The Mudcat Café TM
Thread #158817   Message #3762196
Posted By: Teribus
01-Jan-16 - 09:24 AM
Thread Name: History and mythology of WW1
Subject: RE: History and mythology of WW1
"They were spreading deliberate lies about the Germans, and they were invoking the card of their supposedly superior breeding to persuade people in whose interests they were supposed to be governing to put their lives on the lives to satisfy their petty political and aristocratic egos." - GUEST Dave

Not in July and early August 1914 - Forget about historians looking back at the events, as you do not seem to believe them - go to Hansard and read the speech given in Parliament by the British Foreign Secretary of the day Sir Edward Grey on the 3rd of August 1914:

Grey's Speech 3.08.1914

On the IN or OUT thing here is what SIr Edward Grey said:

It may be said, I suppose, that we might stand aside, husband our strength, and that, whatever happened in the course of this war, at the end of it intervene with effect to put things right, and to adjust them to our own point of view. If, in a crisis like this, we run away

[Loud cheers.]

from those obligations of honour and interest as regards the Belgian treaty, I doubt whether, whatever material force we might have at the end, it would be of very much value in face of the respect that we should have lost. And I do not believe, whether a great power stands outside this war or not, it is going to be in a position at the end of it to exert its superior strength. For us, with a powerful fleet, which we believe able to protect our commerce, to protect our shores, and to protect our interests, if we are engaged in war, we shall suffer but little more than we shall suffer even if we stand aside.

We are going to suffer, I am afraid, terribly in this war, whether we are in it or whether we stand aside.
Foreign trade is going to stop, not because the trade routes are closed, but because there is no trade at the other end. Continental nations engaged in war all their populations, all their energies, all their wealth, engaged in a desperate struggle they cannot carry on the trade with us that they are carrying on in times of peace, whether we are parties to the war or whether we are not. I do not believe for a moment that at the end of this war, even if we stood aside and remained aside, we should be in a position, a material position, to use our force decisively to undo what had happened in the course of the war, to prevent the whole of the west of Europe opposite to us -- if that had been the result of the war -- falling under the domination of a single power, and I am quite sure that our moral position would be such as --


[the rest of the sentence -- "to have lost us all respect." -- was lost in a loud outburst of cheering].

And THAT was part of the speech that took Great Britain to war the next day because the Germans violated the neutrality of Belgium - a move clearly to e seen as being AGAINST Great Britain's best national interests.

"They were spreading deliberate lies about the Germans, and they were invoking the card of their supposedly superior breeding to persuade people in whose interests they were supposed to be governing to put their lives on the lives to satisfy their petty political and aristocratic egos."

Nothing whatsoever to do with "supposedly superior breeding" or with "petty political and aristocratic egos." it was all to do with protecting the wealth, security and prosperity of the nation - and that includes the jobs and livelihoods of all.