What was worse Sup Forums WWI or WWII?

What was worse Sup Forums WWI or WWII?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=GAhtrvRQGJU
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

If you're serious WWI

That guy in the bottom left though

WW1 because it was unnecessary and had everything except nuclear weapons being used. The tactics were for the 1800's but the weaponry was modern. It wasn't unusual to hear that 1000's men would be killed in a single day

WWI

By far.

From least shit to worst for the soldiers:

European theater WWII>WWI>Pacific theater WWII

He was disappointed that war ended so soon

War changes some men in strange ways

It's Jebediah Kerman.

>Never learn about WW1 in school, just WW2
>Lessons on WW2 were entirely "muh holocost"

someone please tell me about WW1

WWI

There's a reason they don't make very many movies about it. You can't romanticize a continent-wide meat grinder.

Shut the fuck up, cringiest post I've seen in a long time

WW1 gives me nightmares. Trenches were hell on earth

WW1 was worse by far, the only part of ww2 that comes close is the pacific theatre and only in a few specific places.

Statistics wise WWII, more died, more bombs dropped, it was bigger.

But WWI was senseless. the only thing the men were fighting for was their countries, not even their ideals. It was literally the simplest and basest a war got, you killed the enemy because they weren't you. Not because you disagreed with them, or because they posed a threat, they simply were on the other side. It was the biggest circle jerk of power projection, except at the end everybody cut each other's dicks off and ended up with STD's of fundamentalism, some more so than others.

How can you say the pacific theatre was worse than being in a trench in WW1

Read the book Storm of Steel by Ernst Junger. It's a good book to get a feel for the war. All Quiet on the Western Front is good, but it has a very pacifist slant.

t. WWI vet.

wtf are you talking about the fucking hun was trying to enslave europe

In general most wars that happened at an earlier time were more brutal.

Imagine 18th century tactics vs modern weaponry it was a slaughter.

Banzai charges, flamethrowers, sadistic treatment of POWs, numerous psychological warfare tactics, etc. The Japs were absolutely savage. I will admit that perhaps it isn't right to say it was worse than WWI, however.

And the Entente weren't? Just because you're fighting in defense doesn't mean you're automatically morally superior.

There's a semi-decent, if not oddly-directed miniseries on netflix called Our World War or something like that, that dramatizes a few individual snapshots of the war from the British army.

If you can get over the nauseating go-pro esq camera angle shots, the occasional CoD graphic maps, and strange soundtrack, it's actually an enthralling show.

and to answer your question OP, ww1 is without a doubt, the worst thing that's ever happened in modern human history

In World War 1, the British only had a professional army. Volunteers only, however, they would try to encourage young boys to join any way they could.

One way they got boy to join was by enlisting women to go around town and make fun of boy who were not wearing an enlistment pin on their jacket.

Another way they got boys to join was to tell them, "If you enlist, you will be able to train and fight with your friends." Sounds fun, right? Spend 6 months traveling in France, Belgium, and Germany fighting with your buddies from home.

Well, The peace time generals didn't know shit about 20th century warfare. Barbed wire and machine guns were not well understood. They would try to blow up barbed wire, which doesn't really work, send waves of troops to charge barbwire with 70 pounds strapped to their back. If they were not mowed down by machine gun fire, they would get caught in barbed wire, then shot by machine gun fire. Entire towns of boys would be killed in a single day from a single charge.

Oh, a charge didn't work? Let's send another wave, says the lame duck peace time general.

My last horror story for you is about how shitty trench life was. Most battles were fought on farm land. They use cow shit to fertilize the ground. If you get shot or get even a cut on your foot, boom infection. Lose a leg to infection. If you get shot peaking of of the trench, they are going to bury you in the trench.

It depends on what you mean by "worse".

We learned the civil war was just that. Ancient tactics new weaponry.

I think that when Japan got pushed back to the home islands, they switched up their strategy to something similar to trench warfare on Iwo Jima and Okinawa. Both sides even started considering using gas again if I remember correctly.

WW1 is directly responsible for every death in WW2.

