WW1, better then WW2

[Pellaken]

This thread is for those, like me, who belive WW1 was better then WW2.

first on the block the discussion:
what would have happened if the centrals had won?

PS-notes, beginers often call the allies the triple entante, which is not a true term, as Britain was in it, and it did not join the war immdetley. please use termanoligy of "Centrals" VS "Allies"
also, the capital of Russia was Petrograd, or St.Petersburg, not Moscow. Atleat untill 1917.

 

[CornMaster]

This is a history topic....moving to the History Forum.

 

[Kublai-Khan]

I would say that it is far more interesting.
I am quite sick of ww2,
in the history channel
all they have are documentals about ww2 or american history.
It should be call american history channel,
i think that they have more documentals about the hoover dam
than documental about ancient egypt.
The History channel sucks only in Argentina or it sucks worlwide?

 

[Knight-Dragon]

How can one war be better than another? All wars are bad.

Also I think that WW1 was much more of a meat-grinder along the Western front. Uncounted nos of soldiers died .... to capture a few inches of territory. A horrible wastage of human lives for no purpose.

 

[Sayhueque]

The social, military and propagandistic implications of WWI marked a big shift in the minds of society.

Kublai, I got a documentary on the Krupps the other day... interesting ****.

I am not fed up with WWII, but I think that it is grossly overrated in comparison to WWI.

 

[Pellaken]

world war 2 has a timeline like this

war starts
the germans are winning
the germans are winning
the germans are winning
there goes france
the germans are winning
the germans are winning
the germans are winning
the germans are winning
there goes russia
no... wait...
the germans are winning
the germans are winning
the germans are winning
STALINGRAD
the allies are winning
the allies are winning
the allies are winning
the allies are winning
D-Day {invented, cause it was 'd day we invaded }
the allies are winning
the allies are winning
the allies are winning
there goes france...
the allies are winning
the allies are winning
the allies are winning
the allies win! yeay!


WW1 is way better cause its more like
the germans are winning
the germans are winning
the germans are winning
the germans are stopped!
the allies are winning.
no... er...
the germans are winning??
the... allies are winning then?
no?
then whos winning?
I dunno, who is?
I dunno?
you dont know?
no!
well I dont know eathier!!
humm...
hey, look, there goes Russia...
yea, but here comes the Americans
its a race, can the germans get to Paris before the Americans do?
...
...
nope!

see, its more of a equal VS equal war, and the climax is near the end, instead of in the middle.

anyone agree?

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

As far as a topic goes, I agree. World War II is pretty straight forward. The old evil dictator tries to take over the world scheme. WWI is really the end of the 19th Century. Everything since Napolean was building up to it. Its really kind of neat.

As far as a war, it depends on what viewpoint. I am sure the Poles probably didn't think too much of WWII. Being Canadian, WWI was much worse. Twice as many killed as in WWII, and the awful conditions in the trenches throughout the war. Until Currie took control later in the war, we weren't even fighting under a Canadian. In WWII, the vast majority of Canadians killed were pilots that WWI also had a much bigger impact on Canadian heritage. Billy Bishop, Vimy Ridge, John McCrae, the Anglo/Franco split over conscription, the fracturing of the Liberal Party, the Halifax Explosion, the poison gas clouds at Paschendaele, and much more. WWII is most remembered for Dieppe and D-Day, from a Canadian perspective.

 

[PinkyGen]

Originally posted by Kahran Ramsus


As far as a war, it depends on what viewpoint. I am sure the Poles probably didn't think too much of WWII.

WWII was far more traumatic for Poland. They were occupied by the Nazi's, and a large majority of the population was forced into slave labor. There were constant partisan battles and atrocities between the Polish partisans and German and Ukranian troops. (Poles and Ukranians none to friendly). Then there are the Jews, and the camps, and the entire being occupied by the Soviets after the war. In WWII, the war in the east far more savage than the war in the West.

A good book called 9 lives by Waldemar Lotnik composed in 1999 is an excellent first hand account of what went on.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

Sorry if you misunderstood me. I was using slang. They didn't think much of it, because it was traumatic. There wasn't even a Poland in WWI.

 

[Crazy_Vasey]

WW1 was four years of stalemate with a few bursts of movement. Massive casualties to move the front a few inches which the other side themn retook the next day for similar losses, so pointless.

 

[willemvanoranje]

Originally posted by Pellaken
world war 2 has a timeline like this

war starts
the germans are winning
the germans are winning
the germans are winning
there goes france
the germans are winning
the germans are winning
the germans are winning
the germans are winning
there goes russia
no... wait...
the germans are winning
the germans are winning
the germans are winning
STALINGRAD
the allies are winning
the allies are winning
the allies are winning
the allies are winning
D-Day {invented, cause it was 'd day we invaded }
the allies are winning
the allies are winning
the allies are winning
there goes france...
the allies are winning
the allies are winning
the allies are winning
the allies win! yeay!


