Do you think WW1 AND 2 were completely avoidable disasters in our history?

Question:

Do you think WW1 AND 2 were completely avoidable disasters in our history?

I do think so, simplistically WW1 was a family row that went global and WW2 may not have happened if the treaty of Versailles sanctions hadn't been so punitive. *Extremist views are more likely to gain a strong foothold in a humiliated people.*

I will always choose the best answer, it's my question and a best answer can differ from my own view if it's well reasoned. Also, all forums attract a greater proportion of *bunny boilers* than are in the general population, i ain't going to let that be a factor.

Additional Details

2 weeks ago
I think most things are simple in essence Observer, our complicating issues unnecessarily leads to many problems. The Congress of Vienna was a factor too.

There are a couple of answers i really like, cheers all. =)

2 weeks ago
Looking forward to your retirement Tony, good answer tho. *Sorry, i just couldn't resist that. =)

5* answers from Steve J and DeSaxe, this ain't going to be an easy choice.

2 weeks ago
Yep, the alliances and ententes formed during the 19th and early 20thC were major factors Eucharistic-Deo, a most excellent answer.

Doesn't take away from my sibling rivalry theory tho, there was almost a determination to have a confrontation as some posters have said and the then powers got a hell of a lot more than they bargained for.

2 weeks ago
Greetings and cheers O most EnlightenedSista, glad you enjoy my questions, i certainly do your answers.=)

A lot of really high quality answers here, thanks everyone. I'll be going out soon so you'll get a rest from my responses. =)

2 weeks ago
This post has been one i'll treasure, thankyou for so many great answers.

Love your answer Marguerite but think the practice of war goes way beyond our imperfection. There's evidence of violent conflicts/war *war being a prolonged period of violent conflicts* since the Mesolithic period but there have been many periods where there was a very low incidence of war. And look at the Palace Civilisation, the Minoans. They were a fantastically successful people until disasters befell them and there's no evidence they even had a military, let alone engaged in war.

I've deliberately made my reasoning for WW1 simplistic, no point in asking a question then answering it myself and i do view ww2 as being the continuation of the great war, as some other posters have said. There were many factors leading up to the actual event but they were avoidable in my opinion. =)

2 weeks ago
Personally i really disagree with France being such a major factor rz1971, validity to your thoughts on Bismarck tho. He was too reactionary for my own taste but engineered German Unification and was probably the right leader for the time, Pity Wilhelm II marginalised him.

I also think German success post 1945 was largely due to returning to Bismarck stylee policies, not nation rebuilding by the Allies.

Hmmm, despite all these excellent answers my personal opinion that the overriding factor that set us speeding to war was the unresolved hostility and rivalry twixt Edward VII and Wilhelm II *relations didn't improve under George V* remains undimmed.

I'll leave this post open for a few hours yet, it's going to be REALLY tough choosing a best answer.

2 weeks ago
The history community is my favourite, ao many 5* answers showing real knowledge and excellent perspective. I had to whittle it down to answers that appealed to me the most personally. It was very hard to choose between Steve J, DeSaxe and Kevan M.

Best Answer - Chosen by Asker: 2 weeks ago
I think most things are simple in essence Observer, our complicating issues unnecessarily leads to many problems. The Congress of Vienna was a factor too.

There are a couple of answers i really like, cheers all. =)