Russian Ambassador just got shot up in Turkey.
Quote:
Hello World War III
But Putin seems such the calm, measured sort.agnerd said:
Not WW3, but I'd REALLY hate to be in East Aleppo right now. Russians are going to completely level (what's left of) it.
WW1 started from the assassination of an heir to the throne of a major European power. Not a member of a bureaucracy serving as an ambassador. Not very similar at all.RVAg02 said:
could be. WWI started from less.
Ok, maybe not less, but pretty similar start.
Why did Ryan from 'The Office' kill the Russian ambassador to Turkey??HBCanine08 said:
http://www.unilad.co.uk/news/breaking-russian-ambassador-to-turkey-assassinated-in-ankara/
honey baked ham will be in high demand. Could probably flip 1000 pounds for huge profits.toucan82 said:
do I need to stock up on bottled water and canned goods?
But in that case it was a member of a royal family and a direct heir to the throne, and in this one it was a mid-level bureaucrat. If Dmitry Medvedev had been assassinated, I'd see some similarities. A bureaucrat? Not so much.titanmaster_race said:
He said similar. Not identical.
In both cases someone was assassinated who belonged to a vast and powerful nation/empire.
Pam Poovey said:
While we conduct Mishile DrillshClaude! said:
This business will get out of control. It will get out of control and we'll be lucky to live through it.
Yes, much more similar, along with John Mein, Cleo Noel, Roger Davies, Francis Meloy, Adolph Dubs, and a number of other US diplomatic officials that have been killed overseas in relatively recent history.DCJAG said:
Is this like when Ambassador Stevens was killed in Benhgazi and nothing happened?
One of these is not like the other.DCJAG said:
Is this like when Ambassador Stevens was killed in Benhgazi and nothing happened.
I was probably more focused on who the other players are and their intentions. The Austro-Hungarians weren't what made it become a World War, but rather Germany's Imperialistic intentions. Ferdinand's assassination would have slid by if Kaiser Wilhelm wanted it too. He used it as a kickstarter. Or at least that's how I understood it.John Francis Donaghy said:But in that case it was a member of a royal family and a direct heir to the throne, and in this one it was a mid-level bureaucrat. If Dmitry Medvedev had been assassinated, I'd see some similarities. A bureaucrat? Not so much.titanmaster_race said:
He said similar. Not identical.
In both cases someone was assassinated who belonged to a vast and powerful nation/empire.
See my post above. The US and early 20th century Germany are not the same.John Francis Donaghy said:Yes, much more similar, along with John Mein, Cleo Noel, Roger Davies, Francis Meloy, Adolph Dubs, and a number of other US diplomatic officials that have been killed overseas in relatively recent history.DCJAG said:
Is this like when Ambassador Stevens was killed in Benhgazi and nothing happened?
Sending diplomats to unstable parts of the world is an inherently risky proposition. Sometime they get killed. It's a risk of the job.
Germany wasn't really after any land grab at the outset of WW1, that was more of a WW2 thing.RVAg02 said:I was probably more focused on who the other players are and their intentions. The Austro-Hungarians weren't what made it become a World War, but rather Germany's Imperialistic intentions. Ferdinand's assassination would have slid by if Kaiser Wilhelm wanted it too. He used it as a kickstarter. Or at least that's how I understood it.John Francis Donaghy said:But in that case it was a member of a royal family and a direct heir to the throne, and in this one it was a mid-level bureaucrat. If Dmitry Medvedev had been assassinated, I'd see some similarities. A bureaucrat? Not so much.titanmaster_race said:
He said similar. Not identical.
In both cases someone was assassinated who belonged to a vast and powerful nation/empire.
ThanksJohn Francis Donaghy said:Germany wasn't really after any land grab at the outset of WW1, that was more of a WW2 thing.RVAg02 said:I was probably more focused on who the other players are and their intentions. The Austro-Hungarians weren't what made it become a World War, but rather Germany's Imperialistic intentions. Ferdinand's assassination would have slid by if Kaiser Wilhelm wanted it too. He used it as a kickstarter. Or at least that's how I understood it.John Francis Donaghy said:But in that case it was a member of a royal family and a direct heir to the throne, and in this one it was a mid-level bureaucrat. If Dmitry Medvedev had been assassinated, I'd see some similarities. A bureaucrat? Not so much.titanmaster_race said:
He said similar. Not identical.
In both cases someone was assassinated who belonged to a vast and powerful nation/empire.
Leading up to the outset of WW1, Austria-Hungary and Serbia were competing for control of the Balkans, particularly Bosnia and Herzegovina. Austria Hungary annexed Bosnia against Serbia's wishes, and Serbian operatives assassinated Archduke Ferdinand. In response, Austria-Hungary declared war on Serbia, Russia, as an ally of Serbia, Declared war on Austria Hungary. Germany tried to convince Russia to stand down, but Russia declared war on Germany in recognition of Germany's alliance with Austria-Hungary (which Germany had recently prioritized over their now lapsed alliance with Russia), and Germany declared war on Russia out of necessity to defend themselves in the midst of the outbreak of military mobilizations going on all around them.
That is the general gist of the "powder keg" of military alliances in that part of the world that existed at the time of the assassination. Everyone in the region was bound by alliance to enter conflict on behalf of someone else, so the whole thing escalated really quickly.