WW1 is way better cause its more like
the germans are winning
the germans are winning
the germans are winning
the germans are stopped!
the allies are winning.
no... er...
the germans are winning??
the... allies are winning then?
no?
then whos winning?
I dunno, who is?
I dunno?
you dont know?
no!
well I dont know eathier!!
humm...
hey, look, there goes Russia...
yea, but here comes the Americans
its a race, can the germans get to Paris before the Americans do?
...
...
nope!

see, its more of a equal VS equal war, and the climax is near the end, instead of in the middle.

anyone agree?

nope, that ain't true. It went like this:

WWII:
war starts
wow, Germany is good!
wow, there goes France
yep, Western-Europe within a few months
ah! Barbarossa!
Wow! 800km within several weeks! They're good.
Ouch! Didn't see that winter coming.
Aah! We're back on track.
Ai! Kursk AND Stalingrad.
Uh oh. This ain't going right.
Wow, the red army is winning fast.
Ah! There come the Allied. Yep.
France is free.
Whole Western-Europe.
Ah! Berlin falls.
The 3rd Reich is gone!

Exciting, wasn't it?

WWI

war starts
Germany advances quickly
there goes Belgium
oh no wait, Germany let's them keep that little piece over there
ah, there's Paris
they're stopped
hey, they're stopped everywhere
is something gonna happen?
I'm waiting.....
what ime is it?
hey look: the centrals win 250 meters!
ah too bad, the Allied have it back.
Hey! Look, that guy in his red little airplane. he's good.
oops, there he goes
I'm getting tired
no action
hey, russia quits
ah well
they must've been bored too
uaaaaah
I wanna sleep
hey, gemany quits
ah well, better for the world
now we can prepare for something really exciting

 

[knowltok]

As far as the history channel: Yes it does focus more on American history. What a shock, their main market is Americans. They aren't running a service, they are trying to sell GI Joe's with a Kung Fu grip. That and CIV3 (I actually saw a commercial for it). I have heard that there is a history channel international. Maybe that would be more to your taste. Perhaps you should start a history channel South America if there is a market for it.

I'm not trying to be an @SS, but I guess I don't know what you expect from a for-profit company other than to do its best to drive up advertising revenues.

 

[Magnus]

I think the WW1 was really the 'Great War of Europe' - there wasn't really much doing outside of Europe except small battles for colonial possessions. WW2 definitely had major theatres outside Europe. In my mind there has only been ONE true world war.

 

[knowltok]

I'm a WWII fan myself. WWI was the prelude to the big show. WWII was a colossal strugle of empires that spanned the globe. It had battles in all types of terrain and environment. It pitted the two strongest navies in the world and led to the introduction of sweeping changes throughout the world. It was definately the watershed event of the last 100 years and hopefully won't be surpassed in the coming century.

Don't get me wrong, WWI is important, but mainly as it relates to the coming of WWII.

Just my thoughts. Take'm or Leave'm

 

[Vrylakas]

I'm with Knight-Dragon on this one, that there is little to choose between the world wars. Some of my usual obtuse and long-winded thoughts:

1. Many historians consider the world wars a single war with a medieval-style 22 year truce. World War II was clearly born of the unresolved issues of World War I.

2. World War II is more popular today because it seems to have a clearer purpose (for those who like "good guys" and "bad guys" in their wars), and because everyone had figured out how to use the military technology properly that had turned the First World War into such a bloodbath. Also, WW II was fortunate enough to happen in a time when mass-media was up-and-running; we have color films and pictures of the war, with lots of action shots because cameras were smaller and portable now. WW I has many photos of marching soldiers and a few bad quality films, none of which really convey the true essence or horror of the war. For WW I, we have to rely still on artists' impressions and re-creations. Universities today offer courses on the poets of World War I, but nobody wastes time reading WW II poets - we don't need to because we can see and hear what they saw and heard. I was born in 1968 but I know Roosevelt's, Stalin's, Churchill's, etc. voices very well though most were dead at least a decade before my birth. I just recently downloaded a scratchy MP3 recording of Woodrow Wilson; imagine that few Americans, Brits or Germans in 1918 really knew what their leaders sounded like.

3. With the 100th anniversary of the First World War slowly approaching in this new century, it would be good for many to better understand how the 20th century was born in the bloodbaths of the world wars. The cynicism, the mistrust of authority, the demise of the aristocratic elites in Europe, the rise of socialism and fascism, the collapse of the European colonial world order, the rapid advance of technology, the primacy of civil society but as well the militarization of civil society, the rapid spread of communications and travel, the growth of both humanism and fanaticism as older worlds gave way to the newer... All gifts of the world wars.

4. As far as the "good guys" and "bad guys" go, as time progresses these lines will blurr somewhat and the distinctions will not be so clear. The Brit military historian John Keegan wrote in 1992 that a history of World War II hasn't truly been written yet; he meant that so far we've only had the stuff written by the victors and vanquished, both of which is self-serving and biased. It will take some distance of time for people to be able to impartially look back (moreso than now) and truly ask "What the hell happened? What the hell was everyone thinking?"

The world went insane in 1914, and some would argue only started to regain its senses in 1989...

