American Entry

[Imperious Leader]

In summary, the evidence we have leads to the conclusion that unrestricted submarine warfare (USW to save my fingers) was the most significant/important cause of the US entry into World War I, while the Zimmermann telegram probably sped the US entry in that it had significant effects on strengthening public opinion for the war in addition to what USW was doing to American public opinion before and after the note’s release.

You got nothing. What triggered the war was the note. The public opinion turned decidedly only after the note was made public. It is what triggered the war. Get over it.

http://history.state.gov/milestones/1914-1920/WWI
Quote
Germany’s resumption of submarine attacks on passenger and merchant ships in 1917 was the primary motivation behind Wilson’s decision to lead the United States into World War I.

There it is in black and white. Wilson led the US into war, and he did so because of USW.

OK if you look hard enough you may find anything. The note triggered the war, not USW. Get over it.

Quote
In mid-march 1917, German U-boats sank three American merchant ships. Outraged about the violation of American neutrality, President Wilson called a meeting with his cabinet. Each cabinet member argued for war. On April 2, Wilson asked Congress to declare war on Germany to "make the world safe for democracy.
-American Anthem, Holt-Rinehart-Winston, 2007

It was sub attacks that caused Wilson to call the meeting in which the cabinet resolved for war.

No it was what WILSON said. The public opinion changed when the note was made public and that allowed Wilson the cache to DOW, because so many people were upset with that note, not the stupid USW.

Wilson’s speech to Congress, Apr. 2, 1917
http://www.firstworldwar.com/source/usawardeclaration.htm

If there is a mention of the note in Wilson’s speech as to why the US needed to go to war, I couldn’t find it. On the other hand, submarines are mentioned at least 8 times, and it doesn’t take a doctorate in English to see that unrestricted submarine warfare is the theme of the speech.

But this is how you gather the “truth” you just count up words and if one word is mentioned more than another word, the “truth” becomes clear. If that’s how you do things, i pity you.

Explaining the absence of mention of the note in the speech being because the note was a sensitive document and such mention would tip to the Germans that there was a leak is an exceedingly poor argument. The Germans had several opportunities to know that the note had gotten out, most obviously the publishing of the note in American newspapers after March 1. Not only that, Zimmermann himself confirmed the note’s authenticity at least twice publicly before Wilson’s speech. The only thing Wilson could possibly have wanted to protect was how exactly the British got the note (if he even knew how they got it), and it was hardly necessary to give away those secrets when the note was publicly confirmed to be true by Zimmermann himself.

So we need another reason, a legitimate reason, for why the note was not mentioned, otherwise it is evidence supporting (although not as slam-dunk as the first quote at top) � that USW was the most important cause for the US to go to war.

The reason why it was not mentioned earlier is because the British were hoping that just USW would be enough to trigger the war, but it didn’t so they played the last card and the note triggered the war. Yep check and mate.

Until you provide definitive evidence stating that the note was the most important cause as to why the US went to war, I don’t really have much more to say since I have already firmly established my viewpoint. There is plenty of room for other tenable viewpoints, if you have definitive evidence for them. If you keep posting on the topic without such evidence, I will try to ignore � such baiting and misdirection, but to be honest I may just bite if it gets too juicy. I really hope you will actually just provide real definitive evidence or gracefully bow out though, not that I have much hope since you ignored a quote that definitively supports my argument while quoting from the same article.

Nobody cares about how you count up the word ‘submarine’ in a speech. I care about how public opinion turned only after the note was made public and that it triggered the war, and not USW.

[vonLettowVorbeck1914]

Let’s say for the sake of example and clarity, a country needs to be 100% provoked to go to war. (Obviously these numbers are for the sake of example and I am not putting exact values on an event that is hard to measure.)

Let’s say one event provokes them 25%. Another event provokes them 75%. Which one is a more important factor?

Does it change if we flip the order the events happened in?

[Imperious Leader]

Let’s say for the sake of example and clarity, a country needs to be 100% provoked to go to war. (Obviously these numbers are for the sake of example and I am not putting exact values on an event that is hard to measure.)

Let’s say one event provokes them 25%. Another event provokes them 75%. Which one is a more important factor?

