World War One Archives - Treaties ending World War

Most People know about the Treaty of Versailles (signed between the Allies and Germany after WWI). I have written about this in an earlier post.

However there were other treaties signed as well.

Treaty of Saint-Germain

Signed between the Allies and Austria after WWI.

​

Key Points

1. Registered the breakup of Hapsburg Empire

2. Created independent countries of Czechoslovakia, Poland, Hungary and Yugoslavia.

3. Loss of Eastern Galicia, Trento, Southern Tirol, Trieste and Istria by Austria.

4. Unification with Germany forbidden.

5. Army reduced to 30,000 men. Navy broken up.

​6. Placed many ethnic Germans under Czechoslovakian and Italian jurisdiction.

7. Austria liable for reparations.

Treaty of Sèvres

​

Treaty signed between UK, France, Italy, Japan  and Tthe Ottoman Empire after WWI.  Involved the partitioning of the Ottoman Empire. Negotiations leading up to the treaty were held in London and San Remo.

1. International recognition of the Kingdom of the Hejaz. Includes the Holy cities of Mecca and Medina.

2. Armenia recognized as an independent state.

3. Strict financial control by Allies over Ottoman finances especially Public debt.

4. Army restricted to 50,700 men. Navy reduced in size. Air force prohibited.

5.  Ottoman "War Criminals' to be handed over to the Allies (Article 230).

6. French zone of influence created to include - Syria, South East Anatalia and  portions of East-Central Anatolia.

7. Greek zones of influence around Smyrna setup.

8. Italy given possession of the Dodecanese Islands and influence in parts of Anatolia around Antalya and Konya.

9. Referendum to be held to decide future of Kurdistan.

10. British given mandate over Iraq and Palestine. French mandate over Lebanon and Syria. Balfour Declaration Principles accepted.

11- Territory under Ottoman control reduced from 1.59 million to 0.53 million square kilometers.

12. Opening up of the Dardanelles Straits, Bosporus and Sea of Marmara to shipping.

Treaty of Neuilly-sur-Seine

Signed by various Allied powers and Bulgaria.

Key Points

1. Western Thrace handed over to Entente. Later given to Greece.

2. Further territory ceded to provide for Kingdom of Yugoslavia.

3. Dobruja returned to Romania

4. Bulgarian Army reduced to 20,000 men

5. Bulgarians to pay 100 million pounds in War Reparations.

6. Recognition of Kingdom of Yugoslavia.

Treaty of Trianon

Treaty signed between Allied Powers and Hungary

Key Points

1. Hungary lost 2/3rd of its territory and 2/3 of its inhabitants.

2. Slovakia handed over to help form Czechoslovakia

3. Austria received Burgenland

4. Yugoslavia took Croatia-Slavonia and part of Banat.

5. Yugoslavia took over the bulk of Banat and Transylvania.

6. Italy received Fiume.

7. Armed forces of Hungary reduced to 35,000 men.

8. Reparations to be determined at a later stage.

The treaty was opposed by many Hungarians as it forced large Magyar populations to fall under the control of foreign nations.

British Politics Reflection..

Britain’s three best prime ministers of the 20th century were Churchill, Lloyd George and Thatcher in that very order. Atlee,  Baldwin, Blair, MacDonald, Macmillan, Campbell-Bannerman, Asquith and Wilson were average while Chamberlain, Callaghan, Major, Heath, Eden were sub-par. The rest – Hume, Balfour, and Bonar Law (who was Canadian-born) weren’t in power long enough to register an impact on the political Richter Scale.

Political Reflection...US Presidential Elections

 If I was an American I would have voted for: Truman (48), Eisenhower (52), Stevenson (56), Kennedy (60), Johnson (64), Nixon (68 and 72), Ford (76), Reagan (80 and 84), Bush Snr (88), Clinton (92 and 96), Gore (00) and Bush (04). Having said that of all the candidates listed the only three that I truly admire are: Truman, Kennedy (even if he is a bit overrated) and Reagan.

