Forum Eerste Wereldoorlog Forum Index Forum Eerste Wereldoorlog
Hét WO1-forum voor Nederland en Vlaanderen
 
 FAQFAQ   ZoekenZoeken   GebruikerslijstGebruikerslijst   WikiWiki   RegistreerRegistreer 
 ProfielProfiel   Log in om je privé berichten te bekijkenLog in om je privé berichten te bekijken   InloggenInloggen   Actieve TopicsActieve Topics 

2 augustus

 
Plaats nieuw bericht   Plaats Reactie    Forum Eerste Wereldoorlog Forum Index -> Wat gebeurde er vandaag... Actieve Topics
Vorige onderwerp :: Volgende onderwerp  
Auteur Bericht
Yvonne
Admin


Geregistreerd op: 2-2-2005
Berichten: 45457

BerichtGeplaatst: 02 Aug 2006 8:26    Onderwerp: 2 augustus Reageer met quote

Aug 2

1917 Greece declares war on Central Powers

On this day in 1917, several weeks after King Constantine I abdicates his throne in Athens under pressure from the Allies, Greece declares war on the Central Powers, ending three years of neutrality by entering World War I alongside Britain, France, Russia and Italy.

Constantine, educated in Germany and married to a sister of Kaiser Wilhelm II, was naturally sympathetic to the Germans when World War I broke out in the summer of 1914, refusing to honor Greece’s obligation to support Serbia, its ally during the two Balkan Wars in 1912-13. Despite pressure from his own pro-Allied government, including Prime Minister Eleutherios Venizelos, and British and French promises of territorial gains in Turkey, Constantine maintained Greece’s neutrality for the first three years of the war, although he did allow British and French forces to disembark at Salonika in late 1914 in a plan to aid Serbia against Austro-Hungarian and Bulgarian forces.

By the end of 1915, with Allied operations bogged down in Salonika and failing spectacularly in the Dardanelles, Constantine was even less inclined to support the Entente, believing Germany clearly had the upper hand in the war. He dismissed Venizelos in October 1915, substituting him with a series of premiers who basically served as royal puppets. Meanwhile, civil war threatened in Greece, as Constantine desperately sought promises of naval, military and financial assistance from Germany, which he did not receive. After losing their patience with Constantine, the Allies finally sent an ultimatum demanding his abdication on June 11, 1917; the same day, British forces blockaded Greece and the French landed their troops at Piraeus, on the Isthmus of Corinth, in blatant disregard of Greek neutrality. The following day, Constantine abdicated in favor of his second son, Alexander.

On June 26, Alexander reinstated Venizelos, who returned from exile in Crete, where he had established a provisional Greek government with Allied support. With a pro-Allied prime minister firmly in place, Greece moved to the brink of entering World War I. On July 1, Alexander Kerensky, the Russian commander in chief and leader of the provisional Russian government after the fall of Czar Nicholas II the previous March, ordered a major offensive on the Eastern Front, despite the turmoil within Russia and the exhausted state of Kerensky’s army. The offensive would end in disastrous losses for the Russians, but at the time it seemed like a fortuitous turn of events for the Allies, in that it would help to sap German resources. The following day, Greece declared war on the Central Powers.

The new king, Alexander, stated the case for war dramatically in his official coronation address on August 4: “Greece has to defend her territory against barbarous aggressors. But if in the trials of the past Greece has been able, thanks to the civilizing strength of the morale of the race, to have overcome the conquerors and to rise free amidst the ruins, today it is quite a different matter. The present cataclysm will decide the definite fate of Hellenism, which, if lost, will never be restored.” Over the next 18 months, some 5,000 Greek soldiers would die on the battlefields of World War I.
www.historychannel.com
_________________
Met hart en ziel
De enige echte

https://twitter.com/ForumWO1
Naar boven
Bekijk gebruikers profiel Stuur privé bericht Verstuur mail Bekijk de homepage
Yvonne
Admin


Geregistreerd op: 2-2-2005
Berichten: 45457

BerichtGeplaatst: 02 Aug 2006 8:28    Onderwerp: Reageer met quote

Der deutsche Heeresbericht:
Die Bergnase bei der Feste Souville genommen

Großes Hauptquartier, 2. August. 1916
Westlicher Kriegsschauplatz:
Nördlich der Somme griff der Feind abends mit sehr starken Kräften, aber vergeblich den Abschnitt von Maurepas bis zur Somme an, nachdem er bereits am Nachmittag bei einem Teilunternehmen gegen das Gehöft Monacu durch raschen Gegenstoß deutscher Bataillone eine blutige Schlappe erlitten hatte. An der Straße Maricourt- Clery ist er bis zu unserem völlig eingeebneten Graben vorgedrungen. Die feindlichen Verluste sind wieder erheblich.
Südlich der Somme haben sich bei Belloy und Estrées örtliche Kämpfe abgespielt.
Rechts der Maas machten wir nordwestlich und westlich des Werkes Thiaumont Fortschritte, gewannen die Bergnase nordöstlich der Feste Souville und drückten den Feind im Bergwalde sowie im Lauféewäldchen wesentlich zurück. An unverwundeten Gefangenen sind 19 Offiziere, 923 Mann eingebracht und 14 Maschinengewehre geborgen.
Englische Patrouillen, die im Abschnitt Ypern-Armentières besonders tätig waren, wurden überall abgewiesen.
Die feindlichen Fliegerangriffe gegen Ortschaften hinter dem nördlichen Teile unserer Front wurden wiederholt. Von militärischem Schaden ist kaum zu reden, die Verluste unter der Bevölkerung mehren sich. Wie nachträglich gemeldet wurde, ist in der Nacht zum 31. Juli auch Arlon in Belgien angegriffen worden. Das Jesuitenkloster und die Kirche sind getroffen.
Durch Abwehrfeuer wurden drei feindliche Flugzeuge, und zwar nördlich von Arras, südwestlich von Bapaume und bei Pozières, im Luftkampf eins bei Monthois abgeschossen.
Östlicher Kriegsschauplatz:
Auf dem nördlichen Teile der Front keine wesentlichen Ereignisse.
Südwestlich von Pinsk wiederholten sich die russischen Unternehmungen beiderseits des Nobel-Sees mit verstärkten Kräften und dehnten sich auch auf die Gegend von Lubieszow (am Stochod) aus. Sie wurden glatt abgewehrt.
Mehrfache Angriffe im Stochod-Bogen (nordöstlich der Bahn Kowel-Rowno) brachen bereits im Sperrfeuer vollkommen zusammen. Immer wieder lief der Gegner ohne Rücksicht auf seine großen Menschenverluste gegen unsere Stellungen zwischen Witonicz und der Turya an; alle seine Anstrengungen blieben erfolglos
Bei der Armee des Generals Grafen v. Bothmer sind feindliche Teilangriffe in der Gegend westlich von Wisniowczyk (an der Strypa) und bei Welesniow (am Koropiec) gescheitert.
Balkan-Kriegsschauplatz:
Die Lage ist unverändert.

Oberste Heeresleitung. 1)


U-Boots-Erfolge an der englischen Küste

Berlin, 2. August.
Am 28. Juli wurden an der englischen Ostküste von einem unserer Unterseeboote acht englische Motorsegler und ein englischer Fischdampfer versenkt. 1)


Hindenburg Befehlshaber der gesamten Ostfront

Zusammenfassung deutscher und österreichisch-ungarischer Heeresgruppen

Berlin, 2. August.
Während der Anwesenheit des Deutschen Kaisers an der Ostfront hat in Übereinstimmung mit Seiner K. u. K. Apostolischen Majestät eine neue Regelung der Befehlsverhältnisse dort stattgefunden, die der durch die allgemeine russische Offensive geschaffenen Lage Rechnung trägt. Unter Generalfeldmarschall von Hindenburg wurden mehrere Heeresgruppen der Verbündeten zu einheitlicher Verwendung nach Vereinbarung der beiden Obersten Heeresleitungen zusammengefaßt. 1)


Der österreichisch-ungarische Heeresbericht:
Russische Angriffe in Ostgalizien zusammengebrochen

Wien, 2. August.
Amtlich wird verlautbart:
Russischer Kriegsschauplatz:
Keine Änderung in der Lage.
In Ostgalizien brachen südwestlich von Buczacz, bei Wisniowczyk und im Süden, Südwesten und Westen von Brody mehrere, zum Teil starke russische Angriffe zusammen; ebenso scheiterten alle Anstrengungen des Gegners zwischen der obersten Turya und der von Rowno nach Kowel führenden Bahn, die Front der Verbündeten zu durchbrechen, an der Abwehr der dort kämpfenden deutschen und österreichisch-ungarischen Truppen. Gleiches Schicksal hatten schließlich mehrere starke Vorstöße des Gegners im Stochodknie bei Kaszowka.
Italienischer Kriegsschauplatz:
Die Lage ist unverändert. In den Dolomiten wurde östlich des Siefsattels der Angriff von zwei italienischen Kompagnien abgewiesen.

Der Stellvertreter des Chefs des Generalstabes
v. Hoefer, Feldmarschalleutnant.

