[QUOTE=Blizzerd;21811624]without ww1 and 2 we would still be at the technological level from just before ww2 on average
think; no computers, rockets etc etc
not just because they where invented in ww2, but because the basis for all these things was also invented in ww2, and often the basis for that basis aswell[/QUOTE]
OK, you go to war and die, I need a faster computer anyways.
[QUOTE=Blizzerd;21811624]without ww1 and 2 we would still be at the technological level from just before ww2 on average
think; no computers, rockets etc etc
not just because they where invented in ww2, but because the basis for all these things was also invented in ww2, and often the basis for that basis aswell[/QUOTE]
I doubt that.
WW1.
Death of Franz Ferdinand, Siberian Nationalists.
Trench Warfare, first war with Airborne Warfare.
Edit: You had the fall of the Ottoman Empire not long after, you had a Genocide killing about 2-3 Million people.
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;21815700]This is very true. And also had the Red Baron. Very cool people indeed.[/QUOTE]
What about Eddie Rickenbacker? He's a cool dude as well.
War is wrong
World War 1 was freaking boring. They just sat in a hole and shot at each other.
[QUOTE=ejonkou;21821702]WW1.
Death of Franz Ferdinand, Siberian Nationalists.
Trench Warfare, first war with Airborne Warfare.
Edit: You had the fall of the Ottoman Empire not long after, you had a Genocide killing about 2-3 Million people.[/QUOTE]
Actually, the first war with airplanes was the Italian-Ottoman war that happened in 1912.
[QUOTE=uberdood15;21822529]What about Eddie Rickenbacker? He's a cool dude as well.[/QUOTE]
Him too, just had a lapse of memory.
[QUOTE=CabooseRvB;21822634]World War 1 was freaking boring. They just sat in a hole and shot at each other.[/QUOTE]
Read the whole thread, be proven wrong.
The only cool part about WWI was the Christmas Truce.
I mean, it takes GENTLEMEN to go and hang out with the people they're about to kill/be killed by.
I would have to say WW1, because you never really hear anything on it. If you do, it's always hazy, and doesn't make much sense, so you really have to put a lot of effort, and dig deep into every aspect of it to get a picture.
WW2 is something you hear time, and time again. Though it peeks my interest a lot too, it doesn't have the same effect as WW1. I have many books about WW1, and they're fascinating each time I open them, whereas books about WW2 just seem like something you've heard over a million times.
On a side note, has anyone else seen the movie about "The Lost Battalion"? I thought it was a good watch, with a respectful ending that seems to complement the respect and dignity in WW1.
[QUOTE=killiam;21822880]
On a side note, has anyone else seen the movie about "The Lost Battalion"? I thought it was a good watch, with a respectful ending that seems to complement the respect and dignity in WW1.[/QUOTE]
Why do they have M1 Garands?
[QUOTE=doommarine23;21817075]It's not but it's human nature and you have to accept it, it's also how technology grows. The only time technology is made is when there is demand for it. War gives demand, War gives technology.[/QUOTE]
It's not so much human nature is it is the inevitable outcome of two sides that won't back down. Eventually once side will want something so much that they will use force.
[QUOTE=killiam;21822880]I would have to say WW1, because you never really hear anything on it. If you do, it's always hazy, and doesn't make much sense, so you really have to put a lot of effort, and dig deep into every aspect of it to get a picture.
WW2 is something you hear time, and time again. Though it peeks my interest a lot too, it doesn't have the same effect as WW1. I have many books about WW1, and they're fascinating each time I open them, whereas books about WW2 just seem like something you've heard over a million times.
On a side note, has anyone else seen the movie about "The Lost Battalion"? I thought it was a good watch, with a respectful ending that seems to complement the respect and dignity in WW1.[/QUOTE]
You sir are my new best friend :hfive:
[QUOTE=SkinkYEA;21811538]WWI was a stalemate in trenches.[/QUOTE]
Oh I beg to differ, the Western Front was a mess after Marne, but the Eastern front was a war consisting of moving large amounts of men and flanking and such.
