Battle of Yarmouk camp

...

And if it were not for the jews, Germany would have won WW1 and there would have been no split up of the Ottoman Empire by the French and British. It would have declined naturally and each ethnic and cultural group would have gotten the land that they needed.

That's pretty arguable.

If it weren't for the Iraq war, there would have been no ISIS.

Nope, not even close., not with the British naval blockade in place and the US ready to join the war on the side of the Entente. Germany lost the war the moment the British Empire got involved. It just took some time for the blockade to decimate the German industry. By 1918 Central Powers were unable to continue the war due to massive shortages, mostly food and coal.

Forty, Simon. World War I: A Visual Encyclopedia. PRC Publishing, 2002
Moyer, Laurence V. Victory Must Be Ours: Germany in the Great War 1914-1918. Pen & Sword, 1995

Attached: slide_9.jpg (960x720, 129.29K)

I can't pretend to be an authority on this, but in terms of shortages, wasn't Britain in the same boat as Germany at that time? Submarine interdiction tactics fucked with Britain's supply lines just as much as the blockade effected Germany, but Britain is a relatively small island that's always been dependent on imports. There is no way that Germany relied on imports as much as Britain. Hell, Russia had to pull out of the war because their people revolted after finally running out of supplies completely. If Germany was holding their own against Britain, France, and Russia, why is it ridiculous to expect that Germany would eventually prevail when faced against only Britain and France?

ftfy

In WWI, the submarine campaign was ineffective. The U-boats didn't have that enough range, and communication between submarines was sketchy at best. The U-boat threat in WWI was negated when convoys were used instead of lone merchant ships, somewhere in the late 1917. Much of U-Boats earlier success can be attributed to how new the concept of submarine really was. Moreover, Germans found that U-boats could easily sink British warships with less risk then German warships would have to take (surface warships that is) and responding to British efforts to blockade Germany decided to unleash their U-boats on British trade in unrestricted submarine warfare, sinking any ship bound for Britain without warning. However, in the early years, this got them in trouble as the US protested these actions after the loss of American lives. The sinking of the Lusitania, and other British ships carrying American passengers helped turn the tide in the US with regards to supporting the Central Powers or the Entente in the Entente's favor. And since the German Army still looked reasonably strong in 1915, the German government backed off and withdrew its U-boats rather then risk American entry into the war. The return to unrestricted submarine warfare in 1917 came due to the situation for Germany had becoming desperate and the German leadership was looking for rapid ways out. And once the convoy system was introduced, the German war effort was broken. That's why I consider the WWI campaign to be ineffective. The Germans didn't have the will to sustain it early, and once the lone U-boat attacks became ineffective due to the convoy system (and the introduction of depth charges) the damage the U-boats did was negligible. Tactics borne of desperation generally do not work. Even if the U-boats had knocked Britain out in 1917, the return to this kind of warfare would likely have brought the US into the war, and the Germans would have traded the British Empire for the United States of America, a nation they couldn't starve into submission. Furthermore, so long as the French didn't completely collapse, there still would be ports for American supplies, and troops to come into.
The British prevented any ships from reaching German ports. The German Empire was unable to do the same for Britain. Furthermore, Brits could afford the loses. Germany could not. On hindsight, from all the material I've ever read about the naval warfare in WW1 the U-boats were extremely dangerous, but they could never sink the required tonnage per month that would truly put the ultimate strain on Britain's survival, although it did cause immense problems, of course. In fact, ironically, bread rationing was introduced for the first time in post-war Britain in 1946-47 to help feed starving West German children in the Occupied zones in Germany.

Attached: large.png (705x253 90.73 KB, 14.42K)

Expect Trump to start kvetching about 'muh ebil dictator Assad' soon.

There very well could be, but in this climate with our president it won't work. Things are going to die down, the traitors are going to slip back into the shadows for a few years and try again later. Evil never gives up.