Ereignisse zur See:
Am 1. August um 7½ früh brach ein Geschwader von 14 italienischen Großkampfflugzeugen über Pirano nach Istrien ein. Linienschiffsleutnant Banfield stieg in Triest mit einem Seeflugzeug auf, verfolgte das feindliche Geschwader über ganz Istrien, erreichte dessen Gros - sieben Caproni - über Fiume in 2700 Meter Höhe und schoß ein Großkampfflugzeug ab. Führer tot. Zwei Beobachter gefangen. Banfield und sein Flugzeug blieben unversehrt.
Das italienische Unterseeboot "Giacinto Pullino" fiel in der nördlichen Adria in unsere Hände und wurde fast ganz unbeschädigt nach Pola geschleppt. Die gesamte Bemannung, bestehend aus 3 Offizieren und 18 Mann, wurde unverwundet gefangengenommen.

Flottenkommando.

www.stahlgewitter.com
_________________
Met hart en ziel
De enige echte

https://twitter.com/ForumWO1
Naar boven
Bekijk gebruikers profiel Stuur privé bericht Verstuur mail Bekijk de homepage
Yvonne
Admin


Geregistreerd op: 2-2-2005
Berichten: 45457

BerichtGeplaatst: 02 Aug 2006 8:31    Onderwerp: Reageer met quote

Op 2 augustus 1914 schrijft Koning Albert I een persoonlijke brief aan de Duitse keizer, in een laatste poging het onheil af te wenden. Om 19:00 uur komt er als antwoord een ultimatum waarin wordt meegedeeld dat Frankrijk Duitsland zal aanvallen door België en dat België niet in staat zal zijn deze aanval af te weren. Duitsland vraag toestemming door België heen te trekken om Frankrijk tegen te houden...

Op datzelfde moment passeren de Duitsers reeds de Luxemburgse grens. De Luxemburgse regering ontving een telegram waarin stond dat Duitsland op de hoogte was van de Franse optocht naar Luxemburg en dat Duitsland daarom uit zelfverdediging de Luxemburgse neutraliteit moest schenden. Diezelfde dag nog is Luxemburg in Duitse handen.

http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duitse_opmars_door_Belgi%C3%AB_tijdens_de_Eerste_Wereldoorlog
_________________
Met hart en ziel
De enige echte

https://twitter.com/ForumWO1
Naar boven
Bekijk gebruikers profiel Stuur privé bericht Verstuur mail Bekijk de homepage
Percy Toplis



Geregistreerd op: 9-5-2009
Berichten: 13473
Woonplaats: Suindrecht

BerichtGeplaatst: 01 Aug 2010 18:03    Onderwerp: Reageer met quote

Ottoman–German Alliance

The Ottoman-German Alliance was established between the Ottoman Empire and the German Empire on August 2nd, 1914. It was this binding alliance that ultimately led the Ottoman Empire to enter the First World War on the side of the Central Powers.

There was a movement in the Ottoman Empire in favour of an alliance with France and Great Britain. Figures such as Talat Pasha favored an alliance with the Allied powers. It was impossible to reconcile an alliance with the French however, as France's main ally was Russia, the long-time enemy of the Ottoman Empire since the Wars of 1828.

The Ottoman Sultan Mehmed V specifically wanted the Empire to remain a non-belligerent nation; however, pressure from Germany and Mehmed's advisor led the Empire to align with the Central Powers.

Germany needed the Ottoman Empire on its side. The Orient Express had run directly to Istanbul since 1889, and prior to the First World War the Sultan had consented to a plan to extend it through Anatolia to Baghdad under German auspices. This would strengthen the Ottoman Empire's link with industrialised Europe while also giving Germany easier access to its African colonies and to trade markets in India. To keep the Ottoman Empire from joining the Triple Entente, Germany encouraged Romania and Bulgaria to enter the Central Powers.

The secret treaty was signed between the Ottoman Empire and Germany on August 2nd, 1914, to enter the war on the side of the Central Powers, one day after Germany declared war on Russia.[1] The alliance was ratified by many high ranking Turkish officials, including Grand Vizier Said Halim Pasha, the Minister of War Enver Pasha, the Interior Minister Talat Pasha, and Head of Parliament Halil Bey.

However, there was no signature from the House of Osman, and the Sultan himself had not signed it. As the Sultan was the Commander-in-Chief of the Army, as written in the constitution, this made the legitimacy of the Alliance questionable, as this would mean that the army would not be able to fight a jihad on behalf of the Sultan. As the Sultan had wanted the Empire to remain neutral, he did not wish to command a war himself, and as such, left the Cabinet to do much of his bidding.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ottoman%E2%80%93German_Alliance
_________________

"Omdat ik alles beter weet is het mijn plicht om betweters te minachten."
Marcel Wauters, Vlaams schrijver en kunstenaar 1921-2005
Naar boven
Bekijk gebruikers profiel Stuur privé bericht
Percy Toplis



Geregistreerd op: 9-5-2009
Berichten: 13473
Woonplaats: Suindrecht

BerichtGeplaatst: 01 Aug 2010 18:04    Onderwerp: Reageer met quote

Adolf Hitler

A jubilent young Hitler among the crowd celebrating the German proclamation of war on the Odeonplatz in Munich, Germany, August 2, 1914.

http://www.historyplace.com/worldwar2/riseofhitler/odeon.htm
_________________

"Omdat ik alles beter weet is het mijn plicht om betweters te minachten."
Marcel Wauters, Vlaams schrijver en kunstenaar 1921-2005
Naar boven
Bekijk gebruikers profiel Stuur privé bericht
Percy Toplis



Geregistreerd op: 9-5-2009
Berichten: 13473
Woonplaats: Suindrecht

BerichtGeplaatst: 01 Aug 2010 18:10    Onderwerp: Reageer met quote

August 1914 - Battle Fronts

On 2 August, at St. Petersburg, the Tsar summoned a special session of the State Duma to explain the situation and signed the manifesto declaring war on Germany. The next day he appointed his uncle, Grand Duke Nikolai Nikolaevich as Supreme Commander-in-Chief. His move opened the way for a split between “front” and “rear” that eventually led to an administrative chaos that would plague the Russian war effort until the Tsar finally took command in August 1915.

In the Baltic Sea, the Russian Fleet had four old battleships, 10 cruisers, 36 destroyers, five submarines, and six mine layers, with their main naval base at Kronshtadt. The Germans hadight cruisers, ten torpedo boats, and four submarines. In the Baltic, German cruisers Magdeburg and Augsburg bombarded the port of Libau and laid 100 mines outside the harbor.

On 2 August, Russian troops entered East Prussia, near Schwidden. German Landwehr Army units from Thorn pushed into northwest Poland on scouting missions. Other German Landwehr units from Posen, Glogau, and Breslau entered Poland, and began moves to occupy Kalisch and Chenstokhov.

On 2 August, Turkey joined a Treaty of Alliance with Germany against Russia. On the grounds that they need time to complete military preparations Turkey remained neutral until October. Facing the imminent Russia advance into East Prussia stood the German 8th Army, led by General von Prittwitz, HQ at Posen, with Chief of Staff, General von Waldersee.

On the Allied Western Front, Germany sent a Note to Belgium, demanding that she remain passive. Belgium immediately refused. German troops quickly moved into Luxembourg, and entered France at four points. The French Army was still in the slow process of mobilizing. Italy declared its neutrality. The British Cabinet agreed to protect the French coasts since most of the French Fleet was in the Mediterranean Sea. France declared martial law. Note: It is not within the purpose of this work to extensively cover the other Allied fronts. Such coverage will only appear when certain key events occurred that had some direct bearing on Russia.

http://warchron.com/russianWarCommand.htm
_________________

"Omdat ik alles beter weet is het mijn plicht om betweters te minachten."
Marcel Wauters, Vlaams schrijver en kunstenaar 1921-2005
Naar boven
Bekijk gebruikers profiel Stuur privé bericht
Percy Toplis



Geregistreerd op: 9-5-2009
Berichten: 13473
Woonplaats: Suindrecht

BerichtGeplaatst: 01 Aug 2010 18:13    Onderwerp: Reageer met quote

AUGUST 2

Belgium.
== ~Despite warnings from its Ambassador in Berlin, Belgium informs Britain that it does not intend to appeal to the powers to affirm its neutrality, and that it assumes that it will need no foreign aid to repel invaders [morning]

France.
==Though the two countries are still at peace, there are eleven recorded German violations of the French border on this day: near Belfort, French Corporal André Peugeot becomes the first recorded fatality on the Western Front
==The French government gives Joffre full freedom of action [200.PM]; he moves his forces up to the German border

Belgium.
==Germany delivers a twelve-hour ultimatum to Belgium, demanding that German forces be allowed to pass through the country [720.PM] - a Council of State is held in Brussels [900.PM-400.AM]: Belgium resolves to resist Germany - acrimonious meetings are held through the night on military strategy - ~belated orders are issued to put the Liège forts in a state of defense

Luxembourg.
==German forces complete the occupation of Luxembourg [by night] - its government protests but does not resist

The Northwestern and Central Fronts.
==Concerned by the Belgian crisis, Joffre begins altering French Plan 17, moving Lanrezac’s 5th Army further left, and putting de Langley’s 4th Army in line to Lanrezac’s right [~night]

Alsace.
==French VII Corps is ordered to invade Alsace and to take Mulhouse and Huningen

France.
==France declares a state of siege (ratified Aug.05), with martial law and military control of the railways

Germany.
==Moltke is named the Commander-in-Chief of the German Field Armies
==German Army commanders are appointed
==Ludendorff is named liaison between the Liège assault force and 2nd Army command
==The Krupp works are urgently ordered to make their super-heavy 420 mm guns ready for use against the Liège forts

http://cnparm.home.texas.net/Wars/Marne/Marne01.htm
_________________

"Omdat ik alles beter weet is het mijn plicht om betweters te minachten."
Marcel Wauters, Vlaams schrijver en kunstenaar 1921-2005
Naar boven
Bekijk gebruikers profiel Stuur privé bericht
Percy Toplis



Geregistreerd op: 9-5-2009
Berichten: 13473
Woonplaats: Suindrecht

BerichtGeplaatst: 01 Aug 2010 18:23    Onderwerp: Reageer met quote

Treaty of Alliance Between Germany and Turkey 2 August, 1914

Constantinople, August 2, 1914

1. The two contracting parties agree to observe strict neutrality in regard to the present conflict between Austria-Hungary and Serbia.