Does it change if we flip the order the events happened in?

Lets rather say for the sake of the truth. The Americans lost many citizens to sinkings of passenger ships and or transports years earlier. USW was introduced and still it didn’t trigger the war. The British had to tip their hand and finally expose the contents of the note. Public opinion then got solidified decidedly against the Germans and this triggered the support that Wilson needed to get the US into the war.  If the Damm USW could trigger the war, the British would never release the contents of the note, and keep the codebreaking efforts a secret allowing them to keep dycipering German code. They had to play this hand because USW was not gonna do it.

Simple fact. I am not getting into another one of your swiss cheese arguments. The note triggered it, not USW. Case closed.

[vonLettowVorbeck1914]

@Imperious:

http://history.state.gov/milestones/1914-1920/WWI
Quote
Germany’s resumption of submarine attacks on passenger and merchant ships in 1917 was the primary motivation behind Wilson’s decision to lead the United States into World War I.

There it is in black and white. Wilson led the US into war, and he did so because of USW.

OK if you look hard enough you may find anything. The note triggered the war, not USW. Get over it.

I think you just confirmed your insanity. You look right at an established historical source and won’t even admit it as plausible.

@Imperious:

Quote
In mid-march 1917, German U-boats sank three American merchant ships. Outraged about the violation of American neutrality, President Wilson called a meeting with his cabinet. Each cabinet member argued for war. On April 2, Wilson asked Congress to declare war on Germany to "make the world safe for democracy.
-American Anthem, Holt-Rinehart-Winston, 2007

It was sub attacks that caused Wilson to call the meeting in which the cabinet resolved for war.

No it was what WILSON said. The public opinion changed when the note was made public and that allowed Wilson the cache to DOW, because so many people were upset with that note, not the stupid USW.

Calling it stupid doesn’t make it any less of a cause. Stop pouting and provide some legitimate sources explicitly supporting your point. I think it’s possible that some sources do state the note to be the primary cause for US entry. But from the sources we do have, that is not a tenable position at the moment.

@Imperious:

Wilson’s speech to Congress, Apr. 2, 1917
http://www.firstworldwar.com/source/usawardeclaration.htm

If there is a mention of the note in Wilson’s speech as to why the US needed to go to war, I couldn’t find it. On the other hand, submarines are mentioned at least 8 times, and it doesn’t take a doctorate in English to see that unrestricted submarine warfare is the theme of the speech.

But this is how you gather the “truth” you just count up words and if one word is mentioned more than another word, the “truth” becomes clear. If that’s how you do things, i pity you.

Almost a good diversionary tactic. The point was that this is a speech where Wilson calls for war. In this speech he repeatedly mentionss the German submarines as the reason for why the US should declare. He does not mention the note. The 8 mentions is just a nice corroborative statistic.

@Imperious:

Explaining the absence of mention of the note in the speech being because the note was a sensitive document and such mention would tip to the Germans that there was a leak is an exceedingly poor argument. The Germans had several opportunities to know that the note had gotten out, most obviously the publishing of the note in American newspapers after March 1. Not only that, Zimmermann himself confirmed the note’s authenticity at least twice publicly before Wilson’s speech. The only thing Wilson could possibly have wanted to protect was how exactly the British got the note (if he even knew how they got it), and it was hardly necessary to give away those secrets when the note was publicly confirmed to be true by Zimmermann himself.

So we need another reason, a legitimate reason, for why the note was not mentioned, otherwise it is evidence supporting (although not as slam-dunk as the first quote at top) � that USW was the most important cause for the US to go to war.

The reason why it was not mentioned earlier is because the British were hoping that just USW would be enough to trigger the war, but it didn’t so they played the last card and the note triggered the war. Yep check and mate.

Mentioned earlier? It WAS mentioned earlier than his speech! In probably every American newspaper. If the note was the most important reason, why did Wilson not mention it in his April 2 speech, when he DID mention submarines sinking shipping over and over? You really, really suck at chess. � :-P

@Imperious:

Nobody cares about how you count up the word ‘submarine’ in a speech. I care about how public opinion turned only after the note was made public and that it triggered the war, and not USW.