Leftist Genocide and Terror

The following is a list of organizations, endorsed by many on the left, that that have been responsible for mass genocide.

Chinese Communist Party
Communist Party of the Soviet Union
Khmer Rouge
Vietnamese Communist Party
Baath Party of Syria
Baath Party of Iraq
Workers Party of Ethiopia
French Jacobins
Castro Regime
Worker’s Party of Korea

What followers are other organizations on the Left of the political spectrum that have been responsible for terror campaigns,

PLO – Fatah
Hamas
Japanese Red Army
Italian Red Brigade
Black Panthers/Black Liberation Army
FARC/ELN
Baader Meinhof Gang
IRA
Action Directe
Basque ETA
DFLP
PFLP/PFLP-GC
Sandanistas
Mau Mau
Red Army Faction (RAF)
Weathermen
ANC – Military Wing
Anarchists of the 19th and 20th centuries
Symbionese Liberation Army
17 November Group
Zapatista Army of National Liberation
ZANU
Shining Path
Hezbollah

Arguments against a Classical Utopia

These four spring to mind

1. Humanity is cursed with the Boredom factor.
2. Our General vision is shortsighted because our lives are short.
3. We are programmed to look out for ourselves. Therefore energy flow is in all directions. It is difficult to facilitate movement on a global level in the same direction.
4. Individuals need to be optimized with respect to their abilities. This will most likely never happen.

My Favourite Activities

Not in any order

Reading - especially History, Politics, Futurology, Science and Philosophy
Watching English Footer - especially Liverpool FC
Debating and Discussing Ideas with others (Live in person or on the Internet)
Spending time with my Wife
Playing with my kids
Watching Movies
Blogging/Writing
Brainstorming
Travelling
Using my imagination
Solving Physics/Math Problems
Following International Tennis, Footer and Rugby
Reading Quality Comics

World War One Archive - War in the Middle East and Africa

My timeline of the events

War in the Middle East and Africa

1914, October 29 - Turkey declares war on the Allies. Russian Black sea Fleet attacked. British shell Turkish position in the Dardanelles and move troops into Egypt. German colonies in Africa fall to British forces. Turkish forces move into Caucasus Mountains

1914, December 29 - Battle of Sarikamish between Turkey and Russia. Russia will win this battle as Turkish losses (including desertions) exceed the 100,000 mark.

1914 - South African forces under Louis Botha and Jan Smuts defeat former Boer War General Christian De Wet who led a Pro-German rebellion.

1915-1916 - Gallipoli campaign. Failed Allied attack on the Dardanelles costs 250,000 Allied casualties and the loss of six battleships. Turkish losses are similar but they claim the legitimate victory.

1915 - Armenian Genocide. Between  1 to 1.5 million Armenians will die in this Genocide at the hands of the Turks.  Armenian rebels lash out at the Turks joining forces with the Russians.

1915 - Turks fail to take Suez Canal.. British forces push into Mesopotamia. Advance to Kut but suffer a setback at Ctesiphon in November.

1916 - Start of the Arab War of Independence. Key players Hussein Ibn Ali (Sharif of Mecca) assisted by his son and TE Lawrence (Lawrence of Arabia). Allied forces will take Mecca and Medina in June.

1916 - Turks take the besieged city of Kut however Turkish forces are pushed back in the Sinai. British and Indian troops go northward on the offensive along the Tigris. 

1917 - British victory against Turks at Magruntein. Gaza falls in March of the year and Jerusalem in December. General  Edmund Allenby is hailed as the British hero. British forces will retake Kut and chase the Turks to Baghdad. Turkish resistance is weak.

1918 -  Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaijan declare independence. British defeat Turks at the Battle of Megiddo and then secures additional victories at Jaffa, Damascus, Homs and Aleppo. Turkish forces defeated in Beirut. Turkey leaves war on October 30 1918 with an armistice.

