Current Events > Was the German empire the strongest empire to exist

(+) Yeah! (+)

Unrelated but the winter war is an incredible thing to read about.

Finland had like a 6:1 advantage in casualties. The soviet union were massive and ruthless but it didn't make them great soldiers by any means.

---

JBaLLEN66 posted...

again took 4 great powers to gang up and beat it :).

Are you a German Imperialist or something lol

---

Questionmarktarius posted...

Russia defeated itself in WW1.

Kind of true but not what I asked.

---

spikethedevil posted...

When did it solo the UK and Russia?

Either the British Empire as it never fell or the Roman Empire.

what do you mean they never fell? Theyre no longer an empire.

by that measure the French and Spanish empires never fell either

---

Eastern Europe managed to not get conquered by a scouting force. Had Ghengis not up and biffed it I think it's entirely reasonable to expect Europe would have gotten the same seeing to as the Khwarezmians got. Meanwhile Vietnam got invaded first while the Mongol B team was busy trying to crack China well after Ghengis was dead. By the time Mongolia tried to finish them off they were a shadow of what they were.

---

Doom_Art posted...

Are you a German Imperialist or something lol

Sure sounds like it.

---

JBaLLEN66 posted...

Austria Hungary and the Ottomans were liabilities not assets, On the western front the Germans were fighting the French and British, the Germans defeated the Russians out east

Still not a solo job. When did they SOLO as in on there own the UK and Russia? Russia in WW1 is fairly complicated btw.

Instead of dying on this hill admit you got it wrong and take the L.

---

SPE posted...

what do you mean they never fell? Theyre no longer an empire.

This seems relevant:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/States_headed_by_Elizabeth_II

Doom_Art posted...

Are you a German Imperialist or something lol

no lol but the german empire is just unappreciated because people want to look edgy and cool and give more attention to the nazis lol

---

SPE posted...

what do you mean they never fell? Theyre no longer an empire.

by that measure the French and Spanish empires never fell either

It was never defeated but after WW2 we gave most of it back.

---

JBaLLEN66 posted...

no lol but the german empire is just unappreciated because people want to look edgy and cool and give more attention to the nazis lol

Maybe fact check stuff next time lol.

---

spikethedevil posted...

Still not a solo job. When did they SOLO as in on there own the UK and Russia? Russia in WW1 is fairly complicated btw.

Instead of dying on this hill admit you got it wrong and take the L.

I aint taking no L lol...Look at these battles, do you see a joint Austrian/Ottoman/German army fighting, no it's Germany doing all of the heavy lifting because Austria and the Ottomans were literally liabilities not allies

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Battle_of_the_Marne

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Jutland

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Verdun

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Somme

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Tannenberg

---

Also of note is the Assyrian Empire if for no other reason than holy crap it stuck around for a minute.

---

Questionmarktarius posted...

This seems relevant:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/States_headed_by_Elizabeth_II

this is relevant.

this is mostly ceremonial though, if the queen tried telling Jamaica or Canada what to do they would tell her to fuck off

---

Hold on, did we forget the Disney empire?

is anyone shocked OP has a fondness for the german empire

JBaLLEN66 posted...

I aint taking no L lol...Look at these battles, do you see a joint Austrian/Ottoman/German army fighting, no it's Germany doing all of the living because they were literally liabilities not allies

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Battle_of_the_Marne

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Jutland

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Verdun

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Somme

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Tannenberg

Germany lost most of those battles so they still didnt Solo the UK, or France they lost a stupid war that was a stupid waste of life.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=l60MnDJklnM

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=oXnnbjC7Fok


---

spikethedevil posted...

Germany lost most of those battles so they still didnt Solo the UK, or France they lost a stupid war that was a stupid waste of life.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=l60MnDJklnM

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=oXnnbjC7Fok

They didn't win the war, but did they go tail to tail with 4 great powers basically by themselves for an extended time...Yes, that's what I mean. The only other country to ever do that was Napoleonic France which I gave credit to...

The British Empire can only win wars against tribes in the outback or some divided state in turmoil. What big country could they go against one on one? A chunk of their empire was literally undeveloped wasteland.

---

I think something both sides can agree on is that Htzendorf was a tosser.
---

Ah so now your back pedalling from the solod claim lol. L accepted. Now the UK did solo France and Spain at one point and France in general though with some tactical fuck ups. (The second link)

https://simple.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Trafalgar

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Santa_Cruz_de_Tenerife_(1797)

---

jballen posting from his family's ancestral home in a spacious castle in the bavarian alps

---

spikethedevil posted...

Ah so now your back pedalling from the solod claim lol. L accepted. Now the UK did solo France and Spain at one point and France in general though with some tactical fuck ups. (The second link)

https://simple.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Trafalgar

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Santa_Cruz_de_Tenerife_(1797)

When was the last time the UK alone threatened Paris since the hundred years war dude?