Part of the reason I counted up “submarine” is because I was pretty sure you would be too lazy or incompetent to actually read the speech. Do you not realize that public opinion going against Germany is not the same thing as causing the war? It helped to cause the war, but it was not the main factor. You can say over and over again the same stuff, but it seems I am the only one actually providing direct evidence. Maybe you should start caring about something other than the note, because USW clearly had more of an effect than you realize.

Whoops, couldn’t stay out of it long.

[vonLettowVorbeck1914]

@Imperious:

Let’s say for the sake of example and clarity, a country needs to be 100% provoked to go to war. (Obviously these numbers are for the sake of example and I am not putting exact values on an event that is hard to measure.)

Let’s say one event provokes them 25%. Another event provokes them 75%. Which one is a more important factor?

Does it change if we flip the order the events happened in?

Lets rather say for the sake of the truth. The Americans lost many citizens to sinkings of passenger ships and or transports years earlier. USW was introduced and still it didn’t trigger the war. The British had to tip their hand and finally expose the contents of the note. Public opinion then got solidified decidedly against the Germans and this triggered the support that Wilson needed to get the US into the war.  If the Damm USW could trigger the war, the British would never release the contents of the note, and keep the codebreaking efforts a secret allowing them to keep dycipering German code. They had to play this hand because USW was not gonna do it.

Simple fact. I am not getting into another one of your swiss cheese arguments. The note triggered it, not USW. Case closed.

Or perhaps did you not answer the question because you know I am making a critical point and you won’t answer honestly because of your ego?

It’s a rhetorical question.

BTW,
Where is your proof that USW was not going to do it?

Bonus question:

If the note was the most important cause, why didn’t Wilson and his cabinet resolve for war right after its release, when they DID resolve for war right after 3 American ships were sunk in mid-march?

Of course you won’t face the facts in these questions because the historical evidence decimates your position.

[Imperious Leader]

I think you just confirmed your insanity. You look right at an established historical source and won’t even admit it as plausible.

I ONLY ADMIT FACTS. THE NOTE TRIGGERED THE ENTRY OF USA. GET OVER IT.

Quote from: Imperious Leader on Today at 10:37:43 am

Quote
Quote
In mid-march 1917, German U-boats sank three American merchant ships. Outraged about the violation of American neutrality, President Wilson called a meeting with his cabinet. Each cabinet member argued for war. On April 2, Wilson asked Congress to declare war on Germany to "make the world safe for democracy.
-American Anthem, Holt-Rinehart-Winston, 2007

It was sub attacks that caused Wilson to call the meeting in which the cabinet resolved for war.

No it was what WILSON said. The public opinion changed when the note was made public and that allowed Wilson the cache to DOW, because so many people were upset with that note, not the stupid USW.

Calling it stupid doesn’t make it any less of a cause. Stop pouting and provide some legitimate sources explicitly supporting your point. I think it’s possible that some sources do state the note to be the primary cause for US entry. But from the sources we do have, that is not a tenable position at the moment.

I already did that before. The note triggered the war. get over it. It is not tenable only to you because you are arguing against the fact that the note triggered the war because that’s the only point i made and you keep coming up with rubbish to dance around that fact.

Quote from: Imperious Leader on Today at 10:37:43 am

Quote
Wilson’s speech to Congress, Apr. 2, 1917
http://www.firstworldwar.com/source/usawardeclaration.htm

If there is a mention of the note in Wilson’s speech as to why the US needed to go to war, I couldn’t find it. On the other hand, submarines are mentioned at least 8 times, and it doesn’t take a doctorate in English to see that unrestricted submarine warfare is the theme of the speech.

But this is how you gather the “truth” you just count up words and if one word is mentioned more than another word, the “truth” becomes clear. If that’s how you do things, i pity you.

Almost a good diversionary tactic. The point was that this is a speech where Wilson calls for war. In this speech he repeatedly mentionss the German submarines as the reason for why the US should declare. He does not mention the note. The 8 mentions is just a nice corroborative statistic.

It could work if for truth validation we just count up words…then yes. But in the real word we just don’t arrive to the facts in that manner. Your shallow reasoning to what caused the war being found in a speech is quite funny.