As for the OP, I think WWI is more interesting firstly because that was when modern weapons really began to take root and because how little people know about it compared to WWII. WWI also lacked a clear bad-guy, unlike WWII where one-side consisted of nationalist authoritarian assholes committing genocide, except for the Ottomans, they sucked dick. In my opinion WWI was a more brutal war as well, in WWII both sides had talented tacticians, but in WWI it was just slaughter and slaughter until Cambrai.
[editline]07:27PM[/editline]
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;21811748]The First World War is by far more interesting because it's such a pinnacle turning point in history, not just for Europe, but for the whole world.
It ended the the rule of monarchies, ended a lot of imperialism (not all, but a lot), and what not. The First World War directly can be tied to the reasons for the Second World War, and indirectly to the Cold War, and even to today's Middle East problems.
It led to the improvement of flight, transportation, medical research and many other new things, despite being focusing on death.
World War One changed the face of the world. World War Two just changed a few borders afterward.
And, WWI wasn't just about trench warfare. You're all being too narrow sighted. The entire war did NOT take place in north eastern France. It was a WORLD WAR, after all. There was fighting in Africa between colonies, oceanic battles in the North Sea, the Mediterranean Sea, the Atlantic, and EVEN the Pacific Ocean. There were mountain raids between Italy and Austria, bombardments of Belgrade in Serbia, revolutionaries in Russia.
You people need to read more about your history for this war. If you honestly think there was just 4 years of "shooting across no man's land" in France for four years, then Germany suddenly gave up, then you're being very ignorant.
Anyone know that Japan not only declared war on the Central Powers, but actually sent two Destroyers to the Mediterranean Sea to aid the British against the Austrian and Ottoman navies?
Does anyone realize that the Allies had sent armies into Russia after the revolution to stop the communists?[/QUOTE]
I agree with you whole-heartedly, too often people see WWI only from the point after Marne where the two sides were in an absolute stalemate.
Anyone play that game that took place in an alternate history 1954 where WW1 never ended, and you had things attack helicopters, laser sights, internet, and robo-turrets?
[QUOTE=scurr;21822971]Why do they have M1 Garands?[/QUOTE]
There are no M1 Garands in that movie, you must be mistaken with something else.
[quote=billiam;21823005]
oh i beg to differ, the western front was a mess after marne, but the eastern front was a war consisting of moving large amounts of men and flanking and such.
As for the op, i think wwi is more interesting firstly because that was when modern weapons really began to take root and because how little people know about it compared to wwii. Wwi also lacked a clear bad-guy, unlike wwii where one-side consisted of nationalist authoritarian assholes committing genocide, except for the ottomans, they sucked dick. In my opinion wwi was a more brutal war as well, in wwii both sides had talented tacticians, but in wwi it was just slaughter and slaughter until cambrai.
[editline]07:27pm[/editline][/quote]
ww1 had very good tacticians, its just the generals, firstly, were not used to the new warfare doctrine of trenches. Secondly, the generals had no idea what was going on at the lowest levels of the army, therefore they could not give orders, plan and work effectively. Finally the canadians gave more power to ncos and cos alike, with maps and proper communications as shown by the battle of vimy ridge.
[editline]11:41pm[/editline]
[quote=billiam;21823005]
I agree with you whole-heartily, too often people see wwi only from the point after marne where the two sides were in an absolute stalemate.[/quote]
ww2 created penicillin, jet engines (sparked off the entire space era), atomic bomb (leading to nuclear power), and much more, but i'm too tired to think of them right now. Also the second world war pretty much started the cold war, thus it changed the world more than any other war.
[QUOTE=Earthen;21823309]ww1 had very good tacticians, its just the generals, firstly, were not used to the new warfare doctrine of trenches. Secondly, the generals had no idea what was going on at the lowest levels of the army, therefore they could not give orders, plan and work effectively. Finally the canadians gave more power to ncos and cos alike, with maps and proper communications as shown by the battle of vimy ridge.
