In the short time following Hans Blix's devastating report and President Bush's compelling State of the Union address, Saddam Hussein looks increasingly more like a dead man walking. In all likelihood, Baghdad will be liberated by April. This may turn out to be one of those hinge moments in history--events like the storming of the Bastille or the fall of the Berlin Wall--after which everything is different. Another such moment is history was the commencement and culmination of the Franco-Prussian war. The ascertainment of Alsace-Lorraine following this complex and nearly imperialistic war yielded a nearly unilateral evil; moreover, an evil with far reaching and widespread effects. From the instigation of this war Bismarck was acting as nothing more but a Napoleon Bonaparte; a ruler acting out of nothing more than physical gain.
At the core of the argument in favor of Bismarck's actions is the entity of the unification of the Germanic states.
With this argument comes its inherent flaw; the notion that two or more states can not share a common language or philosophy, yet be under separate rule. Such a belief, and the basis for Bismarck's imperialism, has been disproved since time immemorial. While much of Latin and South America act as independent countries sharing the same language and customs, Bismarck felt the need for a singular federation and with this so-called "need" came the respective actions: the numerous wars, treaties, bribes, and appeasement. By no means is it thought that Bismarck is anything short of a great military mind; being successful in nearly all his excursions and thinking in the future, but this future planning lacked a correlation and did not coincide with the short future after the Franco-Prussian wars.
The Franco-Prussian War began as a hedonistic plot which would lead to the ill reputed opinion...