Quote from: Imperious Leader on Today at 10:37:43 am
Quote
Explaining the absence of mention of the note in the speech being because the note was a sensitive document and such mention would tip to the Germans that there was a leak is an exceedingly poor argument. The Germans had several opportunities to know that the note had gotten out, most obviously the publishing of the note in American newspapers after March 1. Not only that, Zimmermann himself confirmed the note’s authenticity at least twice publicly before Wilson’s speech. The only thing Wilson could possibly have wanted to protect was how exactly the British got the note (if he even knew how they got it), and it was hardly necessary to give away those secrets when the note was publicly confirmed to be true by Zimmermann himself.

So we need another reason, a legitimate reason, for why the note was not mentioned, otherwise it is evidence supporting (although not as slam-dunk as the first quote at top) � that USW was the most important cause for the US to go to war.

The reason why it was not mentioned earlier is because the British were hoping that just USW would be enough to trigger the war, but it didn’t so they played the last card and the note triggered the war. Yep check and mate.

Mentioned earlier? It WAS mentioned earlier than his speech! In probably every American newspaper. If the note was the most important reason, why did Wilson not mention it in his April 2 speech, when he DID mention submarines sinking shipping over and over? You really, really suck at chess. � tongue

Because it was a political speech and he was still dealing with some factions that felt the note was a fraud perpetrated by the British to get us into war and he had to come up with info that could not be compromised as the official reason for going into war. It was still possible that the note could be a fake and he didn’t want to make his case for war on a false premise. IN case you didn’t know, the public did solidify against Germany only after the note was introduced, but they had some factions doubting the note was real. You really need to look below the surface to gain the truth.

Quote from: Imperious Leader on Today at 10:37:43 am

Nobody cares about how you count up the word ‘submarine’ in a speech. I care about how public opinion turned only after the note was made public and that it triggered the war, and not USW.

Part of the reason I counted up “submarine” is because I was pretty sure you would be too lazy or incompetent to actually read the speech. Do you not realize that public opinion going against Germany is not the same thing as causing the war? It helped to cause the war, but it was not the main factor. You can say over and over again the same stuff, but it seems I am the only one actually providing direct evidence. Maybe you should start caring about something other than the note, because USW clearly had more of an effect than you realize.

The reason why you counted up the words was because you favor shallow reasoning. The note was the trigger that caused the war, not 8 mentions of submarine in a speech you idiot.
Whoops, couldn’t stay out of it long.

[Imperious Leader]

Or perhaps did you not answer the question because you know I am making a critical point and you won’t answer honestly because of your ego?

It’s a rhetorical question.

No its swiss cheese rhetoric. Once you admit the note was the trigger for war the better you will be. It will free you from ignorance of the facts.

BTW,
Where is your proof that USW was not going to do it?

Because the British could not get US to join the war due to USW. It didn’t work before in 1915 with the Lusitania. They had to sacrifice the fact that they broke the German code, in order to finally trigger outrage of the American public to join Wilson to fight Germany. The British had to play their last card. Otherwise, they should say nothing and let USW cause the war, but that didn’t work.

Bonus question:

If the note was the most important cause, why didn’t Wilson and his cabinet resolve for war right after its release, when they DID resolve for war right after 3 American ships were sunk in mid-march?

You can keep making the same false point that i am not making. The note was a trigger for war, get the soap out of your ears. I say the same thing over and over again because it is true and you try to make up other things because you know my claims are correct.

The note triggered the war  I am not arguing which was the most important factor as a claim for truth, because that is open to interpretation. So stop making up arguments that are not part of my claim. Holy Christ.

Of course you won’t face the facts in these questions because the historical evidence decimates your position.

The note caused the trigger to allow the US into the war, not USW. Get over it. You failed yet again to prove anything and instead fought against my main point with other unrelated arguments

You keep doing that and i wonder why.

