World War I
Having just watched a documentary about the battle of the Somme (not as futile as some would think it seems) it got me wondering about World War I in general.
World War I was supposed to be "the war to end all wars", as we know things didn't quite work out that way. But did anything useful come out of World War I at all? Personally I've always seen it as a dress rehearsal for the real World War but do any of you think differently? |
Re: World War I
without getting into another GDesque discussion on what you mean, ill get into another GDesque discussion on what you mean.
What do you mean by 'useful', as with any other war certain innovations and discoveries were made that went on to be industrially useful. Whether that was worth the slaughter of millions is another matter. In a politcal world view context i doubt anyone sees any merit in the war in itself, ie its aims and objectives were lunacy, but i suppose you could argue it had major knock on implications in terms of social revolution (russia for example or the role of women in society in britain). |
Re: World War I
Quote:
|
Re: World War I
Quote:
Quote:
As for Britain, Lloyd George did implement some wide reaching changes (eg universal suffrage) soon after the war ended but the 19th century saw a lot of reform in these areas and I don't think there was much sign of this stopping during the early part of the 20th century. I guess you could say that the war acted as a catalyst for change. Quote:
The Weimar republic did appear to be a positive step at the time but I think the fact that the Nazis destroyed it soon after kind of nullifies that point. And the League of Nations, well, it wasn't particularly useful while it lasted and did nothing to stop World War II coming about. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
As for industrialisation, didn't Ford invent mass production before WWI even started? |
Re: World War I
Quote:
Medical advances were huge. It also left Britain and France economically crippled and the empire was beginning to have trouble as a result. Tanks were developed for WW1 although very basic. It spurred on technology considerably really. As for 'not as bad as it seemed', if you focus in on the battle by itself it was a rather massive disaster for the British forces. Too many died for the little land gained. On the eastern flank a General (i cant remember the guys name) broke German lines but as he was then 'ahead' of the rest of British forces was told to hold his position instead of looping around and bringing fire on the Germans from both sides. The whole battle was a farce when it came to tactical planning. Charging cavalary at guns and artillary was just retarded. When i studied it in depth and read a heap of books it struck me that in some ways the blackadder sketch of the general just knocking down great swathes off men on his play battlefield wasnt too far from the truth. Some of the ideas were just bizarre as to how it should be conducted. However the 'bigger' picture the somme was (some would say) instrumental in bringing about German defeat. Heavy losses were incurred on both sides and the Germans took an absolute hammering. They lost a valuable line of defence etc etc and this led to the eventual defeat of Germany. I think (and this is from 2 years ago) a fair few experts estimate it shortened the war by a year or more or somesuch. I have a university piece i wrote on the somme which got a first (go team me) but as my pc is currnetly lying in tatters with just about everything blown up i cant read it and post any useful comments here. :( |
Re: World War I
Quote:
Quote:
|
Re: World War I
The main benefits of WW1 (the Great War) were simply that we "learnt some lessons that we won't repeat". Such as making negotiations/alliances with countries that then mean we're drawn into hostilities over something which doesn't really concern us.
o wait no it didnt |
Re: World War I
Quote:
|
Re: World War I
Personally I think one result from WWI is that nations did agree not to use chemical and biological weapons against each other after that war.
|
Re: World War I
white phosphorus is so much more up-to-date
|
Re: World War I
Quote:
|
Re: World War I
the menstruation-thread is better.
|
Re: World War I
Quote:
Unfortunately nobody really pays much attention to either resolution :( |
Re: World War I
The world would quite probably have been a good deal better if the Central Powers had won. Or, at least, won by default in the west and as they did historically in the East.
But of course, the whole thing itself was a monstrous, barbaric and wicked. |
Re: World War I
You mean because of the resultant unlikelihood of the rise of Hitler and such? Or more intrinsically?
|
Re: World War I
The victory of the Central Powers would - we can say this with almost total certainity - have put the kibosh on Nazism, and quite possibly Italian Fascism too. (On the reasonable assumption Italy joins the Central Powers and is rewarded territorially, and doesn't have the meat-grinder of the Isonzo.)
I think that we can all agree that would have been pretty good for the world in general. |
Re: World War I
But the British wouldve lost. We never lose. Even when its the best thing to do for humanity and especially not against those sausage eating germans. What a terribly silly arguement you put foward what what.
|
Re: World War I
Oh, and the Soviet Union would have been deprived of the Ukraine*, Belorussia and the Baltics which would all have been German satelites. So you would have had containment fifty years before it happened in real life. And without the SU taking over half of Europe beforehand.