 

[SunTzu]

WW1 shouldn't be called WW1 in the first place. It was a world war. All of the fighting was in Europe with little fighting done in Turkey.
WW2 should be called WW1, it was war in the entire war.
Europe, North Africa, Asia, Austrailia, India ect....
you make ww2 sound much more boring than it was. WW1 was a pure stalemate.
WW2
NAZI's Invade Poland
Poland Falls
Nazi's invade Denmark and Norway
they both fall
Nazi's invade france and it falls
Nazi's start bombing britain to win air surperiority to commence Sea Lion.
Nazi's invade Greece
Nazi's paradrop into Crete
Nazi's start the war in north afrika.
Nazi's have Vichy france in Norht Africa and South France.
Rommel invades Egypt
US enters the war
Operation Barbarossa begins
The battle of britain is won by Britain
Battle of Stalingrad begins
Seige of Leningrad begins
Monty defeats Rommel
Operation Torch begins, US invasion of French North Africa.
Stalingrad is won by the russians.
Invasion of Sicily begins.
Inavsion of mainland Italy begins.
Allies bog down at Monte Cassino
Allies invade at Anzio to break through.
Allies break through and capture rome
Russians are on the offensive.
D-day begins on beaches, Utah, Omaha, Gold, Juno and Sword.
US, British and Canadian forces take part in the invasion.
Allies capture Paris.
Battle of the bulge, last great nazi offensive
Russians invade Germany
Allies wait to damn long to invade germany
Russians capture berlin
Hitler commits suicide
thats just a run down in europe. i missed some things.
but you get the idea.

WW1
Germany invades captures 2 front lawns.
Germany is staled.
British sends troops. Stalemate insues.
Germany gets within 90 miles of paris then is pushed back.
Stalemate again.
Germany invades Russia.
Stalemate blah blah blah.
Britain invades Ottoman empire at Gallipoli.
Its is a huge blunder.
Everyone is tired of dieing for a few yards of muddy bloody land. And they call it quits.
Now thats not much fun is it

The history channel rocks. i saw the civ3 advertisement on it tonight

 

[Fayadi]

Originally posted by knowltok
I'm a WWII fan myself. WWI was the prelude to the big show. WWII was a colossal strugle of empires that spanned the globe. It had battles in all types of terrain and environment. It pitted the two strongest navies in the world and led to the introduction of sweeping changes throughout the world. It was definately the watershed event of the last 100 years and hopefully won't be surpassed in the coming century.

Don't get me wrong, WWI is important, but mainly as it relates to the coming of WWII.

Just my thoughts. Take'm or Leave'm

WW 2 FAn????U MEAN U LOVE THE WAR?I prefer cold war than WW1 or WW2.Cold War brings benefits to human race,such as rocket,spaceship !Cool!WW1 and WW2 history is interesting,but this is the first time i heard somebody a fan of WW2!!10 over millions people died(dunno exact number) thats so terrible,I might as well recommend u thread war is better!

 

[Ohwell]

World War One is also my favorite, and for many reasons. First, the beginning came with a SLAM! It was all peaceful , when suddenly, :rocket3: :soldier: !!! WWII was not like that. It was a build up of Hitler taking over small countries. No excitement. World War I was better because not everyone hated Germany, and Germany didnt even start the war! It was Serbia and Russia, Germany was protecting Austria from Russia, and Russia made France declare war! It was the allies fault! They gave Germany a HUGE penalty in the Versaille Treaty for a war they DIDN'T EVEN START! Back to WWI, the war was a stalemate, and battles raged all over, with no victor. WWII, on the other hand, had few battles in Europe until D-day, and Africa was a simple Hunt-Me-Down. WWII was BORING!

No further Comment

 

[knowltok]

Fayadi, you are intelligent enough to take my comments in context, so please do so. I beleive my meaning was clear that I perfer WWII history to WWI history as a topic of study. For reference look at the thread topic.

As far as your facts go:
Rockets were developed in WWII, not the cold war.

10 million is way low. ~20 million Russians died. 6 million Jews. Millions more Germans, Japanese, and Chinese. Hundreds of thousands of other deaths from countries like the US, UK, France, Australia, Canada, Italy, India, Finnland, Romania, Belgium, The Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Bulgaria, Yugoslavia, Greece, Austria, and Czechoslovakia. There are certainly others that I am leaving out. Conservative numbers put the toll at 40 million.

I certainly am not a person who advocates World War for any reason. I will let the other board members judge whether my previous post constituted an advocacy for world war, or whether I was unfairly characterized. If they care to that is.

 

[Giorgicus]

Originally posted by Kublai-Khan
I would say that it is far more interesting.
I am quite sick of ww2,
in the history channel
all they have are documentals about ww2 or american history.
It should be call american history channel,
i think that they have more documentals about the hoover dam
than documental about ancient egypt.
The History channel sucks only in Argentina or it sucks worlwide?

Well, two things:

(1) The History Channel deals mostly with American history because, uh, it is an American cable network. If you are interested in starting an Argentine History Channel, perhaps you can get together a group of investors to do so, but good luck.

(2) The History Channel deals more with WWII subjects than WWI subjects simply because there is far more footage (newsreels, still pictures, etc.) and primary sources (e.g., interviewees) available to talk about it. This point is so obvious it is almost embarassing to state.

Sorry to stray off topic here. Carry on.