---

JBaLLEN66 posted...

Austria Hungary and the Ottomans were liabilities not assets

That's far more true of the Austrians than of the Ottomans. Germany was never forced to divert substantial resources to shore up a crumbling but vital front in the case of the Ottoman Empire. The Ottoman collapse in 1918 didn't take place until the final seven weeks of the war: the Hindenburg Line had already cracked two days before Damascus fell to the Allies on October 1, and by the time Germany addressed her proposals for an armistice to the United States on October 4, the advancing Allies who were fighting on the Ottoman fronts were no closer to the "soft underbelly" of the Central Powers than Western Thrace.

Germany enjoyed a fairly decent return on her relatively cheap investment in propping up the Ottoman war effort. The total German ground combat strength on the Ottoman fronts amounted to only around seven battalions, and the bulk of this commitment was not made until June 1918 (when it was made to the Palestine front). Yet during the critical months of March to July 1918, the Ottoman fronts were tying up the equivalent of fifteen Allied divisions: seven infantry and four mounted divisions in Palestine and five infantry divisions in Mesopotamia.

The combat support wasn't all one way, either. The Ottoman army contributed two divisions to the Central Powers' defence of the Galician front for over a year, from June 1916 to August 1917; in his memoirs, Falkenhayn stated that the Turks were an "uncommonly valuable asset to the Southern Army". They also contributed three divisions to Mackensen's Danube Army during the conquest of Romania between September 1916 and February 1917.

Of course, combat manpower wasn't the most significant way in which Germany propped up the Ottoman war effort. The German treasury subsidized it to the tune of a little over five billion marks in financial assistance. Germany spent roughly 136 billion marks on fighting the war between 1914-18, which meant that less than 4% of her war expenditure went on financial assistance to the Ottoman Empire.

So no, the Ottoman Empire wasn't a "liability".

---

Lol Germany

Was on the wrong side of two of the biggest wars in history and lost both of them, scrub shit.

JBaLLEN66 posted...

When was the last time the UK alone threatened Paris since the hundred years war dude?

We havent had to? We were the defending nation in the Napoleonic wars not the attacking one. Please do some basic fact checking ffs because you are really looking bad at the moment.

---

What did the Ottomans even serve to gain by allying with Germany?

Firewerx posted...

That's far more true of the Austrians than of the Ottomans. Germany was never forced to divert substantial resources to shore up a crumbling but vital front in the case of the Ottoman Empire. The Ottoman collapse in 1918 didn't take place until the final seven weeks of the war: the Hindenburg Line had already cracked two days before Damascus fell to the Allies on October 1, and by the time Germany addressed her proposals for an armistice to the United States on October 4, the advancing Allies who were fighting on the Ottoman fronts were no closer to the "soft underbelly" of the Central Powers than Western Thrace.

Germany enjoyed a fairly decent return on her relatively cheap investment in propping up the Ottoman war effort. The total German ground combat strength on the Ottoman fronts amounted to only around seven battalions, and the bulk of this commitment was not made until June 1918 (when it was made to the Palestine front). Yet during the critical months of March to July 1918, the Ottoman fronts were tying up the equivalent of fifteen Allied divisions: seven infantry and four mounted divisions in Palestine and five infantry divisions in Mesopotamia.

The combat support wasn't all one way, either. The Ottoman army contributed two divisions to the Central Powers' defence of the Galician front for over a year, from June 1916 to August 1917; in his memoirs, Falkenhayn stated that the Turks were an "uncommonly valuable asset to the Southern Army". They also contributed three divisions to Mackensen's Danube Army during the conquest of Romania between September 1916 and February 1917.

Of course, combat manpower wasn't the most significant way in which Germany propped up the Ottoman war effort. The German treasury subsidized it to the tune of a little over five billion marks in financial assistance. Germany spent roughly 136 billion marks on fighting the war between 1914-18, which meant that less than 4% of her war expenditure went on financial assistance to the Ottoman Empire.

So no, the Ottoman Empire wasn't a "liability".

Where was the Ottoman aid in the Western front? Unless you count just being an extra punching bag for the Russians and British. Why is it so hard to admit that a country literally holding up against the world with two ***** allies was strong? What another country could do this?

---

JBaLLEN66 posted...

Where was the Ottoman aid in the Western front?

Yeah, sure. Aiding the German Spring Offensive by tying up fifteen Allied divisions elsewhere at a critical juncture in the entire Western front campaign, in exchange for German combat support that amounted to fewer than a measly seven battalions in the entire Ottoman Empire, made the Ottomans a "liability" for Germany. "If they weren't fighting on the Western Front, it meant they were a net drain on German resources and contributed nothing!" Masterly strategic thinking there.

The way I see it, you've got three alternatives: (a) read a dictionary, (b) read about something in connection with the war other than Germany, or (c) simply admit that you chose your words badly.