An Alternative History of the Future - Entry XV

2075-2100: The Buildup, Outbreak and Resolution of the Third World War

Russia resurrects military alliance; Arms race renews

Leaders of eleven[1] of the fifteen ex-Soviet republics met in Minsk. Under the guidance of Russian dictator Yuri Sporzakov, a military alliance was struck and the economic principles of the NEB were reaffirmed. Sporzakov delivered an emotionally charged speech, exhorting the Slavic and Asian peoples to rise again to global power, at the expense of Western nations.

The Slavo-Asian Pact and Sporzakov’s rhetoric, produced widespread unease in the West. Anticipating direct military confrontation between the Pact/NEB countries and Western nations, the EU and the USA began a military buildup.

2076

First brain transplant

The first viable brain transplant was performed in 2076, by the Italian neurosurgeon Vincent Feurri. The recipient of the donor brain lived for fourteen hours. Feurri’s work relied on flash freezing and selective heating techniques, pioneered by Eden Base medical clinics in the 2060s. Neurosurgeons Lo Win and Miero Kamarika continued Feurri’s work, rewiring nerves by computer. By the late 2090s, brain transplant recipients commonly lived for ten years or more.

2077

Artificial intelligence popularized

Peocomp,[2] a fifth-generation personal artificial intelligence unit, became a marketing success. Each Peocomp was custom-made to its owner’s requirements to provide instruction, organize household affairs or be a companion. Logo Brain, the Texas-based company responsible for developing artificial intelligence technology, was credited with this first use of artificial intelligence for the general public.

Moldavia joins Slavo-Asian pact; USA offers support to EU

Russia successfully incorporated Moldavia into the Slavo-Asian Pact in 2077. Fearful of Russia’s increasing belligerence, American President Jeffery Smyth, offered the EU the use of two hundred F-46 fighter aircraft and sixty B-88 bombers.

Emergence of the science of brain tectonics

The science of brain tectonics was born at the Piaget Centre for Neurological Study in Toronto, Canada. Brain tectonics studied the brain’s action, by directly monitoring the movement of the brain’s so-called neuron plates, first discovered in 2063. The investigation of this motion was instrumental in understanding such conditions as epilepsy, mania, pylam[3] and mectian.[4]

Western History 105: How did Cardinal Richelieu contribute to the growing strength of Fance?

Armand du Plessis, also known as Cardinal Richelieu, was the First Minister of State in France between 1624 and 1642. In many way this clergyman politician laid the ground work that established France as a great continental power. Richelieu’s term in office overlaps with the rule of the Bourbon monarch Louis XIII.

Richelieu was a champion of the Catholic Church but also an ardent opponent of Hapsburg power, He opposed Protestant forces in France but was willing to ally with various Protestant states to check the Austro-Spanish Alliance. Domestically he centralized power in France and greatly expanded France’s colonial outlook in North America (New France) and the Caribbean.

Ever the astute political animal, Richelieu always made sure that he was Louis XIII himself. He ousted rivals with ruthless intent including Louis’ mother Marie de Medici when it appeared as though she was acting against his will.

In 1627 his forces defeated the French Protestants (Huguenots) at La Rochelle although he permitted the toleration of protestants outlined in the Edict of Nantes (1598) to continue. During the Thirty Years War Richelieu placed French forces in alliances with Sweden against the Habsburgs. His moves here would help weaken the Hapsburg alliance ruining as well the career of his Spanish rival, Duke of Olivares.

However Richelieu’s policies alienated many. He clashed with the Pope and barely failed a conspiracy plot against him (his network of spies served him well). At his death Richelieu was succeeded by his protégé Cardinal Mazarin who continued with several of his policies during the regency of Louis XIV.

Historians have long debated his legacy, with some seeing him as the embodiment of a powerful France that would rise to left by Hapsburg decline while others choosing to focus on the great deal of negativity that defined his authoritarian system of governance.