[Imperious Leader]

February 1, 1917 Germany begins unrestricted submarine warfare
February 3 German U-boat sinks U.S. cargo ship Housatonic United States breaks off diplomatic relations with Germany
February 24 United States learns of Zimmermann telegram
March 1 Zimmermann telegram published in American press
April 2 Wilson asks Congress to declare war
April 6 United States declares war on Germany

The Zimmerman note was the last straw that allowed the US to enter war. It solidified public opinion decidedly against Germany for it’s implied threat against the western hemisphere. To argue otherwise is silly.

[Flashman]

So if the British hadn’t decoded the message and published it America wouldn’t have gone to war?

Was it a reason to go to war or a pretext to justify a war already decided upon?

[Imperious Leader]

Here is why you fail to make any credible argument:

“Obviously, the Zimmerman note which had no bearing on how the entente was doing, triggered the US entry.”

This is my first point made in this thread. The note triggered the entry.

After that post you initiated alot of fluffy posts of nothing inventing all sorts of other things i didn’t say in a bogus attempt to make my claims seem incorrect. I am not or ever argued any claims regarding something else.

All you need to do is properly understand what i was saying which is the truth. What you seem to be doing is getting me to admit i said something about which had a stronger influence on public opinion as my main argument. But this tactic was proven to lead to failure like all your others.

The note triggered the war and i will keep saying this because it is a fact. USW did not trigger the war, otherwise the British would not need to reveal the note to American authorities. They could keep breaking the German code and not have to deal with a new code. The note triggered the war.

[Imperious Leader]

So if the British hadn’t decoded the message and published it America wouldn’t have gone to war?

In terms of what triggered the war, it was the note. That is what actually happened. In some vague hypothetical scenario, it was not clear that USW could cause public opinion to turn against Germany. IN terms of reality the note triggered the war.

Was it a reason to go to war or a pretext to justify a war already decided upon?

The note allowed the president the cache to get his DOW, because the note more than other things solidified opinion against Germany to a greater extent than anything else.

Now that we know what triggers the war, you assign this as a fixed event in time from where the US player enters the game because that is a fact we can count upon since it is what caused the US entry.

If Paris falls in late 1914, there is not way the US can go to war so making some silly ideas about “if the entente starts losing the US has a earlier option to enter the war” as some variable entry is based on faulty reasoning.  The US could care less about what is going on in Europe. They cared only about how the war effected them, and the note was a implied threat against our continent.

Sinking a few ships would not turn opinion as fast as a note with instructions ceding 20% of our territories to Mexico of all places.

[vonLettowVorbeck1914]

@Imperious:

Here is why you fail to make any credible argument:

“Obviously, the Zimmerman note which had no bearing on how the entente was doing, triggered the US entry.”

This is my first point made in this thread. The note triggered the entry.

After that post you initiated alot of fluffy posts of nothing inventing all sorts of other things i didn’t say in a bogus attempt to make my claims seem incorrect. I am not or ever argued any claims regarding something else.

It’s understandable that with so many posts under your belt you can’t keep track of all of your claims:

@Imperious:

Something being the “last straw” is hardly the same as something being the most important factor or an even-more-than-barely-significant factor.

Right and in this case, the note was the most important factor. It caused our entry in the war. No denying that.

You agreed there that “the last straw” is not automatically also the most important factor, but then go further and say that in this case the note is also the most important factor. That claim, which you have yet to support with definitive evidence, is what I have been arguing against.

[Imperious Leader]

It’s understandable that with so many posts under your belt you can’t keep track of all of your claims:

Quote from: Imperious Leader on January 08, 2013, 03:20:04 pm
Quote
Something being the “last straw” is hardly the same as something being the most important factor or an even-more-than-barely-significant factor.

Right and in this case, the note was the most important factor. It caused our entry in the war. No denying that.

You agreed there that “the last straw” is not automatically also the most important factor, but then go further and say that in this case the note is also the most important factor. That claim, which you have yet to support with definitive evidence, is what I have been arguing against.

There you go again when your arguments fail, you keep harping on claims that are not my central point. My central point again is that the note triggered the war. Either argue against that or move on. It is getting boring. So keep inferring claims that are not my point, in an attempt to save your failing arguments that you alone ascribe to me.

The note triggered the war, get over it.