2. In case Russia should intervene with active military measures, and should thus bring about a casus foederis for Germany with relation to Austria-Hungary, this casus foederis would also come into existence for Turkey.

3. In case of war, Germany will leave her military mission at the disposal of Turkey. The latter, for her part, assures the said military mission an effective influence on the general conduct of the army, in accordance with the understanding arrived at directly between His Excellency the Minister of War and His Excellency the Chief of the Military Mission.

4. Germany obligates herself, if necessary by force of arms ... [ cipher group lacking] Ottoman territory in case it should be threatened.

5. This agreement which has been concluded for the purpose of protecting both Empires from international complications which may result from the present conflict goes into force as soon as it is signed by the above-mentioned plenipotentiaries, and shall remain valid, together with any similar mutual agreements, until December 31, 1918.

6. In case it shall not be denounced by one of the high contracting parties six months before the expiration of the term named above, this treaty shall remain in force for a further period of five years.

7. This present document shall be ratified by His Majesty the German Emperor, King of Prussia, and by His Majesty the Emperor of the Ottomans, and the ratifications shall be exchanged within a period of one month from the date of its signing.

8. The present treaty shall remain secret and can only be made public as a result of an agreement arrived at between the two high contracting parties. In testimony whereof, etc.

BARON v. WANGENHEIM
SAID HALIM

(With regard to 3: The Turks wished to use this phraseology in view of the fact that His Majesty the Sultan is the Commander-in-Chief of the Turkish army. General Liman, however, had officially informed me in advance that he had arranged a detailed agreement with the Minister of War Enver which provided the Military Mission with the actual chief command -- as required by your telegram 275....)

WANGENHEIM

http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/turkgerm.asp
_________________

"Omdat ik alles beter weet is het mijn plicht om betweters te minachten."
Marcel Wauters, Vlaams schrijver en kunstenaar 1921-2005
Naar boven
Bekijk gebruikers profiel Stuur privé bericht
Percy Toplis



Geregistreerd op: 9-5-2009
Berichten: 13473
Woonplaats: Suindrecht

BerichtGeplaatst: 01 Aug 2010 18:25    Onderwerp: Reageer met quote

Zu den Waffen!

Aus der Frankfurter Zeitung:

Der Kaiser hat die allgemeine Mobilmachung angeordnet. Das ist das Ergebnis einer achttägigen Spannung von heftigster Stärke, in der es wohl manche Momente der Hoffnung sogar bis in die letzten Stunden hinein gab, die aber doch mit beständig wachsender Heftigkeit dem Ende zu stürmte, das sie nun gehabt hat. Lange hätte man diese Erregung nicht mehr ertragen, es wäre zuviel für normale Nerven geworden und man atmet förmlich auf nachdem die Entscheidung gefallen. Deutschland bietet seine waffenfähige Mannschaft auf, daß sie die gewalttätigen Drohungen maßloser Sarmaten zurückweise und den deutschen Boden vor moskowitischer Barbarei schütze.
Mit einer bis zur äußerste Grenze gehenden Geduld hat Deutschland kein Mittel unversucht gelassen, um eine friedliche Lösung des Konflikts zu finden. Ohne Arg ging es auf die vom Zaren selbst ausgesprochene Bitte ein, eine Vermittlung zwischen dem Standpunkt Österreichs und Rußlands zu suchen. Mit einer beispiellosen Perfidie haben es die leitenden Männer Rußlands fertig gebracht, in demselben Augenblick, in dem der Zar an die Freundschaft des Deutschen Kaisers appellierte, die Waffe zu schleifen, mit der man Deutschland hinterrücks anzufallen gedachte. Das ist dieselbe Denkart, aus der der Meuchelmord von Sarajewo herausgewachsen ist. Mit den Ehr- und Sittlichkeitsbegriffen westlicher Völker hat dieser heimtückische Geist eines nur oberflächlich gefirnißten Tatarentums nicht das Geringste zu tun. Hier scheiden sich zwei Welten, und flammende Empörung über die moskowitische Niedertracht erfüllt heute von der Memel bis an den Südfuß der Vogesen das deutsche Volk, dem es Rußland nicht gönnt, daß es in friedlicher Arbeit seinen Wohlstand fördert und mit seiner Tätigkeit werbend und lehrend auch über die eigenen Grenzen hinausgeht. Wer den Frieden gestört hat, das hat sich in den Vorgängen der letzten Tage deutlich genug erwiesen. Um der Machtgelüste des expansionslustigen Großrussentums willen, das bald in Ostasien, bald in Armenien und Persien, bald auf dem Balkan seine Minen legt, soll ein Krieg entfesselt werden, wie ihn die Welt noch nicht gesehen hat. Wahrlich, die deutschen Soldaten, die in diesen Tagen an die Grenzen abrücken, haben eine schwere, aber auch eine große und heldenhafte Ausgabe. Es gilt nicht nur, den Boden der Heimat, Eltern, Mütter und Kinder, gegen die Wut halb- oder ganzasiatischer Horden zu schützen, gilt vor allem auch, westeuropäische Gesittung gegen die Hinterlist eines selbstsüchtigen, dabei aber doch von Höflingen und Großfürsten schmählich mißbrauchten Despotentums zu verteidigen.
Es ist schwer denkbar, daß Frankreich und England sich an die Seite einer Macht stellen könnten, deren Staatsmänner mit einem solchen Übermaß von Zynismus ihre Ziele verfolgen. Es scheint, daß beide Westmächte ernstlich den Frieden wollen und auch jetzt noch versuchen, ihn zu retten. Wenn es ihnen ernstlich darum zu tun ist, so wird das beste Mittel Rußland zu friedlicheren Absichten zu bringen, darin bestehen daß man ihm bemerkbar macht, es werde eine schlechte Sache allein auszusehen haben. Noch schwankt man in Frankreich. Man könnte sich aus Deutschlands fast naiven Bemühungen um den Frieden überzeugen, daß dieses keinerlei böse Absichten gegen Frankreich hegt, und daß es ein Wahnsinn gegen das eigene Volk wäre, es in einen Kampf zu treiben, der nur die russischen Machtgelüste steigern müßte. Deutschland begehrt nichts als in Frieden gelassen zu werden. Wenn es nun aber doch zum schweren Waffengang kommt, so werden die Männer, die ins Feld gerufen werden, tapfer ihre Pflicht zu tun wissen. Das Dichterwort aus der Schlußszene des "Egmont" kann ihnen ein Leitstern sein: "Dich schließt der Feind von allen Seiten ein. Es blinken Schwerter, Freunde, höhern Mut! Im Rücken habt ihr Eltern, Weiber, Kinder! Und jene treibt ein hohles Wort des Herrschers nicht ihr Gemüt. Schützt eure Güter." Die Größe dessen was auf dem Spiele steht, zeige den Kämpfern draußen und denen, die daheim zurückbleiben, welch gewaltige Werk vor uns liegt. Aber wenn alle bis zum Äußersten ihre Pflicht tun, werden wir den Sieg erringen und uns die Güter sichern, die eine rücksichtslose Despotenpolitik uns fortgesetzt streitig macht.

http://www.stahlgewitter.com/14_08_02.htm
_________________

"Omdat ik alles beter weet is het mijn plicht om betweters te minachten."
Marcel Wauters, Vlaams schrijver en kunstenaar 1921-2005
Naar boven
Bekijk gebruikers profiel Stuur privé bericht
Percy Toplis



Geregistreerd op: 9-5-2009
Berichten: 13473
Woonplaats: Suindrecht

BerichtGeplaatst: 01 Aug 2010 18:29    Onderwerp: Reageer met quote

August 1914

This video is dedicated to Isaac Rosenberg. This is a poem he wrote during the great war, titled "August 1914".

What in our lives is burnt
In the fire of this?
The hearts dear granary? (= graanschuur)
The much we shall miss?

Three lives hath one life
Iron, honey, gold,
The gold, the honey gone
Left is the hard and cold.

Iron are our lives
Molten right through our youth. (= gegoten)
A burnt space through ripe fields
A fair mouths broken tooth.


Biography of Isaac Rosenberg
- Born in Bristol, England on 25th November 1890 to Russian-Jewish parents, Isaac Rosenberg grew up in the East End of London and became an apprentice engraver until he went to the Slade School to study. An artist and one of the Georgian poets, he was in South Africa when the First World War broke out recuperating from illness, but despite poor health, in 1915 he enlisted as a private in the Army and served in the ranks on the Western Front from 1916 until he was killed in action on April 1st 1918. He was 27 years old.