[editline]11:41pm[/editline]
[/quote]
Not to mention that officers in most if not all armies were officers because of their aristocratic social status, not from their own talent.
[QUOTE=Earthen;21823309]ww2 created penicillin, jet engines (sparked off the entire space era), atomic bomb (leading to nuclear power), and much more, but i'm too tired to think of them right now. Also the second world war pretty much started the cold war, thus it changed the world more than any other war.[/QUOTE]
But World War I created the events that caused World War II, so couldn't any change that WWII caused be in the end, attributed to WWI?
[QUOTE=Earthen;21823309]ww1 had very good tacticians, its just the generals, firstly, were not used to the new warfare doctrine of trenches. Secondly, the generals had no idea what was going on at the lowest levels of the army, therefore they could not give orders, plan and work effectively. Finally the canadians gave more power to ncos and cos alike, with maps and proper communications as shown by the battle of vimy ridge.[/QUOTE]
I disagree the French and Russians had some awful generals, especially the Russians. The fact that the tacticians were good didn't make them any less oblivious as well and it surely didn't prevent the slaughter.
[QUOTE=Earthen;21823309]ww2 created penicillin, jet engines (sparked off the entire space era), atomic bomb (leading to nuclear power), and much more, but i'm too tired to think of them right now. Also the second world war pretty much started the cold war, thus it changed the world more than any other war.[/QUOTE]
Penicillin was discovered in 1928 and cultures were using it unknowingly in ancient times. Also WWI was the basis for WWII and the Russian Revolution which occurred during WWI was also a giant part of the Cold War. Without WWI neither of those two wars would have taken place as we know them, Hell with all of those German engineers and scientists working together instead of being split up by WWII who knows what we would've seen.
Both are interesting, I just prefer to study WW2 more. And when we did WW1 in school, all we learnt about was the reasons for the war, not what happened during it.
[QUOTE=Eluveitie;21824272]Both are interesting, I just prefer to study WW2 more. And when we did WW1 in school, all we learnt about was the reasons for the war, not what happened during it.[/QUOTE]
What happened during it is more or less irrelevant to the causes and aftermaths for any war.
I hear in 1916 (halfway WWI) in Christmas or something in some area of the warzone they had a ceasefire and played football.
Is this true?
[QUOTE=Black-Ice;21824509]I hear in 1916 (halfway WWI) in Christmas or something in some area of the warzone they had a ceasefire and played football.
Is this true?[/QUOTE]
It is true, but 1914.
Germans and English played. Germans won, 3-1, I believe.
[QUOTE=Billiam;21823526]I disagree the French and Russians had some awful generals, especially the Russians. The fact that the tacticians were good didn't make them any less oblivious as well and it surely didn't prevent the slaughter.[/QUOTE]
All the people in commander during WW1 didn't understand warfare. Because the most effective weapon they had was a machine gun, a defensive weapon, they would have to make trenches for defense. While this would make sense for France, who was defending attack from Germany, the Germans did the same thing because there was only a machine gun to work with. This caused the stale-mate, so what's the best way to break the stale-mate? Ouh just artillery shell everything and send waves of in-experienced soldiers to their deaths!
The people in command obviously didn't get that the soldiers they were sending to their deaths were humans too, not pawns in a chess game.
For once, the sequel was better
[QUOTE=GunsNRoses;21824754]For once, the sequel was better[/QUOTE]
Yeah the Dark Knight was pretty good.
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;21824706]It is true, but 1914.
Germans and English played. Germans won, 3-1, I believe.[/QUOTE]
I always found the christmas truce fascinating. How they can go from killing each other one day to playing football the next.
I prefer the tech and tactics of WW1 but I prefer the overall battles of WW2.
[QUOTE=Luke510;21824907]I always found the christmas truce fascinating. How they can go from killing each other one day to playing football the next.[/QUOTE]
Actually it wasn't for just that one day. Some parts of the front were at peace for a whole week.
FunFact: Tanks are called tanks because the people who where working on the first tanks where told they where making portable water tanks for Africa.
Wwiii
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