World War One overview

Its been one hundred years since the end of the 'War to End All Wars' and the outcome of this great conflict is still very relevant today, While the war ended the Ottoman, Austro-Hungarian, Russian and German Empires it was also responsible for the rise of Fascism, Marxist-Leninism and Islamism. Vladimir Putin is an extension of the KGB apparatus that originated with Lenin's Cheka (during WWI) and ISIS - gains its intellectual capital (if you can call it such a thing) from the Wahhabism that challenged Turkish superiority in the Arabian Peninsula. As well American Interventionism, which has critics on both the left and the right, can take as its champion Woodrow Wilson, who rejected the isolation of old to thrust America into the global theater as never before. One would not be mistaken to conclude that the genesis of the US as a superpower has its origin in WWI not necessarily in a military capacity (where it swung the war against the Central Pact in 1918) but in its ability to finance the allied war machine. The American economic power house grew to adulthood in the Great War.

Total number of deaths is estimated to be 11 million military personal and 7 million civilians.  Numbers do not include the Great Influenza epidemic that followed the war and infected 500 million people (killing between 50 and 100 million).

I will use rounded numbers for approximate Death estimates for each principal fighting powers. Death numbers do not include wounded. 

Australia - 62,000, Canada - 67,000, India - 74,000, New Zealand - 18,000, Newfoundland - 1,600, South Africa - 10,000,  UK and Colonies - 1,012,000, Belgium - 145,000, France - 1,738,000, Greece - 176,000, Romania - 666,000, Italy 1,243,000, Russia 3,395,000, United States 118,000, Austria-Hungary - 2,081,000, Bulgaria - 188,000, German Empire - 2,801,000, Ottoman Empire - 3,272,000

Biggest Source of Civilian Deaths = 1,500,000 Armenians

Source: World War One Casualties

What is the one subject people need to learn more about?

My answer on Quora.

As a teacher I think that their should be a compulsory course on logic and critical thinking.

Key areas to be addressed would be

1. The nature of logic fallacy
2. Sound arguments from premise
3. causation vs correlation
4. Inferring motive
5. How to read and interpret graphs(including trends)
6. The meaning of uncertainty and error
7. Science as an inductive pursuit
8. Necessary vs contingent conclusions
9. Understanding bias, assumptions and paradigm

Western History 104: In what way did European Exploration turn eastward?

European exploration and colonization of Asia predates Marco Polo’s travels to China in the 13^th century and has a history that goes back to the time of Alexander the Great. The Silk Road traditionally offered a pathway to the East but it wasn’t really until 1497, when the Portuguese explorer Vasco da Gama reached India that the missions to Asia by European travelers increased substantially.

Da Gama himself made a second voyage to India with other explorers – Alfonso de Abuquerque, Francisco de Almeida (and later his son Lorenco) followed suit. It was Abuquerque who conquered Goa and eventually established bases in the East Indies. Fernando Magellan reached Asia in 1520 and he was followed in 1549 by Saint Francis Xavier (who reached Japan) and Gaspar de Cruz who was the first missionary in China.

The Italian Jesuit priest, Matteo Ricci, reached the Portuguese settlement of Macau and became the first European to enter the Ming Dynasty’s Forbidden City in Beijing.

The Dutch, English and French would challenge the early Portuguese European domination in the latter part of the 16^th century and for much of the 17^th century. Thomas Stephens, John Mildenhall and Robert Coverte explored India with Antonio de Andrade and Bento de Gois travelling to Tibet and China respectively.

English and Dutch Exploration ventures were driven by their respective East India Companies that acted as early agents of Empire through the promotion of settlement and trade initiatives.

In Japan the Tokugawa Shogunate limited trade with foreign players by adopting an isolationist policy, known as Sakoku (from 1633 onward). This greatly restricted trade until the opening up of ports to American shipping following the Black Ships voyage commanded by the American Matthew Perry in 1853.

World War One - War on the Eastern Front Timeline

I compiled this as part of my World War One Series.

1914, August 17 - Germany in accordance with the Schlieffen Plan organizes herself for a two-front war. The Russian front was to be defensive focused until France was defeated in the West. Russian position in East Prussia were to be attacked. 

1914, August 12-21 - Serbian forces defeat invading Austria-Hungarian forces at the Battle of Jadar. Austrians will later invade and occupy Belgrade (December 1914) following Battle of Kolubra.

