KiwiHead

You guys are hilarious.....who writes all your stuff?

.....and he did not look like a badass. He's probably 5'9"?

Just don't get on his bad side. You would not like him if he was mad.

I'll argue otherwise. The problems faced in France today are more a result of policy decisions enacted as a result of Algeria, mainly. Remember Algeria was France.....not a colony with a million Europeans living there around the end of WWI. Then in the 30's the French decided to open up citizenship to most non European Algerians as they were living in "France"

Algeria was thecstarting point of the problems....so this starts in the early 1960s. The French and even English populations fared well during WW II compared to the Germans and those in Eastern Europe.....let's just say they suffered much less

Karensky's government was a dead man walking before it was ever born. Lenin had placed the Bolsheviks in key locations and jobs as the revolution started. They controlled the railways and the communications. The provisional government was weak.....vert weak. The only question was what flavor of communist you would get and when.

Just stop......enjoy the melt. Of course there was no ballot harvesting in Texas, Horowitz delivers no definitive proof. Sore losers

No way in hell were the British going to stay out of that fight. The great British fear was that the Germans would strengthen their navy so that it would have a qualitative and quantitative edge on the British .....and challenge Britain in Africa and influence in the ME.

There was an observation made a few years before by the British Admiralty based on a German battleship's port of call in Morocco at Spanish port that had sort of freaked them out. The German warships were better built and capable of just as much if not more firepower than anything the British had. There just was not enough of them at the time and they were reliant on coal whereas the British were transitioning to oil. It had Churchill's attention. Germany gets enough of those and the game changes.

Germany knew it. What wasn't counted on is how a trip about two years later to Sarajevo changes all the calculus.

From a German soldier's perspective they gave up while winning. Think about it, they still held French territory on November 11, 1918. German soil was still sovereign. They had neutralized the Russians months earlier. On a map and outwardly they were in a decent position. Italians were a non factor as they could not get out of the Alps......but when your large ally just collapses.....not good.

The incompetence of the Austrians in particular was mind blowing.

The thing that the French did not necessarily want to admit was that many of the same problems facing Germany internally and with the armed forces was already starting to happen to them. There were more and more mutinies amongst various units of the French army as well. But the internal problems inside Germany were far more critical. They had unleashed the communists by using Lenin as a pawn to get Nicholas out the War and the communists sewed a lot of anarchy in the cities and factories. Mass protests and strikes. You had Liebnecht and Luxemburg going around encouraging revolution. Add to it the blockade by the British was having the desired effect as well.

But, I think what really ended it was the collapse of the Austrians a few weeks before coupled with the quitting by the Bulgarians before that. When that happened, all that was left was for the Kaiser to find a retirement home.....that forced Ludendorff and Hindenburg to seek a negotiated peace that later they disowned.

I'm not sure the French generals and staff were all that happy to sign the Armistice . But they had an enemy coming to them saying they wanted to quit, so what can they do? Kind of like Ray Leonard when Duran walks out in the middle of the fight throws his hand up and says "No mas"

Yeah, you won, I guess. You probably were always going to win, but......this probably felt.......unsatifying?

Dale Lies when He Drinks......and he drinks a lot. Feeling Haggard most mornings.

Difference is that Scalise understands legislation and internal party politics. Not sure that Jordan does.