1 Like
Dammit! They all write like that.
The commies won…! 
1 Like
The Treaty of Brest Litovsk was far worse than Versaille
Yeah, it’s like 10x easier to say Versaille than Breast Lit Off or whatever you typed…
2 Likes
The Treaty of Brest-Litovsk | History Today a very simple version that makes no mention of the starvation in Russia that resulted
I have just read wikipaedia on the subject. A surprisingly scholarly work which gives a wonderful summary of the losses Germany imposed on Russia. I had not realised that the Baltic states were all assigned German Princes. Ludendorf felt this essential as after defeating the West he needed to secure his left flank in the next German/Russian war that would conquer to the Urals. In March 1918 and later the Germans discussed what they would gain from the west which included all of Belgium and most of French Industry, coal and the British Empire.
This is what Brest-Litovsk took from Russia -
Russia lost 34% of its population, 54% of its industrial land, 89% of its coalfields, and 26% of its railways. Russia was also fined 300 million gold marks
Versaille was a mild and overly generous treaty. The view that it was a harsh treaty is entirely the result of German propaganda between the wars.
4 Likes
I think this thread started to be too much on politics discusions and acusations, no? (thats against Mudspike forum rules)
Politics is not only Biden vs Trump…
If we start to talk about nazis, german, reasons of ww1, ww2, etc soon we start to talk about our actual conflicts etc.
IMHO all this thread is out of Mudspike forum objectives
1 Like
Respectfully, I disagree. Maybe it’s because I’m American and we have a perception for a relatively short history and shorter memory, but I have no problem discussing things that took place far enough back that all of the participants are long buried and most of the kingdoms, empires, and nations that fought are either wholly dissolved, displaced, or fundamentally changed beyond recognition.
While I try not to offer (too many) opinions on subjects I have no education on, it looks to me after light reading that the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk was indeed objectively harsher than the Treaty of Versailles. We can likely either agree on that, or understand why one might think so. I stop short of offering an opinion on whether the latter should have been harsher, or whether it would have prevented another war. I dunno. There are some fascinating things to consider there. That’s history, which is something we’re all interested in I think.
WWII is a little fresher, but the participants are once again mostly gone, and many the ideals they fought for no longer exist for the most part. If we can’t discuss the events of WWII (and naturally the reasons behind them), then it’s a sad state of affairs for flight sim and wargaming enthusiasts.
I’m not sure where the line is between contemporary events and history, and you do raise a good point we should all consider in discussions here. We’ve recently discussed fairly recent conflicts, even ones that members here were direct participants in (The Falklands, for instance) where the ideals and objectives of both sides are largely unchanged today, and kept things very civil. I think that says a lot about Mudspike.
Maybe the line stands at dehumanizing an opponent?
2 Likes
Here’s @BeachAV8Rs Welcome post, with a link to the FAQ.
Politics isn’t out of bounds, as such.
But we must be considerate of each others opinions, and as @stavka writes, we must not let it grow into a heated discussion about current conflicts.
The forum is pretty self moderating in that anybody can flag the discussions and heated debates with personal attacks are rare.
But all opinions on this matter are welcome and help moderation by drawing the lines that the users want.
4 Likes
Discussing and understanding History is what I slept through in school because it was boring.
Today I realize it is very important and, in the context of a more grown up mindset, extremely interesting as well. Humanity learned so many lessons already.
One problem with history might be that it’s often told with a bias, trying to instrumentalize it to change current events. We should be able to discuss here with the goal to look beyond an eventual bias. It’s an important thing to do.
With an international community like this one, we also have a privilege to do it in a constructive manner. Too good of an opportunity to pass.
5 Likes
It’s been some decades since I learned about the outcome of WWI in a history class in Germany. While the treaty of Versailles was not considered to be fair, if my memory serves me right it was mostly seen so in conjunction with the ‘Dolchstoss-Legende’, e.g. that Germany never would have lost WWI if not enemies of the Reich had betrayed it in 1918. If you believe Germany did not lose WWI on a military level, why take the hardships of the treaty? At least that’s my understanding on the subject.
1 Like
I wish that all the past conflicts were just long settled, all the ideas long forgotten, and that all people have changed, but I tend to agree with @stavka
but I am just watching this with popcorn so to speak 
cause I keep reminding my self about one important knowledge I gained on the internet
4 Likes
Good point, @NEVO.
And I’d just like to add that when it comes to opinions, everybody is right - from their standpoint. We all come from different contries with different cultures, religions and politics. History and knowledge in general is taught differently in all corners of the world.
Sometimes the best we can accomplish is that we agree to disagree.
But we can always be polite and treat each other with respect.
We could make things easier on ourselves and just stop any discussion with the potential to turn sour. But there are so many good discussions to be had, about really interesting stuff, that I think we should continue to have them, even if some extra effort is required from time to time.
7 Likes
I also remember learning that way back when. The German population largely felt it didn’t “legitimately” lose the war (whatever that means) and never felt their leaders were in the wrong, aside from whoever of them might have been traitors that is.
I think that was also a major reason why it was decided to march on Berlin in WWII so they didn’t repeat the same mistake twice.
You can draw some interesting parallels with Iraq in Gulf War 1 and 2 there, even though the outcomes were very different.
1 Like
This one fits nicely:
5 Likes