1914, August 26-31 - Germans defeat Russians at the Battle of Tannenberg. German forces are led by Paul von Hindenburg and Erich Ludendorff. Russian losses exceed 120,000. German losses sit between 10,000 to 15,000.

1914 - Germans win the First Battle  of Masurian Lakes (September 2014). Although this battle was not as catastrophic for the Russians as Tannenberg, An Austrian offense against the Russians fails at Rava Ruska. Germans defeat a Russian force at the Battle of Lodz. Russian casualties in the 90,000 to 100,000 range.

1915- German and Austrian forces march towards the Carpathian Mountains. Poison gas is used for the first time in warfare at Bolimov (by the Germans). Although wind conditions makes its use ineffective. Second Battle of Maurian Lakes sees another Russian defeat with casualties in the 110,00 range. Austrian and Russian offensives in southern sector of Eastern Front turned back. 

1915 - Germany launches spring offensive. Russian front in disarray all the way through to the Baltics. Italy enters the war on the side of the Allies. Fights eleven costly battles against the Austrians at Isonzo River (until 1917). Stalemate persists between these two fighting forces until the Austrians breakthrough at Caporetto in 1917.

1916 - Russian offense fails at Lake Naroch. Once again casualties are in the 100,000 range. Austrians go on the attack against Italians at Trento and Asiago with no long term gains. Brusilov Offensive - named after Russian general Alexei Brusilov - proves successful in Russia's fight against the Austrians.

1916 - Bulgarian and German forces strike at Salonika but are driven north by Allied counter attack at Monastir. Romanian forces fighting for the Allies are pushed back by the Germsns. Bucharest fall to the Central Powers after the Battle of Arges River.

1917 - Russian Revolution in March 1917 following Army mutiny. Tsar Nicholas II abdicates. Provisional government under Alexander Kerensky in control after a brief stay by Prince Lvov.  Germans offer Vladimir IILich Lenin safe conduct by railway to Russia from Finland in the hopes of stirring up more Revolutionary strife.

1917, July - Failed Kerensky Offensive. German counterattacks push back Brusilov's forces. Russia on the verge of defeat signs an Armistice on December 15th at Brest-Litovsk.

1917, October - Bolsheviks seize power in Russia after coup in Petrograd (October Revolution) . Red Guard forces overthrow Kerensky following storming of Winter Palace. Bolsheviks seize control in other cities. Beginning of Russian Civil War - Reds v Whites.

1917 - Austrians breakthrough against Italians at Caporetto. Greece joins the side of the Allies.

1918 - Massive territorial loss for Russia as a result of Treaty of Brest-Litovsk.  Fighting shifts to the West.

1918, September - Bulgarian forces defeated  at the Battle of Vardar by the Allies ending Balkan War.

1918, October - Allied forces finally defeat Austrians at the Battle of Vittorio Veneto. Austrian-Allied armistice reached on November 4th.

Ten Misconceptions about Evolution

1. Evolution is a Theory.

Correction – It’s a fact in that it does occur. Nevertheless the exact impact of the various factors that are behind it are up for theoretical debate.

2. Evolution has a direction

Correction – Direction implies a goal. There is no goal to evolution, nor is there any purpose it is merely a consequence of a variety of interacting factors.

3. Charles Darwin came up with the idea of Evolution.

Correction – No, he didn’t. The idea has origins in Ancient Greece and has persisted throughout western scientific history (although not with the mainstream support that creationist ideas had). Various scientists have tried to explain what its principle ‘cause’ was (including Darwin’s famous grandfather Erasmus Darwin) however it was ‘Chucky’ himself who came up with the idea of natural selection as the chief phenomenon that drives the process.

4. Natural Selection is the only driver behind evolution

Correction- Natural Selection is a powerful force but it is not the only mechanism. Genetic Drift can be important too.

