Page 2 of 2

RE: WW2 vs. WW1

Posted: Thu Jan 05, 2006 9:21 pm
by DuckofTindalos
The thing about World War I is that every single political leader of the Great Powers in Europe wanted it. They'd all been eyeing each other uncomfortably for years, and finally it was time to decide who the biggest kid in the schoolyard was. Unfortunately, nobody had any idea what it would develop into.

RE: WW2 vs. WW1

Posted: Thu Jan 05, 2006 9:38 pm
by Feinder
The whole thing was illustrated by Haiti.

With the collapse of Eurpean militaries (esp France), they stood a decent chance of invading their former colonial masters.

But the whole scheme got screwed up when the meddling Americans joined in.

-F-

RE: WW2 vs. WW1

Posted: Thu Jan 05, 2006 9:39 pm
by Big B
ORIGINAL: Terminus

The thing about World War I is that every single political leader of the Great Powers in Europe wanted it. They'd all been eyeing each other uncomfortably for years, and finally it was time to decide who the biggest kid in the schoolyard was. Unfortunately, nobody had any idea what it would develop into.

I'm not entirely sure that they all wanted it.
Oddly, I remember a quote from the CBS documentary 'World War One' where - as the armies are mobilizing for war, but just before it's declared in 1914 the Kaiser tells His General Staff "Gentlemen, you will regret this"

RE: WW2 vs. WW1

Posted: Thu Jan 05, 2006 9:42 pm
by Nikademus
from what i've read, Churchill distrusted Stalin intensely.....it was Roosevelt that was more likely to see Stalin as a victim of the war. Churchill was right in the end.

RE: WW2 vs. WW1

Posted: Thu Jan 05, 2006 11:15 pm
by Rob322
Guys, you're comparing the wars all wrong. Think of a Baseball GM when you're deciding to fire the manager or not. What's the W-L? Where'd you finish and when were you in the playoffs last?

A measure of the success of any war is the body count. After all, what's the weapons for but to kill the enemy. If you ain't killing you ain't doing the job. And for that measure WW2 trumps WW1 in terms of sheer number of casualties (military, civilians, atrocities, etc) although you have to give style points to the older war for helping contribute to the great flu pandemic of 1918. Had transportation been just a little faster in that part of the 20th century the flu might've killed more and helped raise WW1's body count to a more respectable level.

RE: WW2 vs. WW1

Posted: Thu Jan 05, 2006 11:36 pm
by DuckofTindalos
ORIGINAL: Big B
I'm not entirely sure that they all wanted it.
Oddly, I remember a quote from the CBS documentary 'World War One' where - as the armies are mobilizing for war, but just before it's declared in 1914 the Kaiser tells His General Staff "Gentlemen, you will regret this"

This illustrates the special status of Germany in 1914. She was a military dictatorship, with the Kaiser as the titular head of state, but the General Staff calling the shots, and they wanted war. The Versailles Treaty had a paragraph expressly forbidding Germany from ever creating a General Staff again for that very reason.

RE: WW2 vs. WW1

Posted: Fri Jan 06, 2006 2:05 am
by ctangus
I've read Churchill's memoirs - the unabridged 6 vol version. He was definitely very distrustful of Stalin, much more so than Roosevelt. He said something to the effect that he'd deal with the devil to finish Hitler. (Very loose quote.)

I can dig up a quote or two if you're interested, but am going to get back to a turn shortly.

BTW, it's a very interesting read. Very dry at times, but it gives a lot of insight into the decision making process of the UK/US high command.

RE: WW2 vs. WW1

Posted: Fri Jan 06, 2006 2:16 am
by diesel7013
I think that the French of Episode I and Japanese of Episode II are long lost cousins - the both liked to charge machine guns with their lightsabers flailing about...

I'm not real excited about Episode III - The US is either going to turn out to be ultimately bad ( with eventual redemption - I hope ) and kill all the younglings ( Iran, Iraq, Syria, Saudi, Afganistan - basically punk countries ) or we'll end up going into exile ( in all our isolationist bent ) behind our great oceans while the evil empire ( EU ) runs amok for 20+ years until our young son - Isreal? rises up and slaps the EU down...

Either way, I'll probably die on Hoth...

RE: WW2 vs. WW1

Posted: Fri Jan 06, 2006 4:05 am
by Rob322
ORIGINAL: diesel7013

I think that the French of Episode I and Japanese of Episode II are long lost cousins - the both liked to charge machine guns with their lightsabers flailing about...

I'm not real excited about Episode III - The US is either going to turn out to be ultimately bad ( with eventual redemption - I hope ) and kill all the younglings ( Iran, Iraq, Syria, Saudi, Afganistan - basically punk countries ) or we'll end up going into exile ( in all our isolationist bent ) behind our great oceans while the evil empire ( EU ) runs amok for 20+ years until our young son - Isreal? rises up and slaps the EU down...

Either way, I'll probably die on Hoth...

It's funny, why do some Americans fear the EU? They're culturally closer to us than Israel, Russia, Japan, China, anything in the MidEast or the rest of Asia. There's really no reason for either side to see each other as evil although with enough paranoia and marijuana I suppose anything seems possible ... [X(][:-]

RE: WW2 vs. WW1

Posted: Fri Jan 06, 2006 4:10 am
by FeurerKrieg
Mrs. Nizbit told me so.....before she stood up.

RE: WW2 vs. WW1

Posted: Fri Jan 06, 2006 8:22 am
by DuckofTindalos
And was shot down...

RE: WW2 vs. WW1

Posted: Fri Jan 06, 2006 4:32 pm
by WhoCares
ORIGINAL: Feinder

WhoCares,

I'll take your word for it that it is your interpretation that Churchill thought Stalin was a "victim".

I've also got Churchill's memoirs, and that's not what I read. Granted, I haven't READ them. I've "skimmed interesting parts", so I'm sure you've gotten more out them. But the impression I've gotten was that Churhill very much thought Stalin was an egomaniacal glutton for power. He very much considered Stalin a post-war threat. However, he understood the necissity of Stalin's war-time contribution.

But I don't think Winston cared much Stalin.

(* shrug *)

-F-
Well, don't get me wrong. Churchill was indeed very critical about Stalin throughout the war. And considering that I read a/the german translation, which I sometimes regretted...

However, if I remember correctly it was in two instances, I think Moscow '42 and Jalta '43, where Churchill mentioned the impression that some of Stalins positions were not his own and he would be willing to concessions but was bound by other instances.

Sure, the further the war progressed, the more Churchill feared the possibility to replace the Nazis with a communist dictatorship for half of Europe. And he was obviously quite disappointed by the american (Roosevelt, Truman, Eisenhower) reactions toward his warnings.