*No Ukrainian 'famine', yo. |
Re: World War I
Quote:
|
Re: World War I
Quote:
France is even less likely to go Fascist than Britain in any such eventuality. You do realise how petty, unsuccessful and disparate French Fascism between the wars was, don't you? I conceed that The Third Republic is unlikely to weather the storm of defeat, but the most likely outcome of that, based on how well the two politically extremes did historically betwen the wars, would be a radical Socialist or Communist government, not a Fascist one - perhaps an authoritarian right-wing government, a la Vichy, if we're lucky. But a successful French Fascism? Pretty unlikely. Personally, I'd be quite content in a world were one half of the totalitarian coin was put out to grass before it could even get on it's feet. |
Re: World War I
Quote:
Quote:
|
Re: World War I
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
Re: World War I
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
Re: World War I
Quote:
|
Re: World War I
Quote:
|
Re: World War I
The main problem I see with Germany winning WWI is what would happen to the Franco - German tensions that had been ongoing since German unification. I don't think Germany would have felt particularly merciful in their victory and so would probably have done what we did to Germany. Taking French territory, demanding reparations, etc... Somewhere down the line there would have been some sort of attempted retribution by the French. So the big problem of WWI (the fact that it caused WWII) would still be there. We probably wouldn't have had the Holocaust but other than that I think WWII would still have been pretty bloody.
Another problem with Germany winning WWI is that it wouldn't have been great for democracy. There would have been no Weimar Republic, the Ottoman Empire would have still been around and the only significant democracies left would have been a defeated France, crippled by reparations, and an isolated Britain. I think British democracy would have survived but I doubt whether the French one would, seeing as revolutions were still in vogue at the time. Fascism could have spread from Spain or communism from Russia. |
Re: World War I
Quote:
Ie: including all countries. |
Re: World War I
Quote:
Quote:
|
Re: World War I
Spain wasn't Fascist. Or perhaps it would be more accurate to say that Franco wasn't a Fascist, and hence the Fallange were only a consituent, emasculated part of Franco's regime which he co-opted into his government to bolster it's grass roots support.
Quote:
Was unstable democracy neccesarily a good thing in inter-war Europe? I would argue that it wasn't. Autocracy generally had the power to see off full-blown Fascism, (Hungary for instance) whereas tottering proto-liberal states like Italy and Germany were easy prey. |
Re: World War I
Quote:
|
Re: World War I
The aftermath of WW1 created a shitload of appalling art and music (dadism/surrealism/schoenberg and his disciples/etc) and also played a key role in popularising modernism and the general dislike of good things, which is probably enough to outweigh any other possible benefits that it had.
|
Re: World War I
Quote:
|
Re: World War I
human suffering dies with those who suffered, whereas I am still plagued by shitty art today.
|
Re: World War I
I must admit that Dadaism is almost biblical in it's intensity, pervasiveness, and threat to the purity of our bodily fluids.
I mean, come on. It must be covered by Newsnight Review now about once a year. Once! A year! They're ****ing demented on the stuff they are. |
Re: World War I
Quote:
I simply said that political lessons were learnt from the results and aftermath of WW1. And gave one (slightly obvious) example. Just because I don't choose to bring politics and history into threads on GD which really are nothing to do with either (like a few posters here do), doesn't mean my grasp of both or either is laughable. |
Re: World War I
Quote:
Quote:
Quoting you again Quote:
|
Re: World War I
Quote:
You're contradicting yourself. Earlier in this thread you mentioned that Britain hasn't made any treaties (ignoring the one in the late 1930s) that has then led to war. Implying that Britain had learnt its lesson and didnt get drawn into any more conflicts that didn't concern it, because they're generally a "bad thing". Yet now you're saying that being drawn into conflicts that don't concern the country-in-question directly are a "good thing"? I see. Quote:
what |
Re: World War I
Quote:
Quote:
**** me that was a lot of ****ing cursing. PS I'm not actually angry I just like cursing sometimes :( |
Re: World War I
Calm down dear, it's just a thread on the interweb :(
|
Re: World War I
The United States emerged as a military and industrial power house. No everyone must admit that this has been a tremendous benefit to ALL of mankind.
|
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:57. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2002 - 2018