
Originally Posted by
Andalusian girls
Versailles was a failure of compromise more than anything. Wilson's soft, reconciling approach may have provided for a more lasting peace, but of course the peace that actually lasted after World War 2 was dismantling Germany as a state for a good long while, abolishing its militarism, and destroying its capacity to wage another world war. the in-between peace the Allies hammered out consisting of humiliating and hamstringing Germany while allowing it to remain the strongest state in Europe was the recipe that led to renewed conflict.
given the mass radicalization that happened after World War 1 i have grave doubts re the possibility of lasting peace based upon conciliation while exploding the great Eastern European Empires. the German Empire deserved to be destroyed (20 million Poles deserved a homeland not subjugation) and it is a great question if that ever could have been accomplished without triggering a virulent nationalist backlash.
moreover Japan and Italy radicalized because they didn't get enough territorial claims, gobbling up portions of their neighbors in classical imperial expansion, the exact opposite of what Wilson argued for. the peace we got sucked but i doubt Wilson would have forged a better one.