Isaac Rosenberg, Charles Sorley and Wilfred Owen, were considered to be the three greatest Great War poets, and Rosenberg's poem, "Break of Day in The Trenches" is generally considered to be the greatest poem of the war. ..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wXxilV5uCqw
_________________

"Omdat ik alles beter weet is het mijn plicht om betweters te minachten."
Marcel Wauters, Vlaams schrijver en kunstenaar 1921-2005
Naar boven
Bekijk gebruikers profiel Stuur privé bericht
Percy Toplis



Geregistreerd op: 9-5-2009
Berichten: 13473
Woonplaats: Suindrecht

BerichtGeplaatst: 01 Aug 2010 18:32    Onderwerp: Reageer met quote

"Woe, when he's let loose!" (August 2, 1914)

Kladderadatsch was one of the oldest and most conservative satirical magazines in Germany. Like most Germans, the magazine was a fervent supporter of the war in the opening days of August 1914. The illustration by A. Johnson, appeared on August 2, demonstrating the optimism and hubris of the war’s first days. The caption below the fearsome giant reads, “Woe, when he’s let loose!”

Images - Germany at War, 1914-1918: Mobilization of the Homefront, http://germanhistorydocs.ghi-dc.org/sub_image.cfm?image_id=1722
_________________

"Omdat ik alles beter weet is het mijn plicht om betweters te minachten."
Marcel Wauters, Vlaams schrijver en kunstenaar 1921-2005
Naar boven
Bekijk gebruikers profiel Stuur privé bericht
Percy Toplis



Geregistreerd op: 9-5-2009
Berichten: 13473
Woonplaats: Suindrecht

BerichtGeplaatst: 01 Aug 2010 18:46    Onderwerp: Reageer met quote

Historical Events on 2nd August

1914 - Belgian govt receives German ultimatum
1914 - German press falsely reports that French bombed Nuremberg
1914 - German troops overthrows Luxembourg
1914 - Germany & Turkey signs secret treaty
1914 - Great Britain mobilizes
1914 - Postdam Conference ended
1914 - Russian troops invade Eastern Prussia
1914 - Sherlock Holmes Adventure "His Last Bow" takes place

http://www.historyorb.com/events/august/2
_________________

"Omdat ik alles beter weet is het mijn plicht om betweters te minachten."
Marcel Wauters, Vlaams schrijver en kunstenaar 1921-2005
Naar boven
Bekijk gebruikers profiel Stuur privé bericht
Percy Toplis



Geregistreerd op: 9-5-2009
Berichten: 13473
Woonplaats: Suindrecht

BerichtGeplaatst: 01 Aug 2010 18:53    Onderwerp: Reageer met quote

France Declares General Mobilization on 2nd August 1914

Cover illustration of 'Excelsior' on Sunday 2nd August 1914 (litho)

http://www.bridgemanart.com/image/French-School-20th-century/France-Declares-General-Mobilization-on-2nd-August-1914-cover-illustration-of-Excelsior-on-Sunday-2/4d8ca7c6276b4fb9a8de230d5f23f1b9
_________________

"Omdat ik alles beter weet is het mijn plicht om betweters te minachten."
Marcel Wauters, Vlaams schrijver en kunstenaar 1921-2005
Naar boven
Bekijk gebruikers profiel Stuur privé bericht
Percy Toplis



Geregistreerd op: 9-5-2009
Berichten: 13473
Woonplaats: Suindrecht

BerichtGeplaatst: 01 Aug 2010 20:58    Onderwerp: Reageer met quote

War and Non-Resistance
by Bertrand Russell

Atlantic Monthly Vol. 116, No. 2 (August 1915). 266–274.

The principle that it is always wrong to employ force against another human being has been held in its extreme form by Quakers and by Tolstoï, but has been rejected by the great majority of mankind as inconsistent with the existence of civilized society. But I think that the occasions where forcible resistance is the best course are much fewer than is generally believed, and that some very great and important advances in civilization might be made if this were more widely recognized. The so-called ““right of self-defense,”” in particular, seems to have only a very limited sphere of application, and to be often supported by arguments involving both mistakes as to political questions and a wrong conception of the best type of character.

No one who holds that human conduct ought to be such as to promote certain ends, no matter what ends may be selected, will expect any absolute hard-and-fast rules of conduct to which no possible exception can be found. Not to lie, not to steal, not to murder, are very good precepts for ordinary cases: it may be, in view of the likelihood of biased judgments, that most men will act better if they always follow these precepts unquestioningly than if they consider each case on its merits. Nevertheless, it is obvious that there are cases where lying and stealing are justifiable, and the same must be said of murder by those who hold that some wars are righteous. Tolstoï does not judge conduct by its consequences: he considers actions inherently right or wrong. This makes it possible for him to say that no use of force is ever right. But if we judge conduct, as I think we ought, by its power of promoting what we consider a good life or a good society, we cannot expect such simplicity in our moral precepts, and we must expect all of them to be subject to exceptions. Whatever we may have to say must be regarded as in the nature of practical maxims, to be applied with common sense, not as logically universal rules to be tested by extreme cases.

Broadly speaking, I think the use of force is justifiable when it is ordered in accordance with law by a neutral authority, in the general interest and not primarily in the interest of one of the parties to the quarrel. On this ground, the use of force by the police is justifiable, provided (as is no doubt sometimes the case) that the authorities are employing the police in the general interest, not merely in the interest of the holders of power. In international affairs, if there were a council of the powers strong enough to restrain any aggressive nation without great difficulty, any army or navy employed in obedience to its orders might be regarded as a police force, and justified on the same grounds on which the police are justified. I think there is more hope of ultimately achieving universal peace by this method than by the adoption of non-resistance. But this has no bearing upon the question of whether non-resistance would be a good policy, if any nation could be induced to adopt it. So long as no council of the powers exists, there is no neutral authority to order resistance, and we have to consider the justification of repelling an attack when the nation attacked is the judge in its own cause.

The justification of non-resistance is more easily seen in the case of quarrels between individuals. If I encountered the traditional highwayman, and he demanded my money or my life, I should unhesitatingly give him my money, even if it were in my power to shoot him before he shot me. I should do this, not from cowardice or lack of spirit, but because I would rather part with money than have a man's blood on my conscience. And for the same reason, if I were compelled to engage in a duel, I would rather let my adversary shoot me than shoot him. In this I believe all humane people would agree. At the same time, if he were a worthless fellow, and I had just made an important mathematical discovery which I had not had time to record, it might be right to preserve my life at his expense. Arguments of this sort would justify civilized communities in defending themselves against savages. But conflicts between civilized nations are more like conflicts between rival metaphysicians, each considering his own system admirable and the other man's abominable, while to outsiders it is obvious that both are equally fantastic.

In private life, most situations can be met by the double principle of neither employing force nor obeying it. It is a familiar Platonic thesis that the man who inflicts injustice is more to be pitied than the man who suffers it. But such statements are read with a smile, as charming literary paradoxes, and are not taken as practical wisdom for the guidance of life. Yet the use of force to coerce another man's will, even in those rare cases in which it is justifiable, produces a brutal and tyrannous state of mind, and is more destructive of inward peace than any misfortune that can be inflicted from without. The greatest good that can be achieved in this life is to have will and desire directed to universal ends, purged of the self-assertion which belongs to instinctive will. If a man has once known this good, he will not consider any private ends important enough to be fought for: he may be willing to enter upon a contest of force, but if so, it will be for some end outside his own life, since what is best in his own life cannot be taken from him by another. But although he will not dictate to others for his own ends, he will also not be turned aside from universal ends by others: he will be no more willing to obey than to command. He will preserve his own liberty as scrupulously as he respects the liberty of others.

Exactly similar considerations apply to the conduct of nations, but they are obscured by traditional phrases about ““honor,”” ““patriotism,”” ““sacred traditions,”” or the ““protection of women and children.”” It is assumed that a nation which does not oppose force with force must be actuated by cowardice, and must lose whatever is valuable in its civilization. Both these are illusions. To oppose force by passive non-obedience would require more courage, and would be far more likely to preserve the best elements of the national life. It would also do far more to discourage the use of force. This would be the way of practical wisdom, if men could be brought to believe it. But I fear men are too wedded to the belief that patriotism is a virtue, and too fond of proving their superiority to others in a contest of force. People who object to the doctrine that might is right always contend that it will be disproved by showing that might is on their own side. Yet that would be a disproof only if their side were in the wrong, and their argument shows that they really believe the doctrine that they are pretending to combat. Those who genuinely disbelieve the doctrine will not attempt to disprove it by getting might on their side.

II
Let us imagine that England were to disband its army and navy, after a generation of instruction in the principles of passive resistance as a better defense than war. Let us suppose that England at the same time publicly announced that no armed opposition would be offered to an invader, that all might come freely, but that no obedience would be yielded to any commands that a foreign authority might issue. What would happen in this case?

Suppose, to continue the argument, that the German government wished to take advantage of England's defenseless condition. It would be faced, at the outset, by the opposition of whatever was not utterly brutal in Germany, since no possible cloak could be found to hide the nakedness of aggression. All civilized countries, when they engage in war, find some decent excuse: they fight almost always either in self-defense or in defense of the weak. No such excuse could be found in this case. It could no longer be said, as the Germans now say, that England's naval preponderance keeps other nations in bondage, and threatens the very existence of any nation which depends on imported food. It could no longer be said that we were oppressing India, since India would be able to separate from the British Empire whenever it wished to do so. All the usual pretexts by which aggression is justified would be lacking. When America attacked Spain, it was to liberate the Cubans, against whom Spain was carrying on a war. When England attacked the Transvaal, the then Poet Laureate, the Times, and Messrs. Werner, Beit & Co. and the other imperialist magnates who represented the ancient traditions of the British race, solemnly assured us that our intervention was necessary for the safety of English women in Johannesburg, and for the liberation of the natives from virtual slavery to the Boers. These pleas deceived many people who, though no doubt not unwilling to be deceived, would yet have shrunk from an aggression which could not be in any way disguised. And it was said that the Boers aimed at the conquest of the whole of South Africa: we were told that if ever England found itself entangled in a European war, Cape Colony would be overrun and its English colonists would be subjected to a tyranny. In any civilized country such arguments are always used in justifying even the most aggressive war.

