Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and the Yahoo Answers website is now in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.
To What Extent Did the Royal Inbreeding Cause the First World War?
The war essentially was a family squabble among inbred diseased (hemophilia) and deformed (Hapsburg chin) royals who stirred up a conflict in which millions of ordinary men and women died. To what extent would republics have changed the result?
6 Answers
- oldcraggyguyLv 62 months agoFavorite Answer
None: Although Kaiser Wilhelm, King George, and Nicholas of Russia were related, WW1 was caused by governments and military infrastructure not understanding the significance of how technology had changed armies since, let's say, the American Civil War which ended in 1865. Once mobilizations started in 1914, career politicians and soldiers thought they could be rescinded, but were wrong. Once the mobilized armies appeared on the frontiers, they had to start moving. As Bonaparte once said, "a bayonet is a wonderful, multi-purpose tool capable of assisting in many tasks, but one cannot sit on it."
- Anonymous2 months ago
None the man that Murdered some Archduke was Not related to him
and when Germany Invaded Belgium and Brought the UK into the war had Nothing to do with family relations
- Anonymous2 months ago
None whatsoever.
- ?Lv 72 months ago
History - FAIL*
*(subject to the 2021 GCSE results rationalisation algorithm, ask your teacher)
- Anonymous2 months ago
To essentially no extent. This wasn't a family squabble among aristocrats. It was a geopolitical fight among nation states. The royals had relatively little to do with formulating policy. And theoretically monarchical interbreeding like that is supposed to prevent wars by making all the leaders part of the family