[Imperious Leader]

You agreed there that “the last straw” is not automatically also the most important factor, but then go further and say that in this case the note is also the most important factor. That claim, which you have yet to support with definitive evidence, is what I have been arguing against.

Only thing is you have been arguing BEFORE JAN 8TH with my central point. Go look again where you see my first post and how you began your failing arguments.  :-D

The note triggered the war. Get over it.

[vonLettowVorbeck1914]

@Imperious:

Mentioned earlier? It WAS mentioned earlier than his speech! In probably every American newspaper. If the note was the most important reason, why did Wilson not mention it in his April 2 speech, when he DID mention submarines sinking shipping over and over? You really, really suck at chess. � tongue

Because it was a political speech and he was still dealing with some factions that felt the note was a fraud perpetrated by the British to get us into war and he had to come up with info that could not be compromised as the official reason for going into war. It was still possible that the note could be a fake and he didn’t want to make his case for war on a false premise. IN case you didn’t know, the public did solidify against Germany only after the note was introduced, but they had some factions doubting the note was real. You really need to look below the surface to gain the truth.

Which factions? Please cite your sources saying that there were still factions believing the note to be fake after two public admissions by Zimmermann himself that it was genuine.

@Imperious:

The reason why you counted up the words was because you favor shallow reasoning. The note was the trigger that caused the war, not 8 mentions of submarine in a speech you idiot.

Ooo! now I’m an idiot. You must really be running out of ammo for your empty argument. Â

If I cared enough to take the time to count how many times on average over your last few posts you say “the note triggered the war, get over it” or the like, I would probably actually be impressed. It’s hard to imagine with the meds available nowadays that someone could be so delusional. IL, you must be of the camp that says that saying something over and over again makes it true.

I’ll see if it works.

I am a millionaire. I am a millionaire. I am a millionaire. I am a millionaire. I am a millionaire. I am a millionaire.

Darn. Nothing. I guess I will have to settle with backing up the claims I make with evidence instead of just repeating them. It’ll be tough, but I’ll manage.

[vonLettowVorbeck1914]

@Imperious:

There you go again when your arguments fail, you keep harping on claims that are not my central point. My central point again is that the note triggered the war.

So regardless of whether or not it triggered the war, do you admit that unrestricted submarine warfare was overall a more important factor?

In other words, if the note was the last straw, was unrestricted sub warfare a bigger pile of straw?

[Imperious Leader]

Which factions? Please cite your sources saying that there were still factions believing the note to be fake after two public admissions by Zimmermann himself that it was genuine.

factions for not going to war and for going to war.

Quote from: Imperious Leader on Today at 01:13:42 pm
The reason why you counted up the words was because you favor shallow reasoning. The note was the trigger that caused the war, not 8 mentions of submarine in a speech you idiot.

Ooo! now I’m an idiot. You must really be running out of ammo for your empty argument. �

But my argument is the note triggered the war , which defeats all the other ones you invent as my argument. :roll:

If I cared enough to take the time to count how many times on average over your last few posts you say “the note triggered the war, get over it” or the like, I would probably actually be impressed. It’s hard to imagine with the meds available nowadays that someone could be so delusional. IL, you must be of the camp that says that saying something over and over again makes it true.

I’ll see if it works.

I am a millionaire. I am a millionaire. I am a millionaire. I am a millionaire. I am a millionaire. I am a millionaire.

The problem is you are not a millionaire. I am actually but that is not for this thread. The fact is that the note triggered the war. The ‘meds’ argument must be another fluff argument in an attempt to bury the truth with nonsense posts?

Darn. Nothing. I guess I will have to settle with backing up the claims I make with evidence instead of just repeating them. It’ll be tough, but I’ll manage.

Yea and while your managing that failed argument, keep ignoring my point that the note triggered the war. Every post you make that invents “gee i thought we are talking about which event had the greatest impact” which is not my argument in an attempt to generate a bunch of dust and smoke and mirror arguments because you hate the fact that i am correct in knowing that the note triggered the war. I will keep repeating the truth since you don’t understand it yet.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V3y3QoFnqZc

It entertains me to no end laughing at how ridiculous you have become  :mrgreen:

[Imperious Leader]

So regardless of whether or not it triggered the war, do you admit that unrestricted submarine warfare was overall a more important factor?