If England had no army and no navy, the Germans would be hard put to it to find a pretext for invasion. All the liberal elements in Germany would oppose any such enterprise; so would all the other nations, unless Germany offered them a share of the plunder. But let us suppose all home opposition overcome, and a force dispatched to England to take possession of the country. Such a force, since it would meet with no military opposition, would not need to be large, and would not be in the state of mingled fear and ferocity which characterizes an invading army among a hostile population. There would be no difficulty in preserving military discipline, and no opportunity for the rape and rapine which have always been displayed by troops after victory in battle. There would be no glory to be won, not even enough to earn one iron cross. The Germans could not congratulate themselves upon their military prowess, or imagine that they were displaying the stern self-abnegation believed to be shown by willingness to die in the fight. To the soldierly mind, the whole expedition would be ridiculous, causing disgust instead of pride. Perhaps a few impudent street-boys might have to have their ears boxed, but otherwise there would be nothing to lend dignity to the expedition.

However, we will suppose the invading army arrived in London, where they would evict the King from Buckingham Palace and the members from the House of Commons. A few able bureaucrats would be brought over from Berlin to consult with the civil servants in Whitehall as to the new laws by which the reign of Kultur was to be inaugurated. No difficulty would be expected in managing so tame a nation, and at first almost all the existing officials would be confirmed in their offices. For the management of a large modern state is a complicated matter, and it would be thought well to facilitate the transition by the help of men familiar with the existing machinery.

But at this point, if the nation showed as much courage as it has always shown in fighting, difficulties would begin. All the existing officials would refuse to coöperate with the Germans. Some of the more prominent would be imprisoned, perhaps even shot, in order to encourage the others. But if the others held firm, if they refused to recognize or transmit any order given by the Germans, if they continued to carry out the decrees previously made by the English Parliament and the English government, the Germans would have to dismiss them all, even to the humblest postman, and call in German talent to fill the breach.

The dismissed officials could not all be imprisoned or shot; since no fighting would have occurred, such wholesale brutality would be out of the question. And it would be very difficult for the Germans suddenly, and out of nothing, to create an administrative machine. Whatever edicts they might issue would be quietly ignored by the population. If they ordered that German should be the language taught in schools, the schoolmasters would go on as if no such order had been issued; if the schoolmasters were dismissed, the parents would no longer send their children to school. If they ordered that English young men should undergo military service, the young men would simply refuse; after shooting a few, the Germans would have to give up the attempt in despair. If they tried to raise revenue by customs duties at the ports, they would have to have German customs officers; this would lead to a strike of all the dock laborers, so that that way of raising revenue would become impossible. If they tried to take over the railways, there would be a strike of the railway servants. Whatever they touched would instantly become paralyzed, nad it would soon be evident, even to them, that nothing was to be made out of England unless the population could be conciliated.

Such a method of dealing with invasion would, of course, require fortitude and discipline. But fortitude and discipline are required in war. For ages past, education has been largely directed to producing these qualities for the sake of war. They now exist so widely that in every civilized country almost every man is willing to die on the battlefield whenever his government thinks the moment suitable. The same courage and idealism which are now put into war could easily be directed by education into the channel of passive resistance. I do not know what losses England may suffer before the present war is ended, but if they amount to a million no one will be surprised. An immensely smaller number of losses, incurred in passive resistance, would prove to any invading army that the task of subjecting England to alien domination was an impossible one. And this proof would be made once for all without dependence upon the doubtful accidents of war. In internal politics, in all democratic countries, the very method we have been considering is constantly practiced, with continually increasing success. Even in Russia, it was the general strike which secured the Constitution of 1905. For a generation, terrorists had uselessly copied the methods of militarists by bombing and assassination; they had achieved nothing except to afford the authorities an excuse for ruthless repression,--an excuse not only to the public, but also to their own consciences, since they appeared to themselves, as soldiers do, to be brave men facing death in the public service. After all the years of fruitless violence, it was the method of passive non-obedience which secured the momentary victory, afterwards lost through disunion and a return to violence. And in all the dealings of democratic governments with labor troubles or with irreconcilable minorities, it is this same power of passive resistance that comes into play. In a civilized, highly organized, highly political state, government is impossible without the consent of the governed. Any object for which a considerable body of men are prepared to starve and die can be achieved by political means, without need of resort to force. And if this is true of objects desired by a minority only, it is a thousand times truer of objects desired unanimously by the whole nation.

But it may be said that, even if the Germans could not actually take over the government of England, or rob us of internal self-government, they could do two things which would injure us vitally: they could take away our empire, and could levy a tribute by the threat of depriving us of food-supplies.

The Germans could not take away the self-governing parts of our empire, since they would encounter there the same difficulties that would prevent them from governing England. They could take away those parts of our empire which we hold by force, and this would be a blow to our pride: the oppression of subject races is one of the chief sources of patriotic satisfaction, and one of the chief things for which Germany envies us. But it is not a source of pride to any rational or humane man. European rule over uncivilized races is in fact a very sordid affair. The best of the men whom it employs are those engaged in the attempt at government, who live in exile and usually die of fever. The rest grow rich selling rum to natives or making them work in mines. Meanwhile the natives degenerate: some die of drink, some of diseases caught from white men, some of consumption in the mines; and those who survive contract the vices of civilization without losing the vices of barbarism. It can only be a blessing to any nation to be deprived of this source of pride, which is a canker of corruption and immorality in the life of democratic communities.

That the Germans could levy tribute on England by threatening our food supplies is obviously true. The ethics of such a demand would be exactly the same as that of the highwayman who demands ““your money or your life.”” The same reasons which would lead a reasonable man to give his money rather than shoot or be shot, would also lead a reasonable nation to give tribute rather than resist by force of arms. The greatest sum that foreigners could theoretically exact would be the total economic rent of the land and natural resources of England. In fact, economic rent may be defined as what can be, and historically has been, extorted by such means. The rent now paid to landowners in England is the outcome of the exactions made by William the Conqueror and his barons. The law courts are the outcome of those set up at that time, and the law which they administer, so far as land is concerned, represents simply the power of the sword. From inertia and lack of imagination, the English at the present day continue to pay the landowners a vast sum to which the latter have no right but that of conquest. The working classes, the shopkeepers, manufacturers, and merchants, the literary men, and the men of science--all the people who make England of any account in the world--have at the most an infinitesimal and accidental share in the rental of England. The men who have a share use their rents in luxury, political corruption, taking the lives of birds, and depopulating and enslaving the rural districts. This way of life is that which almost all English men and women consider the most admirable: those who are anywhere near achieving it struggle to attain it completely, and those who are more remote read serial stories about it as their ancestors would have read of the joys of Paradise.

It is this life of the idle rich which would be curtailed if the Germans exacted a tribute from England. Everything in England that is not positively harmful would be untouched: wages and other earned incomes could not be diminished without diminishing the productivity of English labor, and so lessening England's capacity for paying tribute! Our snobbish instincts, if the idle rich were abolished, might be driven, by want of other outlet, into the admiration of real merit. And if the Germans could effect this for us, they would well deserve their tribute.

It is very doubtful indeed whether the Germans would exact from us a larger tribute than we exact from ourselves in resisting them. There is no knowing what this war will have cost England when it ends, but we shall probably not exaggerate if we place the cost at a thousand million pounds. This represents an annual payment of forty million pounds. All this, together with the annual expenditure on our army and navy, we might have paid to the Germans without being any poorer than we shall be when the war ends. This represents an incredibly larger tribute than we derive from India; yet the Germans assure us that we are full of commercial cunning, and that we govern India solely for our own profit. If they believe this, it is hardly to be supposed that the receipt of such a tribute would fail to satisfy them. Meanwhile we should have avoided the death of our young men, the moral degradation of almost our whole population, and the lowering of the standard of civilization slowly achieved through the centuries which were peaceful in comparison with our present condition.

III
But of course all that I have been saying is fantastic, degrading, and out of touch with reality. I have been assuming that men are to some extent guided by reason, that their actions are directed to ends such as ““life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.”” This is not the case. Death, slavery, and unhappiness (for others) are the chief ends pursued by states in their external relations. It is the preference of such ends to one's own happiness that constitutes patriotism, that shows a man to be free from materialism, and that raises him above the commercial, money-grubbing level of the mere shop-keeper. The Prussian feels himself noble because he is willing to be killed, provided men of other nations are killed at the same time. His nobility and his freedom from commercialism consist in the fact that he desires the misery of others more than his own happiness. And there is a Prussian lurking in each of us, ready to make us regret any national advantage which is not purchased by injury to some other nation. It is this lurking Prussian in our instincts who assures us that a policy of non-resistance would be tame and cowardly, unworthy of a great and proud nation, a failure to perform our duty of chastising an exactly similar pride in other nations.

