Ends in London showing a massive parade celebrating the victory of the Allies against the evil Germans with triumphant...

>ends in London showing a massive parade celebrating the victory of the Allies against the evil Germans with triumphant music
Why is Hollywood so grotesque in their portrayal of WW1?

Other urls found in this thread:

comicsalliance.com/wonder-woman-1970s/
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Percentages_agreement
youtube.com/watch?v=tGxAYeeyoIc
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Versailles
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dawes_Plan
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Young_Plan
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hoover_Moratorium
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupation_of_the_Ruhr
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

>Germany btfo when trying to destroy the world
The more things change the more they stay the same

Hollywood likes to pretend WW1 was as morally-clear cut as WW2 (but even then we kinda like to ignore the whole alliance with the soviets and stuff)

Germans were still the bad guys in WW1.

It's how Americans think the World Wars went down:
Evil Germany almost taking over the world but America stepped and saved everyone!

Hitler served in WW1, therefore the Germans were evil.

Aren't they the bad guys though? Haven't read anything about it, but I'm pretty sure the Germans started world war 1.

They honored their alliance with the Austro-Hungarian Empire.
The scummiest thing they did was ignoring Belgium's neutrality.

Not any more so than any other great power at the time.

Winners write history. WWI barely gets taught in American schools and when it does they mention the assassination, the complex web of alliances, trench warfare, the Lusitania sinking, America's entry into the war and the Germans' surrender. The implication throughout it all is Germany = bad, USA = good.

It started with Russia and Austria fighting over influence in the Balkan.

>invading a non-country is scummy

Belgium literally was created as a buffer state, it was always supposed to be invaded :^)

This is not true. They are more responsible for starting this war than France or Great Britain.

Literally everyone was itching for war. It wasn't evil that made Germany "start" the way, it was stupidity for giving the rest an excuse to finally fight.

>Germany is singularly responsible for causing WW1 and 2
>people are upset when you mention this fact

Great Britain took WW1 as a chance to nip German naval aspirations in the bud and maintain their superiority on the sea.

France tried to stall until Germany was busy with the Russians so they could stab them in the back.

It started with Austria wanting to invade Serbia and Russia protecting it.

>oh no, those evil Germans are gonna try to take over the world

So did this gentleman

Eternal Anglo

>american education

The fact that WW is set during WWI shows how ignorant Hollywood is of both history and the character. Hell, superheroes themselves are from the zeitgeist of WWII, not WWI.

I'm thinking they wanted to avoid too many comparisons to the plot of the first Captain America movie.

He knew how to survive and make use of his numbers. Truly an exemplary of German efficiency.

Keep in mind they wanted to do WW2, but it was already too much like Captain America so they changed it. Still a rip off of Captain America and Thor though.

...

in the private writings of the US diplomat Henry White and his conversation with Lord Balfour in 1907

“Balfour (somewhat lightly): “We are probably fools to not find a reason for not declaring war on Germany before she builds too many ships and takes away our trade.”

White: “You are a very high-minded man in private life. How can you possibly contemplate anything so politically immoral as provoking a war against a harmless nation which has as good a right to a navy as you have? If you wish to compete with German trade, work harder.”

Balfour: “That would mean lowering our standard of living. Perhaps it would be simpler for us to have a war.”

White: “I am shocked that you of all men should enunciate such principles.”

Balfour (again lightly): “Is it a question of right or wrong? Maybe it is just a question of keeping our supremacy.”

This view that England wanted to eliminate a trade rival was accepted by the renowned economist John Maynard Keynes:

“The politics of power are inevitable, and there is nothing very new to learn about this war or the end it was fought for; England had destroyed, as in each preceding century, a trade rival; a mighty chapter had been closed in the secular struggle between the glories of Germany and France.”

>Britain dindu nuffin, they wuz the good guys!

So... why did Jews bomb that english hotel?

This.

Fun fact: Russia mobilised first.

Pls shoot yourself in the brain.

And then make somebody take all your organs except your brain, because your brain is clearly worthless. You are retarded.

It should not be forgotten that after the end of the First World War, a massive trans-Atlantic revisionism took place in the US, UK, and France thoroughly debunking many of these myths, only for those same myths to re-entrench themselves in the post-World War II era.

The hysteria directed against Germany began in 1909 with the Great Naval Scare. When First Lord of the Admiralty Sir Reginald McKenna made ludicrous claims that Germany was intending to build eight dreadnoughts rather than the four stated in the April 1908 German Naval Law3, he spread hysteria throughout the British Isles. He claimed that Germany could build dreadnoughts faster than the British and would outstrip them in naval production at current rates. The heights of hysteria can be seen in the twin predictions made by McKenna and Lord Balfour in April 1912; the former claimed Germany had 17 dreadnoughts and the latter 21-25. The ridiculousness of these estimates can be seen by the fact that at the onset of the First World War in 1914 Germany had only 13 dreadnoughts.

