A discussion on the consequences of the schlieffen plan

a discussion on the consequences of the schlieffen plan Historians have assumed that in the schlieffen plan denkschrift, which was written in early 1906, schlieffen could afford to leave east prussia undefended because the russian army had been made combat ineffective by the effects of the russo-japanese war and the russian revolution of 1905 the 1906[2] german.

“there never was a schlieffen plan”¹ several years ago this pointed thesis advanced by terence zuber caused a lively debate about operational and strategic planning in the prussian great general staff (grosser generalstab) under the leadership of field marshal alfred graf von schlieffen and colonel general helmuth. In 1896, germany began to make preparations for war the strategy, which took 9 years to finalise, became known as the schlieffen plan the plan, however, was fatally flawed as it was built on too many assumptions and did not take into account any other factors which may have occurred it was also. This book is a collection of papers presented at a conference in potsdam in 2004 to discuss the controversies that have raged over the “schlieffen plan” since the end of the first world war, and most recently inflamed by the theories (and books ) of terence zuber, who was also at the conference (but who declined to have. German commander alfred graf von schlieffen developed a plan against france and russia that would have a profound effect on both the scope and the conduct of world war i. She acknowledges that zuber has forced people to reexamine long held assumptions, but concludes “ultimately, the debate seems of very little consequence to what we know about the origins of the first world war” and that no schlieffen plan does not mean no german war guilt mombauer spends the next few pages. The plan was devised by alfred von schlieffen (hence the name) , when he devised it he was german army chief of staff, in 1905, the plan was german which they would use to avoid a war on two fronts (russia on the eastern front, and britain + france on.

a discussion on the consequences of the schlieffen plan Historians have assumed that in the schlieffen plan denkschrift, which was written in early 1906, schlieffen could afford to leave east prussia undefended because the russian army had been made combat ineffective by the effects of the russo-japanese war and the russian revolution of 1905 the 1906[2] german.

Ritter wanted to discuss militarism, and his studies on that led him to schlieffen and schlieffen's war plan war and the kind of bold - brash, as fischer might describe it - stroke so common to bombastic wilhelmine imperial germany in its ignorance of public opinion and its effect on international relations. This proved a serious miscalculation which, in conjunction with an underestimation of the schlieffen plan, almost led to france's undoing within a month of the outbreak of war within weeks of austria-hungary's plans for war are much less discussed than those of france and germany, and with good reason in devising. The plan's ultimate goal was the encirclement of the french army along the german-french frontier while the basic military strategy of the plan was sound, it ignored the possible diplomatic repercussions of an advance through belgium germany and the other major powers were signatories to a treaty that guaranteed.

The fact that this maneuver would violate the neutrality of belgium was of little consequence to schlieffen the overall focus of the plan was to secure a german victory, so respect for neutrality and international treaties was of no regard it is helpful to remember the state of affairs in europe at this time. Developed long before the war itself, the german schlieffen plan was part of an extensive military preparation the schlieffen plan disregarded the political implications of what was regarded as essentially a technical solution to a military problem it called for learn more: the impact of world war i—new world disorder.

Although the controversy which zuber has provoked has encouraged historians to re-examine the schlieffen plan and question some long-held assumptions, ultimately the debate seems of very little consequence to what we know about the origins of the first world war certainly, zuber has failed to convince his critics of. Now discuss the actual plan again, you can walk through this or talk through it on the board first describe the plan to attack france using belgium as the main route to paris, explain why fewer troops were sent over the border with france explain why schlieffen believed it was possible to think about russia second. Why did schlieffen believe his plan necessary for germany to win any general war in europe why was schlieffen worried about a two-front war how close did the a state of war with france in consequence of the acts of this latter power group activity – socratic discussion: what was schlieffen's plan for winning a.

A discussion on the consequences of the schlieffen plan

a discussion on the consequences of the schlieffen plan Historians have assumed that in the schlieffen plan denkschrift, which was written in early 1906, schlieffen could afford to leave east prussia undefended because the russian army had been made combat ineffective by the effects of the russo-japanese war and the russian revolution of 1905 the 1906[2] german.

A secondary school revision resource for gcse history about modern world history, international relations, causes of world war one and the schlieffen plan.

  • Zuber argues, in two chapters that (oddly) bracket the lengthy discussion of german war planning at the heart of the book, that the schlieffen plan was the postwar invention of a number of german officers (notably this argument steadily gained momentum as the consequences of germany's defeat became clearer.
  • Plan for more than forty years, its text was not published until 1956, when gerhard ritter produced his outstanding study of the plan and its consequences 1 the german official histories published between 1920 and 1939 gave only fragmentary information about the plan and, as a result, all discussions of the subject before.
  • Of this paper to delve into the much-discussed war guilt issue have expected to discredit the russo-french alliance and in effect to schlieffen plan the schlieffen plan count alfred von schlieffen, 4 chief of the great general staff from 1891 to 1906, was acutely aware of germany's emerging.

From a 1999 article in war in history and in inventing the schlieffen plan (2002) to the real german war plan, 1906–1914 (2011), terence zuber has engaged in a debate with terence holmes, annika mombauer, robert foley, gerhard gross, holger herwig and others with his proposition that the schlieffen plan was a. When war looked likely in 1914, the germans decided to put the schlieffen plan into effect, declaring war on france and attacking with multiple armies in the west , leaving one a debate over whether the schlieffen plan would have worked if left alone began within moments and has continued ever since. The schlieffen plan it was an ambitious plan designed to avoid germany having to fight a two-front war against france and russia the plan was to invade france and capture paris before the russians could mobilize german speed slow russian mobilization (6 weeks) britain staying out of the war.

a discussion on the consequences of the schlieffen plan Historians have assumed that in the schlieffen plan denkschrift, which was written in early 1906, schlieffen could afford to leave east prussia undefended because the russian army had been made combat ineffective by the effects of the russo-japanese war and the russian revolution of 1905 the 1906[2] german. a discussion on the consequences of the schlieffen plan Historians have assumed that in the schlieffen plan denkschrift, which was written in early 1906, schlieffen could afford to leave east prussia undefended because the russian army had been made combat ineffective by the effects of the russo-japanese war and the russian revolution of 1905 the 1906[2] german. a discussion on the consequences of the schlieffen plan Historians have assumed that in the schlieffen plan denkschrift, which was written in early 1906, schlieffen could afford to leave east prussia undefended because the russian army had been made combat ineffective by the effects of the russo-japanese war and the russian revolution of 1905 the 1906[2] german. a discussion on the consequences of the schlieffen plan Historians have assumed that in the schlieffen plan denkschrift, which was written in early 1906, schlieffen could afford to leave east prussia undefended because the russian army had been made combat ineffective by the effects of the russo-japanese war and the russian revolution of 1905 the 1906[2] german.
A discussion on the consequences of the schlieffen plan
Rated 4/5 based on 49 review

2018.