Many believe that the Treaty of Versailles was too harsh on Germany. Was it actually too lenient?

[Julie07]

[Cormac995]

The reason WW2 happened was because the treaty of Versailles was so punishing the German people had nothing left to lose. Sit down and think about this for a minute. This is a nation that just lost a war in a massive culling of their sons for nothing, and they were beaten down and had nothing left because the reparations were so punishing Germany was flat out broke paying them off. The standard of living plummeted, and a lot of family's couldn't even promise their kids a meal a day.

After how badly they had been beaten the taste for war was at an all-time low because they had just seen the cost a short time ago. The reason things came full circle is because things got so bad after the war that the German people were willing to double down on try 2 because they literally thought the alternative was to be destroyed as a country entirely by a slow bleeding to death.

This environment of desperation made the people fearful and the fearful crave stability and the angry need a place to direct their hate. Hitler brought stability and gave them an enemy to loath and blame all their suffering on. Further he delivered on many of his early promises to help the common people and with his background many of them truly saw him as one of them and a man of the people.

From their perspective he was a veteran that served his country, loved it, it's people and had conviction and vision who had gone from destitute on the streets to one of the powerful. From there perspective it was like having a president that worked at MacDonalds for years before making it big so they felt he would remember his own because he'd spent a good chunk of his life living among the desperate.

This all bought him good will and if you were crying because you could see your daughters' ribs through her skin and then suddenly you're not worried about feeding them on a daily basis you really won't give a fuck about how things got better, you'll only care that they did. If the treaty of Versailles hadn't been so punishing the German people wouldn't have been desperate and scared and the environment necessary for Hitler to portray himself as a savior never would have existed for him to climb to power in the first place.

The perfect storm of discontent, fear, hunger and desperation was artificially created by an attempt to essentially enslave a nation and without that cocktail Hitler never would have had a foundation on which to build up and popularize his movement. The problems Hitler fixed to look like a hero only existed in the first place because of our mistake.

This is why after WW2 we built them and Japan back up. We entwined our economies with them so that trade with us was a requirement for their nation to function because that makes war logistically impossible because the more you hurt the economy of someone you trade with the more you hurt your own. Fighting and business don't mix well unless you're an arms dealer.

Now as a result of this Germany and Japan are some of America's most loyal allies and valuable economic trade partners and the money, we poured into their economy we've more than made back because of productive trade relations and a long period of peace in Europe until Putin's invasion of Ukraine.

Nation building works when you put the time in. We failed in Afghanistan because of a half assed effort and a failure to create a state that the Afghans would have enough love for to want to protect it. How many fathers are going to throw their lives away willingly to prop up a government that really doesn't help them in any way? If a person loves their home, they will fight for it tooth and nail, but we didn't really change anything there during our occupation.

We didn't invest in them, we didn't support them long enough militarily, and we didn't commit the necessary troops resources or advisors to build Afghanistan into a nation it's people would love enough to fight for. That's why we failed there but South Korea, Japan and Germany are great examples of how regime change and nation building can achieve great things and save people in more ways than one.

[Alexandrubaschet08]

As a winner from the one.
I think it was just right and France and UK should not let their guard down.

France should have invaded Germany the second Hitler remilitarized the Rhineland. He even said it in his own book that those were the most crucial 24 hours of his life.
Later France and the UK allowed the unification of Germany with Austria another violated condition.
Later they fed Germany's hunger for territories with Czechoslovakia.
Then they fought the war on the sidelines and were not prepared to intervene from September 2nd against Germany. (September 1st Germany invades Poland).

It was not the treaty that was the problem, but its non-application.

[Julie07]

I quite agree.

[Alexandrubaschet08]

Hello again my evile old friend.
Mon cher ami.

Tu me manques depuis notre dernière dispute.

[Julie07]

It's in the past, let's not think about it anymore.

[Alexandrubaschet08]

Même si nous pouvons nous disputer, j'espère que nous resterons ensemble dans cette relation amour-haine en ligne.

