The Obvious Logical Question About The Great War:

I think it was a combination of nationalism and colonialism, where some European powers were carving up the world and others were left behind. Plus, the alliance system obligated its members to declare war when one of their allies was attacked.

It does seem kind of odd, since Russia had a brief alliance with both Austria-Hungary and Germany, which was supposed to be against the Ottoman Empire, as their hold on the Balkans was weakening by the 19th century. Russia had been involved in numerous wars with Turkey over the previous centuries, and the various nationalities in the Balkans were also resisting Turkish rule and finally gaining independence.

I don't believe Nicholas II acted any differently than any other Tsar would have under the circumstances. Although he probably should have paid more attention to building up his industries and armaments, which is what Germany and other countries were doing at the time. There had been an arms race going on. They also needed more railroads and an overall better system of transportation. (That's why there were so many peasants starving; not because they didn't grow enough food, but it's because their transport was so bad that a lot of it would rot before it ever got to the cities. The Soviets had similar problems.)

However, it was perfectly natural that the Russians and Serbs would have a close bond, as they had for centuries. And I think it's also true that Nicholas did not have any intention of attacking Germany. It seemed his only goal at first was to attempt to force Austria to refrain from attacking Serbia.

It might have been a more manageable conflict if Germany had not gotten involved. If it was just Russia and Serbia against Austria, then it might have been settled sooner. Perhaps other powers could have acted as mediators. But Germany was just looking for an opportunity.

Germany was looking to expand the size of their empire. They tried to make a grab for French Morocco in 1905, but the British intervened and Germany backed down. Then the Kaiser said he wanted to increase the size of Germany's navy, which also got the British to sit up and take notice. German nationalism was flourishing, and they were strong, modern, and felt they were superior to other powers, such as the French, who they defeated in 1871 after only six weeks.

The Kaiser was probably one of the real villains here, while Nicholas II was in over his head. One thing that wasn't shown in the movie but mentioned in Massie's book is that one of the leading instigators who got Nicholas to get fired up to go to war with Japan was the Kaiser, who was apparently goading Nicholas by telegraph. Even as a young boy, the future Kaiser reportedly bit a member of the British Royal Family in the ankle at some large funeral gathering. I can't remember who it was, but the person he bit had hemophilia.

The irony is that the Kaiser ended up being toppled as well, although he didn't suffer the same fate as the Romanovs. He was able to make it into exile in Holland and escaped all the post-war, post-revolutionary wrath. He even lived long enough to see the Germans occupy Holland in 1940.

The Three Emperors of Germany, Austria-Hungary, and Russia should have kept their alliance and continued to work together. If they had, then they might have saved their dynasties. Unfortunately, their incompetence coupled with a misguided lust for personal glory brought about their downfall.

The fall of both the Kaiser and Tsar was their own fault, and they left a power vacuum in their countries which would eventually be filled by the likes of Hitler and Stalin.

Of course, I don't think they intended for bourgeois society to be destroyed, nor did they relish seeing the rise of the Nazis or Bolsheviks. I don't think they really thought that far ahead, which was part of the main problem already.