The ‘evidence’ for these fantastic figures came from H.H. Mulliner. Mr. Mulliner was the managing director of Coventry Ordnance Works. Desiring more orders from the government he fabricated a series of hysterical predictions that Germany would rapidly outpace Britain in dreadnought production. Due to the slump in naval production, a result of the détentes with France and Russia, a new foe had to be manufactured to ensure government orders. The information of Germany’s feverish buildup came from one of H.H. Mulliner’s employees, a certain Mr. Carpmael. Mr. Carpmael claimed to have visited the Krupp Works and saw five to six large machines of varying degrees of competition and assumed that Germany was building or capable of building six dreadnoughts a year.5 While Mr. Carpmael’s intentions are unknown they were grist for Mr. Mulliner’s mill.

Trevor tries to explain that there is not one bad guy to stop the War and that he maybe at fault as wellThat's what I got from it.

No proof of this.

>everyone
Germany and Austria-Hungary.

Yet as these fabulous predictions were being made the truth was well known by the First Lord of the Admiralty and the King. John ‘Jack’ Fisher wrote:

“I might say “The unswerving intention of 4 years has now culminated in two complete Fleets in Home Waters, each of which is incomparably superior to the whole German Fleet mobilized for war. Don’t take my word! Count them, see them for yourselves! You will see them next June. This can’t alter for years, even were we supinely passive in our building; but it won’t alter because we will have 8 dreadnoughts a year. So sleep quiet in your beds!””

To King Edward he wrote:

“In March of this year, 1907, it is an absolute fact that Germany had not laid down a single “Dreadnought,” nor had she commenced building a single Battleship or Big Cruiser for eighteen months.”

And

There is one more piece of information I have to give: Admiral Tirpitz, the German Minister of Marine has just stated, in a secret official document, that the English Navy is now four times stronger than the German Navy. Yes that is so, and we are going to keep the British Navy at that strength, with ten “Dreadnoughts” commenced last May. But we don’t want to parade all this to the world at large.”

To defend Serbia.

As we can see the British with cold and malicious intent lied about an irenic neighbor in order to build up the Royal Navy for war with Germany to remove a trade rival. Admiral von Tirpitz claims that the British led by “Jack” Fisher compared the projected size of the Germany Navy of 1920 with the then contemporary British Navy of 1908, this bait and switch being impossible for the British people to have known about.

The question then arises: why did Germany seek a blue water navy? In order to combat the growing strength of the Franco-Russian navies as the two nations were joined as allies. We see from JFC Fuller:

The crux of the naval question was that it had been the policy of successive British governments to concentrate popular attention on British and German expansion alone; they did not take into account the fact that Germany had other naval considerations than war against England. Her naval situation in a war against France and Russia was overlooked; yet it was the situation which was, and had been, the governing factor in her naval policy since 1900, when Admirals Tirpitz said: “We should be in a position to blockade the Russian fleet in the Baltic ports, and to prevent at the same time the entrance to that sea of the French fleet.”

To gain control in the region.
They didn't give a shit about Serbia's independence.

So they just copied the plot of the first Captain America movie and set it in WWI?

They even both end with a guy named Steve flying a plane and sacrificing himself to stop the evil enemy's giant bomb thing.

Wonder Woman deserved better. Warners is shit.

How do you know this?

Cute propaganda. What right-wing, neo-Nazi blog is this from?

>Wonder Woman deserved better.
Why? Isn't it just bondage fetishism?

It's different enough to make it worth watching but yeah, there are some obvious similarities between the two.

Do you think Russia were freedom fighters, campaigning for separatists around the world?

>Sourced writings is propaganda
>If it isn't anti-German, it's right-wing propaganda

no

daily reminder that the Lusitania was a valid military target

yes

No, but they supported Serbian pan-slavism.

>sourced
10 references? Half of them from before 1950s. You obviously never studied history. It is propaganda.

>amerifats think germany started ww1

This is embarrassing. Please just stop whatever you're doing and go do some studying. WW1 is one of the most significant events in history and theres no excuse to be uneducated on it.

>Everything German is Hitler

I want to lick out her pits till she orgasms
I want my face to be a Wonder Woman toilet seat

Meh, the sequel was better.

>Half of them from before 1950s
Yes, as is WW1. You imbecile. I gave you citations from British admirals, generals, Keynes, and lord fucking Balfour himself, showing clear undeniable British intentions for war.

This

The British wanted war in 1914 when they still had naval superiority.
The French wanted war in 1914 to avenge the losses in the previous century.
The Germans wanted war in 1914 because they felt waiting would mean a harder war later with Russia building up its rail network.
The Habsburgs wanted war in 1914 to ensure their dominance in the Balkans.
The Russians are the only ones you could say didn't want a war in 1914, but they wouldn't allow their only ally in the Balkans to be destroyed and the French assured them they were up for the fight.
The Ottomans were furious at the Brits for stealing their ship and just wanted to preserve what they had. Sitting out that war and having the Central Powers lose would just mean the Russians attack them next. Obviously they couldn't predict what would actually happen.
Italy are just blowhard cunts.

Of course not. But German Empire was still chiefly responsible for that war.