[Julie07]

Haha , faisons comme cela. Mais j'ai pas de haine haha. Je me laisse parfois emporter par les émotions quand on critique la France 😂

[FreyaRed]

German industry and elites felt strong and wanted to expand their territory. More territory, more resources, more money, more influence, more power. Political aversion against this treaty was just propaganda tool, while Germans developed together with Stalin on Russian test grounds new tanks, vehicles and guns. Many later used German innovations developed years before in those tests like modern tank suspensions, steering clutches and electro-hydralic pumps were later used in T-34 against German army. U-Boots were difficult to control either because Versailles treaty just limited German vessels above a certain tonnage, while U-Boots remained below that. If allies wouldn't develop active sonar and microwave nagnetron used in high frequency Radars to detect U-boots on surface, those vessels would dominate maritime Seaways and WW2 would end differently.
What hurt Germany was huge Reparation payments to France and Britain, but elites didn't pay that, the pleb did who was financially exploited and later abused to fight a war.

[RavVid]

That statement is usually used in conjunction with reparation payments. But there were areas where punishment needed to be harsher AND enforced.

Germany was more populous than France or UK, so I would agree with a prior proposal you posted on that Germany should have been partitioned.

A great failing that helped WW2 along was not to enforce the military restrictions upon Germany.

So in those two aspects I would agree the Treaty of Versailles should have been harsher. On the financial side, with the Great Depression I doubt the cost could be extracted so it probably was of no importance in the end.

[KostasKouvalis]

Yeah, especially considering Germany didn't start WWI. Kind of messed up to gang up on them and not include them in the negotiations. They could've punished them a little, but not THAT much.
But clearly whoever was supppsed to be enforcing it, didn't do a good job.
The Treaty only let to WWII, because Germans were fed up with being abused. Why didn't other nations have to bare responsability.

Also, I didn't know you guys got Alsace from that, I thought you had it for much longer.

But not cool stripping Germany of its colonies and conquered land. Germany took some other countries' land, tough luck. Pretty messed up to completely cripple their country.
Yet for WWII they got reperations🤦‍♂️

[Julie07]

considering the terms of Brest Litovsk treaty in march 1918 against Russia and Romania, the dismantling of Austrian and Ottoman empires, Versailles was a peace of cake for Germany. And it had never been really applicated.

[KostasKouvalis]

I don't know anything about those
No one is enforcing it though

[DryGermanGuy]

The rise of the Third Reich and World War 2 were medium-term consequences of the conditions of the Treaty of Versailles. It's also understood nowadays that Germany was not the sole responsible country for World War 1, no matter any treaty text. So there is that.

[Julie07]

But considering the terms of Brest Litovsk treaty in march 1918 against Russia and Romania, the dismantling of Austrian and Ottoman empires, Versailles was a peace of cake for Germany. And it had never been really applicated.

[DryGermanGuy]

Obviously the historic sentiments disagreed, as you can tell from reading the contemporary German and Austrian press. The last WW1 reparation payed by Germany stretched into the year 2010!
And by the way, the terms of Brest-Litovsk were practically not applied at all.

[Julie07]

The strictest terms of the Treaty of Versailles were never applied to Germany. The British and Americans ultimately agreed to Keynes's misguided idea. Under Napoleon, France paid war reparations that were higher relative to GDP than those paid by Germany after World War I.

Don't get me wrong, I love Germany, but to paraphrase a famous French writer, I love Germany so much that I prefer it when there are two of them.

[DryGermanGuy]

Wasn't that quote from François Mitterrand to humor the fact that he tried to sabotage the German re-unification efforts?

[Julie07]

This is a quote from François Mauriac, but in reality Mitterrand supported German reunification on the condition that Germany accept the single currency.

In both cases, the Germans are still better in terms of economic results.

[DryGermanGuy]

Mitterrand started to "support" German re-unification after the Americans strongly supported it and Gorbachev at least signaled no active opposition, because he understood it would be better to be on the winning side of history. Thatcher, as an open antagonist, was peeved about this the rest of her life.

[Julie07]

Mitterrand's goal was to maintain the balance of power. German reunification represented a threat to this balance. However, Mitterrand's solution was to make German reunification conditional on Germany becoming more integrated into the European system, particularly through the adoption of the European currency.