---

The Sun Never Sets on the British Empire

you know, the same British Empire that directly defeated both empires listed in the OP

---

ShibaToken posted...

is anyone shocked OP has a fondness for the german empire

Questionmarktarius posted...

What did the Ottomans even serve to gain by allying with Germany?

Briefly: Ottoman hawks saw an alliance with Germany as a vital counterbalance against the threat of the Russian Empire.

---

Firewerx posted...

Yeah, sure. Aiding the German Spring Offensive by tying up fifteen Allied divisions elsewhere at a critical juncture in the entire Western front campaign, in exchange for German combat support that amounted to fewer than a measly seven battalions in the entire Ottoman Empire, made the Ottomans a "liability" for Germany.

The way I see it, you've got three alternatives: (a) read a dictionary, (b) read about something in connection with the war other than Germany, or (c) simply admit that you chose you words badly.

What the Ottoman Empire brings: A literal dying empire of a punching bag to divert resources from the allies, made a very small contribution that to the western front that takes a 30 minutes of google searching to even find.

Now, let us compare what allies brought:

Britain had the strongest Navy and available manpower and could literally project it's force anywhere on any front/ blockade your ports in to oblivion. In addition, its manufacturing capacities were superb and it's an island so it literally cannot be invaded. Last, it wasn't a dying dysfunctional empire like the ottomans.

France- Not as strong as Britain's projection, but still being able to project its power globally. Its military was strong and able to hold out though.

USA- Manufacturing capability in line, manpower in line, couldn't even be touched by the axis powers

Russia- The weakest link of the bunch and ended up falling- Pretty similar to the ottoman empire- a dying monarchy on its last breath

So please explain to me again how the Ottoman empire is on the same level as these countries?

---

FL81 posted...

The Sun Never Sets on the British Empire

you know, the same British Empire that directly defeated both empires listed in the OP

with the help of other countries

---

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=l60MnDJklnM

---

JBaLLEN66 posted...

NVM, it's Napoleonic France lol...Butttt It literally soloed the UK, France, and Russia and <b>handed the USA its bloodiest battle in history.</b> Earth to people that haven't picked up a damn history book, the German Empire fought in WW1!!!!!

Wrong. Battle of Antietam is the bloodiest battle in American history.

---

The empire of Kyros the Great.

---

When did the US ever war with Napoleon?
I must have missed that.

spikethedevil posted...

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=l60MnDJklnM

admit the german empire was strong and went against the world basically solo then

---

Cringe af topic and highly suspect given tcs views

---

JBaLLEN66 posted...

admit the german empire was strong and went against the world basically solo then

And lost. You claimed if Solod which implies it won then when you got called out decided to die on that hill and refused to fact check anything and just moved the goal posts at every opportunity.

---

The fact that I even have to google if Ottoman empire and Austria-Hungary fought on the western front tells me how terrible of allies actually were

---

Literally no comeback to my post lol.

---

spikethedevil posted...

And lost. You claimed if Solod which implies it won then when you got called out decided to die on that hill and refused to fact check anything and just moved the goal posts at every opportunity.

I didn't move any goalposts. I gave you key battles in WW1 where Germany was literally fighting by itselffffffff which means SOLO

---

JBaLLEN66 posted...

I didn't move any goalposts. I gave you key battles in WW1 where Germany was literally fighting by itselffffffff which means SOLO

No you moved the goalposts. They lost meaning they didnt solo soloimg someone means you won against more than one opponent in terms of a fight.

---

spikethedevil posted...

No you moved the goalposts. They lost meaning they didnt solo soloimg someone means you won against more than one opponent in terms of a fight.

I didn't say they won the war, I said they put up a great fight despite literally sololing against 4 great powers. The only other country that could that is Napoleon's France which I admitted was stronger. Yall are over here trying to argue that the lame-ass dying ottoman empire offering itself as an extra punching bag was an actual ally lol.

---

Except they were and you have had a detailed explanation that you ignored.

---

the roman empire, macedonians and persians were far more impressive than germans ever were in any period of history, even if you just stick to the western side of eurasia. assuming you're comparing any given empire to all its contemporaries

---

ThyCorndog posted...

the roman empire, macedonians and persians were far more impressive than germans ever were in any period of history, even if you just stick to the western side of eurasia. assuming you're comparing any given empire to all its contemporaries

I don't see anything impressive about Alexander's empire. He inherit the empire of Cyrus and it's institutions but failed to keep it together and it splintered into warlords vying for power.

---

The American Empire. I talk about the US all the time. But damn are we good at killing and pushing around other people.

---

cjsdowg posted...

The American Empire. I talk about the US all the time. But damn are we good at killing and pushing around other people.

You havent had much success in conflicts and wars post WW2 tbf.

---