Watch The Great War channel on JewTube

I remember when we learned about WWI in school, there was one story that stood out to me. Some guy gets stranded out in no man's land, and his buddy can't go rescue him until it gets dark out or he'll be killed himself. Come nightfall, his friend in the trench has a look out to where the stranded man is with a pair of binoculars, and sees that his buddy is still moving around. So, he rushes out to were the stranded man is. When the rescuer gets to his friend's position, he's not responding so he turns him over only to discover his open torso is crawling with rats. His friend was already dead, and his corpse was being dragged around by hungry rats eating through his innards.

That's what World War I was like.

For conditions of soldiers it might go to WWI, pretty debatable. Western front of the WWII was a piece of cake for the most part, but the Eastern front and the Pacific? Fuck that.

Yah man took European and American Military History and one thing i always found super interesting where those times when old tactics where just no match for modern technology. Every single time it was a fucking slaughter. and those old tactics which took hundreds of years to master where just utterly useless.

Thanks but I was mainly referring to the social/economic tensions/collapses that caused the war, not the war itself

Even worse was that the scale of deaths were unprecedented. The amount of deaths in a single battle rivaled the sizes of armies just a few centuries earlier. A common theme that you will hear is that ww1 was a war of attrition. Armies simply couldn't break lines. Germany was hoping that they could win the war by starving the British to death by sinking merchant vessels.

Starving an island country of food and natural resources. Think about that.

...

Very good one series. I've been consuming as many WWI documentaries and shows and that one is near the top of the list.

>Typical WW1 battlefield

This is what I think of when WW1 is brought up

What you need to know about the cause of ww1 is that the French were humilitated 60 years earlier in the Franco-Prussian war and wanted to redeem herself. The Germans were a modern day China and thought that the natural order was for Germany to rule Europe. The Russians also had a dog in the fight and were gunning for a war.

However, all of these rivalries were long standing. The assassination of Ferdinand in the Balkins gave Germany a reason to attack, and Germany was afraid of Russia and thought the only way to beat Russia was to quickly take out Russia's ally, France.

>Falling asleep in the trench and not waking up because you were devoured by the mud overnight.
>Not being able to prevent your feet from rotting off into wretched stumps.

No thank you.

Ww2, Hitler lost.

Even worse was that the Germans believed that the only way to defeat France was to bypass all of France's forts allong their border. So instead Germany thought they could stroll through the neutral country of Belgium, backed by Britain, to invade France and take Paris quickly.

Well the Belgians fought back, literally burned bridges, and fucked up that plan. Then Britain, and all of her colonies, got in the war.

The problem with WWI is it was eclipsed by WWII so soon. Society barely had the chance to realize what had happened before it all happened again.

The mindsets of WWI soldiers were uniquely 19th century.

t. underage b&

Basically you had a bunch of countries make defense pacts with one another then some shit kicked off in Serbia and you had all the old blood aristocrats wanting to goto war because at the time war was considered a noble and jolly thing. Everyone wanted to show one another how big their dicks was thinking it would all be over in a few months. long story short they beat themselves into a stalemate and came up with new horrible ways to kill each-other.

>launched the middle east into a state of constant state of turmoil after nearly 500 years of relative peace
>same with balkans
>ended victorian romantic ideals of nationhood
>ended the age of empire
>end of Austria-Hungary, resulting in a fucked up central/eastern europe, to this day
>end of American isolationism
>self-determination
>national socialism
>leninism/stalinism
>WWII

I could go on.
WWI was hella bad senpai

The ultimate result of both wars was that the United States loaned a SHIT ton of money to the allies, and had a huge financial interest in making sure the allies were able to pay the United States back. If France and Britian lost, we were not going to get paid. Also, the entire continent of Europe was fucked.

Want to make America great again? Start a world war in Europe or China, loan money to the winning side, and make sure you don't fight any battles in your country.

t. anglokike

Makes me groan just looking at it

All those working class men lost

What is funny is the actual assassination was not what was important. It was the hype around it that was far worse

>Men

boys

>Combat

WW1, due to the terrible conditions the troops were fighting in combined with the lack of tactical innovation.

>Casualties

WW2 obviously

>Effects on society/politics

WW1 for several reasons

>Destroyed 19th century European social structures
>brought socialist economic policies into mainstream politics
>Literally the reason the world is what it is today

WWI. Most of the history following history, which includes WWII, was a result of WWI.