Although imperfect, this solution seemed to be the best way to manage German reunification.

[DryGermanGuy]

Yeah, the introduction of the Euro has Germany not only given the European Central Bank but also boosted our export economy by being cheaper in exchange than the strong Deutschmark. A bit ironic… 🙂

[Julie07]

At first, it wasn't so obvious because the Germans were reluctant to adopt the euro.

[DryGermanGuy]

Very true, the Deutschmark was a symbol of economical pride. Helmut Kohl knew exactly why he did not ask the people for a referendum on the Euro, he would have lost that.

[Julie07]

Exactly. I think that if a referendum on the European Union were held today, many people would vote to leave the EU.

However, despite its flaws, I don't see how leaving the EU would improve a country's situation.

[Bricealan]

@julie07 I had read about the Treaty in High School, but did not know the terms, and still do not know the terms. I looked it up on Google and there were many Articles in the Treaty, but I did not read them all. However harsh they were, I don't see how they could have been too harsh when looking at the actions of the Germans during the war, the murdering of the millions of Jews, and the prison Camps the Germans established.

[DryGermanGuy]

Big fail there... you might want to extent the Google search time.

[Bricealan]

@DryGermanGuy I don't agree. After the war was over, and Hitler blew his brains out or died of syphilis, whatever sanctions were put on German, were not too harsh. The German people themselves, did not want hitler to do what he did, and there were plots to assassinate him. I know you can't punish the PEOPLE for what Hitler did, but I don't know the alternative.

[DryGermanGuy]

Mate, you are confusing World War 1 (1914-18) with World War 2 (1939-45). The Treaty of Versailles concluded World War 1.

[Bricealan]

@DryGermanGuy Oh damn, I was in Germany in July and was in Potsdam where that agreement was signed and territories were divided and treaties signed. Sorry for my confusing the two and thanks for correcting me. Still, I think the sanctions imposed at that time were justifiable, and from what I read and learned was that Germany was still "smarting' from the spanking they took with the Treaty of Versailles, SUPPOSEDLY, why Hitler declared war on the U. S.

Thanks for your correction my German ally !

[Bricealan]

P. S. I like the discussions about the long histories of Europe.

[DryGermanGuy]

Yeah, Potsdam was a different animal altogether.
Historical trivia: Did you know that Hitler had the French delegation sign the 1940 armistice in the same train carriage the Germans had to sign the 1918 armistice? Afterwards the Germans blew the whole place into pieces with explosives.

[AviatorTom]

The treaty was fine, its enforcement was not. When Hitler decided to ignore it and build Germany's military well above the limits set in the treaty, no one did anything to stop him. Europeans were so afraid of another war, that they let Hitler do whatever he wanted. Chamberlain's Munich Treaty and Hitler's invasion of Czechoslovakia are proof of that. Being so afraid of another war is exactly what led to one... World War 2.

[Twalli]

It was too harsh and punitive. That's what caused the worldwide depression. It wasn't so much a peace treaty as a way to punish Germany. In fact, without The Treaty of Versailles, Hitler would not have gained enough power to take control in Germany.

[lightbulb27]

I think so as if you so punish a nation of people that are shall we say, very prideful, it can come back to haunt you. compare that to how USA handled post WWII.

But I don't fully understand what lead up to that war.

[beefcakebradybatson]

No, because its disarming and dismantling of Germany's economic base impoverished many Germans and led to the rise of Communism (which never became Germany's Government) and Naziism, as Hitler exploited martial Germany's shame in being disarmed into a movement dedicated to the re-strengthening of the Fatherland's defense and economy.

[Cidknee]

It WAS to harsh. It's what brought the fall of France some twenty years later. It harmed every German for over a decade. It would have been more humane had they taken Germany in as part of France. Then they would be caring for the ones who starved.

[Dargil]

It precipitated WW2 in Europe.

[DrPepper12]

History teacher here.

NO!

[Xawyx-2]

You're right, it was a bit too lenient.

[noohair]

It caused WWII.