Pride has its place amongst virtues, in the lives of individuals as well as in the lives of nations. Pride, in so far as it is a virtue, is a determination not to be turned aside from the ends which a man thinks good, no matter what outside pressure may be brought to bear upon him. There is pride in Condorcet, sentenced to the guillotine, spending his last days in writing a book on human progress. There is pride in those who refuse to recant their religious convictions under persecution. Such pride is the noblest form of courage: it shows that self-determination of the will which is the essence of spiritual freedom. But such pride should have as its complement a just conception of what constitutes human welfare, and as its correlative a respect for the freedom of others as absolute as the determination to preserve freedom for ourselves. Exactly the same kind of pride is good in the life of a nation. If we think ill of war, while some other nation thinks well of it, let us show our national pride by living without war, whatever temptations the other nation may put in our way to live according to their ideals rather than according to our own.

The Germans, we are given to understand, hate us with a bitter hatred, and long to believe that we feel toward them as they feel toward us; for unrequited hatred is as bitter as unrequited love. They have made it increasingly difficult not to gratify their desire; but in so far as we can keep our resistance free from bitterness we win a spiritual victory over what deserves to be combatted in the enemy, which is far more important than any victory to be won by guns and bayonets. But this kind of pride is not the kind which patriots exhort us to display. The pride that they admire is the kind that aims at thwarting others; it is the pride of power. Having found that the Germans desired Morocco and Mesopotamia, we were proud of the fact that we prevented them from acquiring either. Having found that the Boers desired independence, we were proud of the fact that we made them submit to our rule. This kind of pride consists merely in love of dominion. Dominion and power can be conclusively shown only by compelling others to forego what they desire. By a natural consequence, those in whom the love of power is strong are led to inflict pain and to use force against the perfectly legitimate desires of those whom they wish to subdue. In nations, this attitude is commended. Generally the heroes of a nation's history are not those who have benefited mankind, but those who have injured other nations. If we prided ourselves upon the good and not the harm that we have done, we should have put Shakespeare on the Nelson monument, and given Apsley House to Darwin. But the citizens whom every nation honors most are those who have killed the greatest number of foreigners.

It is this pride of power that makes us unwilling to yield to others in matters of no intrinsic importance. The Germans cherish a desire for African swamps, of which we have a superfluity. No one in England benefits by the possession of them, except a few financial magnates mostly of foreign origin. If we were reasonable, we should regard the German desire as a curious whim, which we might gratify without any real national loss. Instead of that we regard the German desire as a crime, and our resistance to it as a virtue. We teach school-children to rejoice because so much of the map is painted red. In order that as much as possible may be painted red, we are willing to sacrifice those ideals of freedom in which we have led mankind, and if necessary to adopt all the worst features of the Prussian spirit. This is because we fear the external enemy, who kills the body, more than the internal enemy, who kills the soul. The soul of a nation, if it is a free soul, without slavishness and without tyranny, cannot be killed by any outward enemy. And if men would realize this, the panic fear which the nations feel, one toward another, would be expelled by a better pride than that of diplomatists and war-lords.

The armies and navies of the world are kept up by three causes: cowardice, love of dominion, and lust for blood.

It is cowardice that makes it difficult to meet invasion by the method of passive resistance. More courage and discipline are needed for the successful practice of this method than for facing death in the heat of battle. But I am persuaded that there is in England enough courage and enough capacity for discipline to make success in passive resistance possible if education and moral teaching were directed to that end instead of to warlike prowess. It is cowardice also that makes men prefer the old method of trying to be stronger than your adversary (in which only one party can succeed), rather than a new method requiring imagination, and a readjustment of traditional standards. Yet, if men could think outside the well-worn grooves, there are many plain facts which show the folly of conventional statesmanship. Why has Germany invaded France? Because the French have an army. Why has England attacked Germany? Because the Germans have a navy. Yet people persist in thinking that the French army and the German navy contribute to national safety. Nothing could be more obvious than the facts; nothing could be more universal than men's blindness to them.

The second reason for keeping up the armies and navies of the world is love of dominion. The Germans, in the Morocco controversy, announced that nothing of importance was to happen anywhere without their being consulted. We regarded this as monstrous arrogance; but for two centuries we had advanced the same claim as a matter of course. The matters about which diplomatists raise a pother are usually of only microscopic importance to the welfare of ordinary citizens; they are matters involving national ““prestige,”” that is to say, the power of the state to prevent other states from doing as they wish. This power is sometimes partly based on money, but in the main it rests on armies and navies. If our navy had been smaller, we should not have been able to defeat the German desire for an Atlantic port in Morocco. It would have done us no harm if the Germans had acquired Casablanca, but we enjoyed the thought that our fiat kept them out. The procuring of such pleasure is the second purpose served by armies and navies.

The third purpose of armaments--indeed their primary and original purpose, from which all others are derivative--is to satisfy the lust for blood. Fighting is an instinctive activity of males, both animal and human. Human males, being gregarious, naturally fight in packs. It has been found that the pack tends to be more successful against other packs when fighting within the pack is as far as possible prevented. For this purpose, the law and the police have been instituted. But the shedding of human blood is still considered the most glorious thing a man can do, provided he does it in company with the rest of his pack. War, like marriage, is the legally permitted outlet for a certain instinct. But the instinct which leads to war, unlike the instinct which leads to marriage, so far from being necessary to the human race, is wholly harmful among civilized men. It is an instinct which easily becomes atrophied in a settled community; many men have hardly a trace of it. Unfortunately, as men grow older, their affections and their powers of thought decay. For this reason, and also because power stimulates the love of power, the men who have most influence in government are usually men whose passions and impulses are less civilized than those of the average citizen. These men--the great financiers, the politicians, and some editors of daily papers--use their position, their knowledge, and their power of disseminating misinformation to arouse and stimulate the latent instinct for bloodshed. When they have succeeded, they say that they are reluctantly forced into war by the pressure of public opinion. Their activities are exactly analogous to those of men who distribute indecent pictures or produce lascivious plays. They ought to be viewed in the same light; but because of the notion that a wish to kill foreigners is patriotic and virtuous, they are honored as men who have deserved well of their country. They provide an outlet for the impulse to homicide. To gratify this impulse is the third and ultimate purpose of armies and navies.

All these three motives for armaments,--cowardice, love of dominion, and lust for blood,--are no longer ineradicable in civilized human nature. All are diminishing under the influence of modern social organization. All might be reduced to a degree which would make them almost innocuous, if early education and current moral standards were directed to that end. Passive resistance, if it were adopted deliberately by the will of a whole nation, with the same measure of courage and discipline which is now displayed in war, might achieve a far more perfect protection for what is good in national life than armies and navies can ever achieve, without demanding the carnage and waste and welter of brutality involved in modern war.

But it is hardly to be expected that progress will come in this way, because the imaginative effort required is too great. It is much more likely that it will come, like the reign of law within the state, by the establishment of a central government of the world, able and willing to secure obedience by force, because the great majority of men will recognize that obedience is better than the present international anarchy.

A central government of this kind would command assent, not as a partisan, but as they representative of the interests of the whole. Very soon resistance to it would be seen to be hopeless and wars would cease. Force directed by a neutral authority is not open to the same abuse or likely to cause the same long-drawn conflicts as force exercised by quarreling nations, each of which is the judge in its own cause. Although I firmly believe that the adoption of passive instead of active resistance would be good if a nation could be convinced of its goodness, yet it is rather to the ultimate creation of a strong central authority that I should look for the ending of war. But war will end only after a great labor has been performed in altering men's moral ideals, directing them to the good of all mankind, and not only of the separate nations into which men happen to have been born.

http://fair-use.org/atlantic-monthly/1915/08/war-and-non-resistance
_________________

"Omdat ik alles beter weet is het mijn plicht om betweters te minachten."
Marcel Wauters, Vlaams schrijver en kunstenaar 1921-2005
Naar boven
Bekijk gebruikers profiel Stuur privé bericht
Percy Toplis



Geregistreerd op: 9-5-2009
Berichten: 13473
Woonplaats: Suindrecht

BerichtGeplaatst: 01 Aug 2010 21:10    Onderwerp: Reageer met quote

2 August 1916 → Commons Sitting → MILITARY SERVICE.

BADGES FOR REJECTED MEN.


HC Deb 02 August 1916 vol 85 c286 286

Mr. HOGGE asked the Secretary of State for War whether, among the now many badges, he can see his way to give some distinguishing badge to men of military age who have tried their utmost to enlist but who have failed for physical reasons and who are thereby subjected to petty annoyance?

Mr. FORSTER The Army Council do not see their way to adopt this suggestion. The clerical labour involved in tracing all these men, in examining their bona fides and establishing their identity would be enormous, and both the labour and the expense involved could, it is thought, be demoted with greater advantage to other objects. At the same time my hon. Friend will not take me as indicating that men of the category he mentions do not deserve sympathy if they are subjected to petty annoyance. My information, however, is that the number of persons who haye been and are subjected to any annoyance is very small. It is now, I believe, universally known and appreciated that under the Military Service Acts all men physically fit for military service in its varied forms are at the disposal of the State. Any annoyance there has been in the past has now ceased.

Mr. HOGGE Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that when a recruiting officer turns a man down for medical reasons he has got to do certain things and register the fact; and how would it involve any more work to give a man a badge?

Mr. FORSTER According to the form of the hon. Gentleman's question, it is to apply to everybody declined since the outbreak of war.

http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/commons/1916/aug/02/badges-for-rejected-men
_________________

"Omdat ik alles beter weet is het mijn plicht om betweters te minachten."
Marcel Wauters, Vlaams schrijver en kunstenaar 1921-2005
Naar boven
Bekijk gebruikers profiel Stuur privé bericht
Percy Toplis



Geregistreerd op: 9-5-2009
Berichten: 13473
Woonplaats: Suindrecht

BerichtGeplaatst: 01 Aug 2010 21:26    Onderwerp: Reageer met quote

Noel Godfrey Chavasse

Captain Noel Godfrey Chavasse VC & Bar, MC (9 November 1884 – 4 August 1917) was a British medical doctor and British Army officer who is one of only three people to be awarded a Victoria Cross twice.