In other words, if the note was the last straw, was unrestricted sub warfare a bigger pile of straw?

So in order words you are beginning to admit the note caused the war ( triggered it?)

I made no definite claims about anything except what was the final straw, the note.

USW was not it, it would take that note to solidify public opinion not sinking merchant ships because that was too distant to hit home for the American people. An implied threat would be what caused it…that note.

[vonLettowVorbeck1914]

@Imperious:

Which factions? Please cite your sources saying that there were still factions believing the note to be fake after two public admissions by Zimmermann himself that it was genuine.

factions for not going to war and for going to war.

Which ones? Where is your source? Did these factions actually still believe the note was fake after Zimmermann’s two admissions it was real? Where is your source?

@Imperious:

So regardless of whether or not it triggered the war, do you admit that unrestricted submarine warfare was overall a more important factor?

In other words, if the note was the last straw, was unrestricted sub warfare a bigger pile of straw?

So in order words you are beginning to admit the note caused the war ( triggered it?)

Dude.

@vonLettowVorbeck1914:

@Imperious:

The note was what triggered the war. When on this earth will you stop dancing around this white elephant?

It can be admitted that it was the “last straw,” but for the last straw to matter, there has to be many other straws. No one is saying the Zimmerman telegram is totally irrelevant, but please find a source (if you can) that states that as being a more important reason than USW (don’t forget that the note was sent because Germany was planning on resuming USW)

Bold, underline, and italics added.

That was post 22. That was 3 pages ago.

@Imperious:

I made no definite claims about anything except what was the final straw, the note.

Dude.
I hope this is just your ignorance shining forth and not your lying habit.

I’m going to be adding a lot of bold and underline to highlight how erroneous your above quote is (I suspect it’s intentionally erroneous, trying to cover your tracks, backtracking and saying ‘I never said that’ and giving lame excuses for how such and such was meant to be interpreted differently).

@Imperious:

What you seem to keep missing is that the note drew US into the war not unrestricted submarine warfare.

@Imperious:

Right and in this case, the note was the most important factor. It caused our entry in the war. No denying that.

@Imperious:

It takes many decades of reflection to sort out the causes, and everybody knows the Note was the major contribution. Just acknowledge that and move on.

@Imperious:

I only said the Zimmerman note was the vital influence to draw US into war. Now if you want to create new arguments in an effort to bury the truth that the Zimmerman Note was the key factor and not UNRESTRICTED SUBMARINE WARFARE, OR THIS NEW THING YOU INVENT.

OK, four is enough. I might be able to find more, but the point is clear.

If all of these are just mistakes on your part and all you ever meant to say was the the note was simply the last straw and you never meant to say the note was the most important factor, then you really have no business posting on an English forum as you have no functional command of the language to speak of.

@Imperious:

USW was not it, it would take that note to solidify public opinion not sinking merchant ships because that was too distant to hit home for the American people.

Where is your proof of that?

According to World History, 5th Edition (McDougal Littell, 1997), “When the Germans returned to unrestricted submarine warfare in 1917, they knew their decision would lead to war with the United States.” Did they know the telegram would get out?  Or did they know that destroying US shipping would cause the US to join? We both know the answer is the second one. Are you adult enough to admit it?

I have been agreeing all along the the Zimmerman note was important in America going to war. It’s quite possibly the event that took things over the edge. But, things had to have been pushed to the edge in the first place, and from the sources, unrestricted submarine warfare overall pushed much further than the note. You can claim the note was the most important, that it pushed more than USW did, and then say that you never made those claims when the evidence starts piling up against you, but it doesn’t change the fact that the sources we have clearly point to USW as being more significant.

[Imperious Leader]

Which factions? Please cite your sources saying that there were still factions believing the note to be fake after two public admissions by Zimmermann himself that it was genuine.

factions for not going to war and for going to war.

Which ones? Where is your source? Did these factions actually still believe the note was fake after Zimmermann’s two admissions it was real? Where is your source?

It is common knowledge that when the note was first released, American public thought it was trick by the British to draw us into war. The American public was still against the war until latter when the note was proven to be authentic. If you knew anything about this period you would have known that.

