germany caused the state to be susceptible to the influence of this dangerous ideology. Along with the damage to the national ego as a result of the First World War, Germany had co-existing and conflicting highly modern strands of development forced to integrate with powerful remnants of archaic values and social structures, and had a deeply fractured parliamentary political system, and the weaknesses of this system reflected the social and political differences within the population. This shame and failure after World War I was superimposed onto a modern country which once had an advanced economy, a sophisticated state

The importance of the First World War in shaping Germany's historical development is large; A German victory in 1918 would have certainly defused the crisis and in doing so retarded the process of political reform for a generation or more. It plowed Germanyinto economic crisis, causing hyperinflation

Documents1, 3, and 4 support the idea that one of the causes that led to World War II included Germany’s attempt of imperialism. Document 1, an excerpt from Mein Kampf by Adolf Hitler, explains some of Hitler’s ideas of forming a regime first in order to gain lands that had been taken away after German defeat in World War I. Document 1 is biased since it has been written by Hitler’s point of view who only wants to brainwash the German masses into supporting his

In this essay I will assess the significance of strategic bombing of Germany. I will do this by evaluating four key areas of the German war effort. This will include German and British moral, German economy, its effect on the outcome of the Eastern Front and the results of the preparation for D-Day. Overall allied bombing did not have a significant impact on the outcome of the war as for the majority of the war bombing techniques and technology were primitive and so had little effect. It only became a threatening tool latter on in the war, when the allies had effectively won.

Hitler’s autobiography in which he outlined his ideas, beliefs and plans for the future of Germany

By 1890, Germany had been a nation state for almost 20 years. Liberal nationalism was dying from its own success, and a new brand of popular ideas on the German Volk and fatherland was emerging to represent the generation which had been born in the boundaries of a German state, and was now reaching adulthood. Necessarily, these ideas would adopt foundations of German cultural superiority and common identity which had been espoused at the start of the century, and this was encouraged by colonialism. This popular nationalism was encouraged by the more active climate of public debate and freer politics. They were also no doubt affected by the position of the army in German society and the interference of a government dominated by the

The nationalist power-politics in Germany were promoted heavily. There were strong advocates for imperialism who also pushed for advancing Germany's weapon's technology and strong army.

Germany, a country rich in culture and heritage, yet plagued by the fallout of World War I and World War II, has progressed to become the centerpiece of the European Union and the world’s third richest economy. The first German Empire dates back to the Roman Empire starting in the 8th century AD. During the Middle Ages the German Empire fended off many attacks against their soil from the Hungarians and the Slavs. Fighting and power struggles continued until the 1400’s, when the modern world gradually came into existence with intellectual, economic and political changes.

In order to fully understand the role the Treaty of Versailles played in the initial upcoming of Adolf Hitler, we must first delve into the reasoning behind German involvement in World War One. Since the late 1800s, Germany was intent on expanding its borders, by any means necessary. Otto von Bismarck, Chancellor of Germany, was obsessed with his desire to “create a German Empire out of the group of smaller German states” mainly under Austria-Hungary’s authority (Schmidt, 2006). In order to expel Austria as the primary influence over these smaller German states, war was inevitable. Subsequently following the war, also known as the Seven Weeks War, Bismarck extorted the small German states of “Schleswig, Holstein, Hanover, Hesse, Nassau, and Frankfurt, which created the North German Federation” (Schmidt, 2006). Even more importantly, Austria was successfully displaced as the major influence over those small German states. Bismarck’s next calculated move was to achieve the same unification in the southern parts of Germany.

Why Germany lost the war (despite its early tactical successes) is a simple question with a complex answer. And, over the years since Germany’s surrender at Reims, France on May 7, 1945, scholars and historians have provided a number of arguments to warrant their perspective answers. Consequently there are a

After the First World War (1914-1919), the world was faced with the questions - who was responsible and what was reason for the outbreak of the war. Ultimately it was agreed on the 28 June 1919 that “the Allied and Associated Governments affirm and Germany accepts the responsibility of Germany and her allies for causing all the loss and damage” from the First World War. However, there have been many other interpretations on whom and what was responsible for the war. On the one hand, some historians would agree with David Lloyd George’s notion of all “the nations slithered over the brink into the boiling cauldron of war”, however, on the contrary, others would agree with Fischer in arguing that Germany’s aggressive foreign policy was responsible for the First World War. Whether you agree with Lloyd George or Fischer, it is important to understand some of the other possible reasons for the outbreak of the First World War – including the growth of nationalism and imperialism, the alliances within Europe and the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand. Although this essay will argue that Germany’s aggressive foreign policy was responsible for the outbreak of the First World War, it will also illustrate why other historians have argued against that notion.