The battlefield of Mametz was to see acts of heroism by Captain Chavasse, the only man to be awarded the Victoria Cross twice during the First World War. In 1916, Chavasse was hit by shell splinters while rescuing men in no-man's land. It is said he got as close as 25 yards from the German line, where he found three men and continued throughout the night under a constant rain of sniper bullets and bombing. He performed similar heroics in the offensive at Passchendaele to gain a second VC and become the most highly decorated British serviceman in the war. Although operated upon, he was to die of his wounds two days later in 1917. (...)

Victoria Cross - Chavasse was first awarded the VC for his actions on 9 August 1916, at Guillemont, France when he attended to the wounded all day under heavy fire. The full citation was published on 24 October 1916 and read:

Captain Noel Godfrey Chavasse, M.C., M.B., Royal Army Medical Corps.
For most conspicuous bravery and devotion to duty.

During an attack he tended the wounded in the open all day, under heavy fire, frequently in view of the enemy. During the ensuing night he searched for wounded on the ground in front of the enemy's lines for four hours.

Next day he took one stretcher-bearer to the advanced trenches, and under heavy shell fire carried an urgent case for 500 yards into safety, being wounded in the side by a shell splinter during the journey. The same night he took up a party of twenty volunteers, rescued three wounded men from a shell hole twenty-five yards from the enemy's trench, buried the bodies of two Officers, and collected many identity discs, although fired on by bombs and machine guns.

Altogether he saved the lives of some twenty badly wounded men, besides the ordinary cases which passed through his hands. His courage and self-sacrifice, were beyond praise.


Bar to Victoria Cross - Chavasse's second award was made during the period 31 July to 2 August 1917, at Wieltje, Belgium; the full citation was published on 14 September 1917 and read:

War Office, September, 1917.
His Majesty the KING has been graciously pleased to approve of the award of a Bar to the Victoria Cross to Capt. Noel Godfrey Chavasse, V.C., M.C., late K.A.M.C., attd. L'pool R.

For most conspicuous bravery and devotion to duty when in action.

Though severely wounded early in the action whilst carrying a wounded soldier to the Dressing Station, Capt. Chavasse refused to leave his post, and for two days not only continued to perform his duties, but in addition went out repeatedly under heavy fire to search for and attend to the wounded who were lying out.

During these searches, although practically without food during this period, worn with fatigue and faint with his wound, he assisted to carry in a number of badly wounded men, over heavy and difficult ground.

By his extraordinary energy and inspiring example, he was instrumental in rescuing many wounded who would have otherwise undoubtedly succumbed under the bad weather conditions.

This devoted and gallant officer subsequently died of his wounds.


Chavasse died of his wounds in Brandhoek and is buried at Brandhoek New Military Cemetery, Vlamertinge. His military headstone carries, uniquely, a representation of two Victoria Crosses.

Chavasse was the only man to be awarded both a Victoria Cross and bar in the First World War, and one of only three men ever to have achieved this distinction.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noel_Godfrey_Chavasse
Zie ook http://www.chavasse.u-net.com/chavasse.html
Zie ook http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/6624138/Lord-Ashcroft-pays-record-price-for-ultimate-Victoria-Cross.html
_________________

"Omdat ik alles beter weet is het mijn plicht om betweters te minachten."
Marcel Wauters, Vlaams schrijver en kunstenaar 1921-2005
Naar boven
Bekijk gebruikers profiel Stuur privé bericht
Percy Toplis



Geregistreerd op: 9-5-2009
Berichten: 13473
Woonplaats: Suindrecht

BerichtGeplaatst: 01 Aug 2010 21:37    Onderwerp: Reageer met quote

Passchendaele

William Beach Thomas, Daily Mail (2nd August, 1917)

Floods of rain and a blanket of mist have doused and cloaked the whole of the Flanders plain. The newest shell-holes, already half-filled with soakage, are now flooded to the brim. The rain has so fouled this low, stoneless ground, spoiled of all natural drainage by shell-fire, that we experienced the double value of the early work, for today moving heavy material was extremely difficult and the men could scarcely walk in full equipment, much less dig. Every man was soaked through and was standing or sleeping in a marsh. It was a work of energy to keep a rifle in a state fit to use.

Percival Phillips described the Battle of Passchendaele in the Daily Express (2nd August, 1917)

The weather changed for the worse last night, although fortunately too late to hamper the execution of our plans. The rain was heavy and constant throughout the night. It was still beating down steadily when the day broke chill and cheerless, with a thick blanket of mist completely shutting off the battlefield. During the morning it slackened to a dismal drizzle, but by this time the roads, fields, and footways were covered with semi-liquid mud, and the torn ground beyond Ypres had become in places a horrible quagmire.

It was pretty bad in the opinion of the weary soldiers who came back with wounds, but it was certainly worse for the enemy holding fragments of broken lines still heavily hammered by the artillery and undoubtedly disheartened by the hardships of a wet night in the open after a day of defeat.

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/FWWpasschendaele.htm
_________________

"Omdat ik alles beter weet is het mijn plicht om betweters te minachten."
Marcel Wauters, Vlaams schrijver en kunstenaar 1921-2005
Naar boven
Bekijk gebruikers profiel Stuur privé bericht
Percy Toplis



Geregistreerd op: 9-5-2009
Berichten: 13473
Woonplaats: Suindrecht

BerichtGeplaatst: 01 Aug 2010 21:47    Onderwerp: Reageer met quote

About the Campaigns of the First AIF

Western Front - From mid 1916 France and Flanders was the AIF's main theatre of war.

Marne 1918
20 July to 2 August 1918. The German Offensive in the French sector. Australian participation was limited to the 4th Light Horse Regiment. which participated in the battle of Tardenois on 20 to 31 July 1918.

http://www.aif.adfa.edu.au:8888/about3.html
_________________

"Omdat ik alles beter weet is het mijn plicht om betweters te minachten."
Marcel Wauters, Vlaams schrijver en kunstenaar 1921-2005
Naar boven
Bekijk gebruikers profiel Stuur privé bericht
Percy Toplis



Geregistreerd op: 9-5-2009
Berichten: 13473
Woonplaats: Suindrecht

BerichtGeplaatst: 01 Aug 2010 21:49    Onderwerp: Reageer met quote

Indian Army victory march, 2 August 1919

http://www.westminster.gov.uk/services/libraries/archives/blackpresence/27/
_________________

"Omdat ik alles beter weet is het mijn plicht om betweters te minachten."
Marcel Wauters, Vlaams schrijver en kunstenaar 1921-2005
Naar boven
Bekijk gebruikers profiel Stuur privé bericht
Percy Toplis



Geregistreerd op: 9-5-2009
Berichten: 13473
Woonplaats: Suindrecht

BerichtGeplaatst: 01 Aug 2010 23:51    Onderwerp: Reageer met quote

poilu I aj harig, ruig, bebaard; II m P mannetjesputter m; Franse soldaat m (1914 - 1918).

"Poilu" is wel het meest gevierde woord van de eerste wereldoorlog. Als de linguīst Albert Dauzat tijdens zijn mobilisatie op 2 augustus 1914 deze term hanteerd is dat omdat deze reeds gebruikt werd. In augustus 1914 betekent "poilu" man. In het leger werden soldaten mannen genoemd.

Deze snelle verklaring ontkrachtigt nog niet de gedachte dat soldaten "poilus" werden genoemd omdat deze zich niet zouden scheren. Een eeuw eerder, in het militaire vakjargon, was een "poilu" iemand die haar had, niet zozeer op zijn kin maar elders.....van oudsher een teken van vruchtbaarheid. Balzac, een generaal van Napoleon, vond 42 pontonniers (geniesoldaten) voldoende "poilu" om een brug over de Bérézina te bouwen, te zeggen, met lef, moed.

In de kazernes, voor 1914, betekende "poilu" dus moedig of gewoonweg man. Berichten over de oorlog aan het front bereikte ook de burger en men nam de term "poilu" ,welke tot voor kort voorbehouden was aan het militaire vakjargon, over. Hierbij kreeg "poilu" een nieuwe glans; soms familiair, vriendelijk of met bewondering. Niemand sprak meer van strijder, iedereen sprak van 'poilu'!

De franse infanteriesoldaat, ofwel 'fantassin', onderging tijdens het eerste jaar van de oorlog een behoorlijke transformatie. De in augustus 1914 met elan ten strijde trekkende soldaat in zijn zéér opvallende uniform met rode broek, donkerblauwe jas en rode kepi, dat hem schietschijf maakte voor de in 'feldgrau' gehulde duitse troepen, kreeg met ingang van 1915 zijn uniform in 'bleu horizon'. De kepi, korte tijd in 'bleu horizon', werd door de vele hoofdwonden veroorzaakt door bomscherven al snel vervangen door de kenmerkende 'casque (helm) Adrian'.