Quote from: Imperious Leader on Today at 02:53:16 pm
Quote
So regardless of whether or not it triggered the war, do you admit that unrestricted submarine warfare was overall a more important factor?

In other words, if the note was the last straw, was unrestricted sub warfare a bigger pile of straw?

So in order words you are beginning to admit the note caused the war ( triggered it?)

Dude.

Yep i know truth is hard to swallow.

Quote from: vonLettowVorbeck1914 on January 08, 2013, 06:43:21 pm
Quote from: Imperious Leader on January 08, 2013, 02:11:20 pm
The note was what triggered the war. When on this earth will you stop dancing around this white elephant?

It can be admitted that it was the “last straw,” but for the last straw to matter, there has to be many other straws. No one is saying the Zimmerman telegram is totally irrelevant, but please find a source (if you can) that states that as being a more important reason than USW (don’t forget that the note was sent because Germany was planning on resuming USW)

Bold, underline, and italics added.

But it was the trigger for war, keep avoiding the truth.

That was post 22. That was 3 pages ago.

Quote from: Imperious Leader on Today at 02:53:16 pm

I made no definite claims about anything except what was the final straw, the note.

Dude.
I hope this is just your ignorance shining forth and not your lying habit.

I’m going to be adding a lot of bold and underline to highlight how erroneous your above quote is (I suspect it’s intentionally erroneous, trying to cover your tracks, backtracking and saying ‘I never said that’ and giving lame excuses for how such and such was meant to be interpreted differently).

Keep making fluff arguments knowing all the while that the note triggered the war.

Quote from: Imperious Leader on January 08, 2013, 02:11:20 pm
What you seem to keep missing is that the note drew US into the war not unrestricted submarine warfare.

Quote from: Imperious Leader on January 08, 2013, 03:20:04 pm
Right and in this case, the note was the most important factor. It caused our entry in the war. No denying that.

Quote from: Imperious Leader on January 08, 2013, 07:23:02 pm
It takes many decades of reflection to sort out the causes, and everybody knows the Note was the major contribution. Just acknowledge that and move on.

Quote from: Imperious Leader on January 08, 2013, 07:23:02 pm
I only said the Zimmerman note was the vital influence to draw US into war. Now if you want to create new arguments in an effort to bury the truth that the Zimmerman Note was the key factor and not UNRESTRICTED SUBMARINE WARFARE, OR THIS NEW THING YOU INVENT.

OK, four is enough. I might be able to find more, but the point is clear.

Right and i am right in that the note triggered the war. It was the final straw.

If all of these are just mistakes on your part and all you ever meant to say was the the note was simply the last straw and you never meant to say the note was the most important factor, then you really have no business posting on an English forum as you have no functional command of the language to speak of.

If adding yet another erroneous admission that you have wasted 50% of your total post count arguing against thet fact that the note was the final trigger that caused our entry into the war, then my god have mercy on your smoke and mirrors soul.

Quote from: Imperious Leader on Today at 02:53:16 pm
USW was not it, it would take that note to solidify public opinion not sinking merchant ships because that was too distant to hit home for the American people.

Where is your proof of that?

According to World History, 5th Edition (McDougal Littell, 1997), “When the Germans returned to unrestricted submarine warfare in 1917, they knew their decision would lead to war with the United States.” Did they know the telegram would get out? � Or did they know that destroying US shipping would cause the US to join? We both know the answer is the second one. Are you adult enough to admit it?

More smoke and mirrors? The note triggered the war.

I have been agreeing all along the the Zimmerman note was important in America going to war. It’s quite possibly the event that took things over the edge. But, things had to have been pushed to the edge in the first place, and from the sources, unrestricted submarine warfare overall pushed much further than the note. You can claim the note was the most important, that it pushed more than USW did, and then say that you never made those claims when the evidence starts piling up against you, but it doesn’t change the fact that the sources we have clearly point to USW as being more significant.

Wrong as usual. If that were true the British would never have needed to bring up the Note because USW events would have alone drawn the US into war. The British had to play their last card and make it known that they broke the German code. The note triggered the war not USW.