5. Charles Darwin wrote the definitive all encompassing work on the evolutionary mechanism. 

Correction – Darwin’s work on the Galapagos Islands (during his voyage on the HMS Beagle) were critical to the formulation of his ideas on Natural Selection but his work was far from complete. He had no understanding of the Mendelian Genetics (let alone DNA) and in a sense produced more of a macro approach to the science than anything else.

6. Darwin was a the only scientist at the time thinking along these lines re: natural selection

Correction – Much overlooked in the history of this fascinating topic is the work of Alfred Russel Wallace who had reached similar conclusions to Wallace. Darwin published before Wallace (although Wallace had notified Darwin beforehand of the conclusions that he had reached). Wallace was the product of a working class environment and in a time when class distinction was all important in British society Darwin’s ties to the establishment may have given him the edge in this regard. 

7. Evolution causes organisms to improve over time.

Correction – This again implies direction. Evolutionary change favours organisms that are better adapted to the environment at the time. However if the environment had to change these better adapted organisms may find themselves on the short end of the stick and out competed by their peers who they currently dominate. In summary it is the environment that is the key.

8. Evolution explains the origin of life.

Correction – Actually it doesn’t. Science has several useful ideas how this may have happened (it also may not be a one time event), almost all of it biochemical, but the issue is far from being meaningfully resolved.

9. Darwin removed the necessity to believe in a God as a creator.

Correction – This is the classic Richard Dawkins argument that has some merit in a world of strict materialism but it still fails to answer the origin of life question mentioned in 8. In addition it is indeed possible that there may be subtle forces at play that drive evolutionary change that our material based science cannot elucidate. If God is indeed all powerful, then God can act with pure subtlety, bypassing our best efforts to notice such action. Remember our science is limited and has constraints defined by sensory and rational limits.

10. Certain features are most certainly intelligently designed.

Correction: Intelligent Design constructs (eg. clotting mechanisms, Flagella in bacteria, the eye) are an illusion driven by an innate human need to see purpose and meaning within pattern. Structures proposed by ID proponents may exhibit facets of design but these can be explained adequately by natural selections without the need to bring in a designer. Besides some designs thought to be intelligent fall short of the description…most notably the blind spot in the retina, our pharynx (which increases choking risks) and the narrowness of the female birth canal. 

Silly Trends in Education

What is it about teachers that they love dogma and simple solutions? In my area of teaching (Physics + General Science) the latest dogma that appears to be gaining ground is Peer Group Work (PGW). While such a mechanism of teaching physics through group work is not new and indeed it has manifested itself under the exotic newspeak term Collaborative Learning in an earlier era, the latest incantation of the phenomenon seems to be gaining a stronger clout largely driven by the zealotry of its followers. 

This is not to say that Group Learning is without merit, indeed it has its usefulness (I myself make use of it for certain aspects of the curriculum  viz. Hooke's Law and Linear Momentum) but the latest radicalism champions it as the panacea for all the woes associated with misconceptions in physics learning. In fact left to their own devices the PGW crew would use their teaching methodology exclusively in the classroom claiming the support of selective data interpretation of quasi-performance indicators, such as the limited force concept inventory for justification. A cursory glance at their reasoning evidently reveals an emperor without clothes but such a critique will hardly suffice for those who have chugged with passion on this pedagogical kool-aid.

The reality is that there is no single methodology that should be followed for teaching Physics or any of the scientists. Teachers have diverse strengths and skills and the myriad of learners types in a class are too varied to pigeon hole a class into a one-size fits all mentality. The best teachers will employ a variety of learning strategies from formal lecturing, to Problem Based Learning, to careful use of the Socratic and indeed will dabble with Constructivism. Misconceptions can be addressed effectively in such a milieu as I have personally witnessed, The Key is to know your learners and be prepared to differentiate. Approaches vary. 

Binding yourself to a dogma - no matter how progressive it seems - ignores the reality of the learner (not all students are extroverted which is what PGW favours) and minimizes to its very detriment the powerful and critical role of the teacher in the classroom. PGW sees the role of a teacher changing to become that of a facilitator. This would be a tragedy especially for those who have traditionally learnt so much over the years from the active role of the knowledgeable other.