>you will never see a WW movie based on her powerless-kung-fu-spy days

comicsalliance.com/wonder-woman-1970s/

*sips goblet of fresh aryan blood*

>its an austria starts some shit and everybody blames germany episode

one more and it'll be a triple

So they were racists?

>morally-clear cut as WW2

only retards from dumboland can think so

Do you think one or two citations is enough? Have you ever read a real book about WW1?

>The British wanted war in 1914 when they still had naval superiority.
>The French wanted war in 1914 to avenge the losses in the previous century.
Can you prove it? July Crisis is pretty well sourced.

>On 23 July, British Foreign Secretary Sir Edward Grey made a mediation offer with a promise that his government would attempt to influence Russia to influence Serbia, and Germany to influence Austria-Hungary as the best way of stopping a general war.[114] Wilhelm wrote on the margins of Lichnowsky's dispatch containing Grey’s offer that Britain’s "condescending orders" were to be totally rejected, and Austria-Hungary would not retract any of its "impossible demands" on Serbia.
Yup, Britain clearly wanted a war.

WW2 had a clear aggressor.

>world war
>morally clear
Both of them started with a conflict of European interests. USA always got involved to secure their interests. I don't see how morality goes into that.

You are literally retarded

Jews just really really hate Germany

*Inhales*
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

There haven't been enough video games on WW1 so they naturally don't know anything about it.

Yup, the British.

see

>Captain America

Most retarded superhero ever.
>fighting about liberty and justice in alliance with Soviets!
lmao

UNDEFEATED

>what is battlefields 1

Yeah, the British.

Yeah appeasement is really aggressive.

Yet every big country involved made agreements and pacts regarding the land before and during the entire affair.

Like how the fuck is this moral?
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Percentages_agreement

bcuz muh evul naziiissss

youtube.com/watch?v=tGxAYeeyoIc

You might want to do some research my dear fat american.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Versailles


If you spend decades kicking a man while he's down, eventually he'll be forced to act out of self preservation.

But the worst things for Germany came from the French not the British

>WW2 had a clear aggressor.

>Ignoring Soviets also attacking Poland, Baltic States and Finland before allying with their western lackeys.

>muh versailles treety
No excuse to invade Poland. You honestly believe that the British would just sit on their asses, watch as Poland get invaded by a foreign power, and do nothing?

Maybe officially, obviously it would look better coming from the french since the war took place on their soil, but in reality the punitive measures were all at the urging of the brits.

>he fell for german propaganda that the treaty of versailles was this death sentence
How about you read some historical scholars? The treaty was actually very lenient, especially compared with the peace treaties Germany had forced on its enemies when succesful previously.

There is some debate about Britain, sure. The guarantee of Belgium was basically a safe way to 100% guarantee Britain would be joining the war with cause whenever it happened. There were diplomatic talks on all sides in July and the Brits, at the time nominally neutral, did lead the correspondence, but the Habsburgs had just lost the last sane voice in their government and the Germans and French were not really listening. Claiming the Brits spent how many lives to defend Belgian neutrality and not their own global position is silly.

I hope you don't expect me to prove the French wanted a war. They were so eager for it they invented a phrase for their state of mind in revanchism.

>he treaty was actually very lenient
amerifat pls go, your public school education is showing

>muh horrible appeasement, not enough free toys WAH WAH WAH

Childhood is thinking the Treaty of Versailles was too harsh
Adulthood is realizing that it wasn't harsh enough

amerifats please go, this is a thread for people who actually have an education

>Germans, 140 million including colonies, 40 million have right to vote
>British, 750 million including colonies, 10 millino have right to vote

Objectively the more democratic nation lost.

>The treaty which wrecked the German economy was actually very lenient
>The treaty which destroyed the German army, allowing for the French to aggressively invade the western parts of Germany unopposed was actually very lenient

Yeah, forcing a country close to starving is a great way to ensure peace...

And now something for you:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dawes_Plan
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Young_Plan
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hoover_Moratorium

They really hated those poor Germans. I mean, how could they do this?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupation_of_the_Ruhr

>The British Labour Party demanded peace and denounced Lloyd George as a troublemaker. It saw Germany as the martyr of the postwar period and France as vengeful and the principal threat to peace in Europe. The tension between France and Britain peaked during a conference in Paris in early 1923, by which time the coalition led by Lloyd George had been replaced by the Conservatives. The Labour Party opposed the occupation of the Ruhr throughout 1923, which it rejected as French imperialism. The British Labour Party believed it had won when Poincaré accepted the Dawes Plan in 1924.[23]
Just look how everyone hated those poor Germans.

Yeah, the native american Ottoman soldiers fighting side by side with black Germans at Verdun against the Chinese French.

>A far right government takes power in Poland
>Poland annexes Villinus
>Poland annexes part of Czechoslovakia
>Germany and the Soviet Union annexes Poland
Poetry.

Annexing 1/3 of Russias population umder German puppet states sure was neat.

>The treaty which destroyed the German army, allowing for the French to aggressively invade the western parts of Germany unopposed

the wat now?

see

>They were so eager for it they invented a phrase for their state of mind in revanchism.
That mostly died out before WW1.