Tijdens de eerste wereldoorlog kreeg de term "poilu" een extra dimensie. De beoogde bewegingsoorlog aan het westfront viel stil en alle partijen groeven zich in: de loopgravenoorlog was een feit. De franse soldaten verbleven een periode van twee weken in de voorste linies, vaak onder zéér erbarmelijke omstandigheden. Onder vuur van de vijand, uitgeput, vervuild en verhongerd keerden de soldaten terug naar de achterste linies om na een korte repose terug te keren naar de hel van de loopgraven. De naar de achterste linies terugkerende soldaten waren helder te onderscheiden van hun collega's van de aflossing: naast de door modder doordrenkte uniformen camoufleerde een baard van twee weken de gelaten gezichtsuitdrukking. Deze mannen, die zich twee weken nauwelijks hadden geschoren, kwamen terug als 'bebaarden' ofwel 'poilus'. Het werd hun geuzennaam.

http://www.verdun.nl/les_poilus.htm
_________________

"Omdat ik alles beter weet is het mijn plicht om betweters te minachten."
Marcel Wauters, Vlaams schrijver en kunstenaar 1921-2005
Naar boven
Bekijk gebruikers profiel Stuur privé bericht
Finnbar
Moderator


Geregistreerd op: 5-11-2009
Berichten: 6975
Woonplaats: Uaso Monte

BerichtGeplaatst: 03 Aug 2010 7:16    Onderwerp: Reageer met quote

2 August 1914: Cpl Jules Andre Peugeot and Lt Albert Mayer were the first two men killed in the Great War

8117 Cpl Jules Andre Peugeot, 6e Compagnie, 2e Bataillon, 44e RI.

and

Lt Albert Mayer, Jäger-zu-Pferd-Regt Nr 5

Cpl Peugeot was born at Etupes on 11 June 1893 (Class of 1913). He did his military service in Lons-le-Saunier and was mobilized as a corporal in 44 RI, 6th Company, 2nd Battalion. On 2 August 1914, Peugeot's squad was on duty in Jonchery and arrested and dispersed the first patrol to violate French territory. He was killed by a bullet near Docourt Farm when the German patrol commander (20 year old Lt Albert Mayer) opened fire with his revolver at 10.00 am. The French returned fire and Mayer also died.

Peugeot was hit by the fourth round fired during the war and Mayer by the fifth or sixth. Its also possible (though this is disputed in some circles) that the first two casualties of the war actually killed each other. Cpl Peugeot is now buried in his family plot in the communal churchyard at Etupes and Lt Mayer is buried in the Soldatenfriedhof at Illfurth in a specially marked grave commemorating the ‘1st German Casualty of the World War 1914-18'.

bron: http://www.westernfrontassociation.com/great-war-people/remember-on-this-day/1389-2-august-1914-cpl-jules-andre-peugeot-and-lt-albert-mayer-.html
Naar boven
Bekijk gebruikers profiel Stuur privé bericht Verstuur mail
Finnbar
Moderator


Geregistreerd op: 5-11-2009
Berichten: 6975
Woonplaats: Uaso Monte

BerichtGeplaatst: 02 Aug 2012 6:55    Onderwerp: On This Day - 2 August 1914 Reageer met quote

On This Day - 2 August 1914

Countdown to War

German troops invade Luxemburg very early.

France entered at four points.

Patrol kill French soldiers 10 km over frontier near Belfort.

Poland invaded by Germans, who occupy Kalish, Chenstokhov and Bendzin.

East Prussia entered by Russian raiders near Schwidden.

Libau bombarded by German light cruiser "Augsburg".

German Note to Belgium, 7 p.m. alleging that Germany must violate her soil in order to "anticipate" the French attack in Belgium; demands that latter should remain passive; answer required in 12 hours.

England assures France that British fleet will stop German fleet if latter attacks French shipping in Channel.

Moratorium proclaimed in England.


http://www.firstworldwar.com/onthisday/1914_08_02.htm
Naar boven
Bekijk gebruikers profiel Stuur privé bericht Verstuur mail
Finnbar
Moderator


Geregistreerd op: 5-11-2009
Berichten: 6975
Woonplaats: Uaso Monte

BerichtGeplaatst: 02 Aug 2012 6:57    Onderwerp: Reageer met quote

On This Day - 2 August 1915

Western Front

Fighting in the St. Hubert region (Argonne).

Les Eparges (Verdun) bombarded.

Enemy attacks position on the Linge and Barrenkopf ridge (Vosges).

German success at Hill 213 (Argonne).

Eastern Front

Russians retreat east of Ponevyej (Dvinsk).

Germans claim 9,000 prisoners taken near Lomja (east bank of Vistula), and at Ivangorod.

the Leczna-Kholm line (C) Russians lose 2,000 prisoners and evacuate their positions.

Southern Front

Italian offensive near Mt. Sei Busi (Carso) progresses: beaten back on Polazzo plateau.

Naval and Overseas Operations

British submarine sinks German transport in Baltic with troops of von Below's army.

Political, etc.

Full correspondence concerning Prize Courts, between Sir Edward Grey and the American Ambassador, published by Foreign Office.

German Note regarding the "William P. Frye" received by U.S.A.

Third report of French Commission on atrocities published.


http://www.firstworldwar.com/onthisday/1915_08_02.htm
Naar boven
Bekijk gebruikers profiel Stuur privé bericht Verstuur mail
Finnbar
Moderator


Geregistreerd op: 5-11-2009
Berichten: 6975
Woonplaats: Uaso Monte

BerichtGeplaatst: 02 Aug 2012 6:58    Onderwerp: On This Day - 2 August 1916 Reageer met quote

On This Day - 2 August 1916

Western Front

German attack on Delville Wood (Somme) repulsed.

German counter-attack on French at Estrees (southern Somme) repulsed.

German trenches carried south of Fleury (Verdun), 800 prisoners taken.

British naval air raid near Ghent.

Eastern Front

German gas attack in region of Smorgon (east Vilna) repulsed.

Asiatic and Egyptian Theatres

Turkish counter-attack takes Mush and Bitlis (Armenia).

Naval and Overseas Operations

Loss of Italian dreadnought "Lionardo da Vinci", at Taranto, by fire and explosion (248 killed).

Political, etc.

Government attitude to Resolutions adopted by Allies at Economic Conference in Paris explained by Mr. Asquith.

Two important State Papers on barbarity of Germans published.


http://www.firstworldwar.com/onthisday/1916_08_02.htm
Naar boven
Bekijk gebruikers profiel Stuur privé bericht Verstuur mail
Finnbar
Moderator


Geregistreerd op: 5-11-2009
Berichten: 6975
Woonplaats: Uaso Monte

BerichtGeplaatst: 02 Aug 2012 6:59    Onderwerp: On This Day - 2 August 1917 Reageer met quote

On This Day - 2 August 1917

Western Front

Positions Ypres-Roulers retaken by British.

Germans attack Infantry Hill (east of Monchy-Arras) and carry some trenches.

Eastern Front

Generals Brusilov and Dmitriev resign. General Kornilov appointed Commander-in-Chief.

Naval and Overseas Operations

German raider "Seeadler" wrecked on Lord Howe Island, Pacific.

Political, etc.

M. Kerenski resigns.

Admiral Lacaze (Minister of Marine) and M. Denys Cochin (Under Secretary Foreign Affairs) resign from French Cabinet.


http://www.firstworldwar.com/onthisday/1917_08_02.htm
Naar boven
Bekijk gebruikers profiel Stuur privé bericht Verstuur mail
Finnbar
Moderator


Geregistreerd op: 5-11-2009
Berichten: 6975
Woonplaats: Uaso Monte

BerichtGeplaatst: 02 Aug 2012 7:01    Onderwerp: On This Day - 2 August 1918 Reageer met quote

On This Day - 2 August 1918

Western Front

French re-take Soissons.

Germans retreating to River Vesle.

Eastern Front

Pro-Entente revolution in Archangel.

Asiatic and Egyptian Theatres

Turks occupy Urmia, north-west Persia.

Political, etc.

Japanese Government decides to act with U.S.A. in sending troops to Vladivostok.


http://www.firstworldwar.com/onthisday/1918_08_02.htm
Naar boven
Bekijk gebruikers profiel Stuur privé bericht Verstuur mail
Finnbar
Moderator


Geregistreerd op: 5-11-2009
Berichten: 6975
Woonplaats: Uaso Monte

BerichtGeplaatst: 02 Aug 2014 6:36    Onderwerp: Reageer met quote

http://greatwarphotos.com/2014/08/02/france-mobilises-2nd-august-1914/

On this day a hundred years ago France was going to war. The German invasion of France had begun as part of the Schlieffen Plan and France had declared war on Germany. Mobilisation notices went up all over France recalling Reservists and Territorials to the Army and within two weeks more than 2.8 million French soldiers had been mobilised into the army.

Also on this day the first clashes between the French and Germans occurred in Eastern France when the 44th Territorial Regiment of Infantry encountered German cavalry and Corporal Jules-André Peugeot was killed; the first French Poilu to die in the war.

This photograph dated August 1914 shows men of the 113th Regiment of Infantry preparing for war. From Blois in the Loire, they were action a few weeks later and in their first battle suffered more than 1,200 casualties; typical of the huge French losses of this period.

Naar boven
Bekijk gebruikers profiel Stuur privé bericht Verstuur mail
Berichten van afgelopen:   
Plaats nieuw bericht   Plaats Reactie    Forum Eerste Wereldoorlog Forum Index -> Wat gebeurde er vandaag... Tijden zijn in GMT + 1 uur
Pagina 1 van 1

 
Ga naar:  
Je mag geen nieuwe onderwerpen plaatsen
Je mag geen reacties plaatsen
Je mag je berichten niet bewerken
Je mag je berichten niet verwijderen
Ja mag niet stemmen in polls


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group