Blackadder How Did WW1 Start?

The reason why WW1 started according to Cpt Edmund Blackadder. Blackadder is temporarily pretending to be mad, which is why he has underwear on his head and pencil's up his nose. From the 4th series episode Goodbyee!

Category:

Entertainment

Tags:

• Blackadder
• WW1
• Arch
• Duke
• Goodbyee

[Magni56]

It was bollocks.

Best description of WWI ever.

[superhamzah85]

I remember in school a-level history, i wrote a 2500 word essay on the causes of war.

I SOO WISH I'd have added at the end of it:

"So the poor old ostrich died for nothing..."

Markers would be like..."whut......"

[TheSmithersy]

@tigerlili97: Not nessecarily. In WW1, Germany was already running out of supplys and money when the yanks entered which the British had from the Empire. No doubt, the war would have been longer but the result would have been the same. In WW2, Hitler couldn't knock out the RAF which stopped him being able to take Britain which is also supported by the fact that op sea lion would have failed if ever implimented.

[tigerlili97]

@TechnoTV6 I agree the Triple Entente deserve the most credit for both wars, but it is also true that if America hadn't entered World War II, and maybe even World War I that the Central Powers probably would have won. No, they didn't get involved until there was an actual attack on them, but Britain wouldn't have declared war on Germany so early if they didn't agree to protect Belgium. The US had no such treaty, so had no reason to fight.

[TechnoTV6]

to be fair the US don't deserve alot of credit for the victories in WW1 and WW2 mainly because they entered late in WW1 and the only reason they got involved in WW2 at all is because of Japan bombing pearl harbor. Granted they helped us with troops when they joined and gave us equipment but should not be given all the credit for WW1 and WW2 as they do not deserve it..the British, French and Russians deserve the credit for the main bulk of both wars.

[rmstew]

@061369317

I don't understand the point you're making.

I'm saying Britain *might* have been better off if it hadn't entered WW1 (obviously we cannot know for certain). I also don't see what Britain gained from being involved in WW1 that was worth the lives of almost one million people.

What does this have to do with the US currently being a powerful nation?

[icejaff]

@061369317 just remember the us would be under spanish and french control if it wasnt for the brittish, fancy learning a new language ^?

[061369317]

@rmstew Brits can now sit back and watch the US lead the way.

You must be happy then.

[rmstew]

@IAmCaptainMarvel

Czar Nicholas II was also the cousin of Kaiser Wilhelm.

Yes, Britain was allied with France and Russia, but was also worried about the Germans becoming too powerful. I still think that sitting back and letting the French, the Germans, the Russians and the Austrians slug it out would have been better for Britain's interests. Whatever Britain 'gained' from WW1 surely wasn't worth just under one million war dead.

[IAmCaptainMarvel]

@rmstew

Come on, now. We weren't scared of the Germans becoming more powerful than us, we did it because we were allies with France and Russia, (who were already at war with the Germans) and with Belgium in particular being so close to England, of course we were going to help.

Not only that, but King George V was the first cousin of Nicholas II of Russia. (Before the poor git had his whole family slaughtered by revolutionaries).

[Benergi]

@MateusVIII bollocks basicly means balls meaning those dangly ones you got down there, so he basicly cursing saying it was a load of rubbish

[Benergi]

@TheKevinWalker Austria Hungary declare war on Serbia but thanks to the alliance system, Russia promised to back Serbia up, then Germany started on Russia then france backed Russia up and Britian waited untill Ger walked into Belgium(a neutral country that had a deal with GB that says that if any country walks into their land, not wanted, GB must defend them)