agree completely, though I believe that they totally share the blame with the Russians. Both didn’t want Serbia to be an independent state and we’re looking for an excuse, and the rest of the world is kind of on the place like Domino’s.
In my view any fault by the Russians in the matter hinges on their failure to promptly respond to German communications on the matter of mobilization.
Austrio Hungary declared war against Serbia, Russia was an ally. The predictable consequence of declaring or entering war with someone’s ally is that they are going to offer assistance.
I don’t see at as any different than in the modern day, people trying to blame the United States for the conflict in Ukraine. Or a less politically charged example- if a child is bullying another and the bullied child goes to a teacher for help and the bully is expelled. Should the bully or their parents be able to come back and say: “it’s all your fault for ruining our boys life. If you just let them do whatever they want including murder you, this never would have happened!” Well I mean… that’s not necessarily wrong… but in what world is someone expected to stand by and be murdered or give you anything you demand so they don’t risk causing problems?
In that scenario the problem isn’t the person standing up, it’s the aggressor being stood up to.
Now these things are often more complicated- but these same problems get echoed into modern times and it seems our proximity to the events shapes our opinions. Rebels killed a protected person so in response war was declared on a nation. In recent history we’ve seen similar with terrorists such as the American involvement in Afghanistan.
The moral quandary is this- if you can expect your involvement will escalate a situation, but failure to involve yourself will result in harm or death to one or few compared to many- prudently, few lives are not worth many, but philosophically if everyone knows that no one will stand for the weak or transgressed upon if the cost is deemed greater than their lives- the weak and undervalued instantly become prey.
Those who have seen the horrors of war have their own feelings on the matter usually.
Comments
Austrio Hungary declared war against Serbia, Russia was an ally. The predictable consequence of declaring or entering war with someone’s ally is that they are going to offer assistance.
I don’t see at as any different than in the modern day, people trying to blame the United States for the conflict in Ukraine. Or a less politically charged example- if a child is bullying another and the bullied child goes to a teacher for help and the bully is expelled. Should the bully or their parents be able to come back and say: “it’s all your fault for ruining our boys life. If you just let them do whatever they want including murder you, this never would have happened!” Well I mean… that’s not necessarily wrong… but in what world is someone expected to stand by and be murdered or give you anything you demand so they don’t risk causing problems?
Now these things are often more complicated- but these same problems get echoed into modern times and it seems our proximity to the events shapes our opinions. Rebels killed a protected person so in response war was declared on a nation. In recent history we’ve seen similar with terrorists such as the American involvement in Afghanistan.
The moral quandary is this- if you can expect your involvement will escalate a situation, but failure to involve yourself will result in harm or death to one or few compared to many- prudently, few lives are not worth many, but philosophically if everyone knows that no one will stand for the weak or transgressed upon if the cost is deemed greater than their lives- the weak and undervalued instantly become prey.
Those who have seen the horrors of war have their own feelings on the matter usually.