It wasn't the hype. The Germans had to aid Austria which was going to war with Russia's ally. The Germans thought that the only way to beat Russia was to *quickly* take out Russia's other ally, France.

Germany thought it would take months for Russia to fully mobilize, and if you wait for them to mobilize, then you are fighting a two front war. Turns out Russia wanted a war and was already partially mobilized, and shit hit the fan.

Depends on how you define worse, really.

More soldiers and a lot more civilians died in WWII so there's that.

For the conditions the soldiers had to face on the ground, WWI without a doubt. WWII has a few select battles like Stalingrad that come close but pretty much every major offensive in the Great War was an outright bloodbath.

More brutal warfare in WWI for sure, WWII was more inhumane, the civilian toll that is

It's all so closely related, when you start digging into it, you can't really say WWI and WWII were 2 "events". It was one massive fall for mankind. The buildup, the wars, the aftermath. Really all tied together, very cause and effect

I think it was General Fosh that said that (in regards to the terms of surrender) the Armistice was just a 20 year ceasefire. He was right.

WWI because there were no ideology behind the war like in the WWII, it was just kikery.

When we won WW2 we went out and rebuilt, we celebrated, and we moved on

When we won WW1 we said "fuck it, life is too short for this shit", the people slipped into the decadence of the 20's and fell into degeneracy to dull the pain. Nothing mattered

Google "blueprint for Armageddon" by dan carlin.

Best podcast out there.

it's crazy to think we had these massive world wars in which guys like us would all be sent off to on basically a suicide mission not that long ago

it's just mental when you think about it, there was no natural event causing it, it was just something we decided to do

pretty sure the battlefields had color in them sems fake

WW1. Except for Serbia or Armenia and a few others it wasn't an existential war the way it was for the Germans after Barbarosa, the Russians after Barbarosa, the French, the British with the threat to their empire (yes yes Hitler was going to let them keep it but writing on the wall for the British being allowed to 'keep' their empire the way the Vichy got to 'keep' their sovereignty). States conquered by the Germans or Japs or who threw their lot in with the Germans against the Bolsheviks had an existential struggle to galvanize their war effort.

The British lost more men in WW1 than in WW2. French lost more men in WW1 than in WW2. Italy lost more men in WW1 than in WW2. Don't know the specifics of Serbian casualties within Yugoslavia during WW2 but they lost about a quarter of their entire population in WW1. Germany, Russia, the Chinese and Japanese clearly suffered a great deal more in WW2 as did some of the other countries like the Greeks or the Baltics.

Obviously in the thick of it all that lofty bullshit don't mean much but at least there would be a feeling of purpose for most WW2 fighting soldiers. You were fighting to keep the Bolsheviks from raping and pillaging your homeland, you were fighting to keep these Teutonic devils from turning your people into serfs. Not "you were fighting to take back Alsace-Lorraine" "you were fighting to get your nation a 'place in the sun' (the fuck does that even mean kaiser you nigger), you were fighting for some bullshit notion of Pan-slav solidarity.

As much as I detest communists I'd probably become one if I had to go through WW1 and feel like I was risking my life and limb for the bankers, the generals, the aristocrats and the merchants of death.

WWI. Read "Now it can be told". It's only about the British on the western front (and some stuff about theose they fought with and a bit about the Germans from letters) but it's a great catalog of as Dan Carlin would call it, "man's inhumanity to man".

I hear all British students were meant to read it in school. I wish we got that, we don't talk much of wwi here because we weren't the starts of the show.

NIGGA WAT?

The Kaiser and generals all believe in German superiority - that it was the natural order of things for the strong to rule the weak. They applied the survival of the fittest to nations and cultures, Die Kulture.

>3rd battle of ypres
>troops marching on duckboards to front line
>some private slips and gets stuck in mud up to his knees
>suction too great to pull him out. Try using rope to lever and shovels to dig him out... all no good.
>gotta keep marching so leave him there with some water
>pass back by 3 days later.
>poor fucker is still there, except now has sunk to his neck.
>poor fucker has gone mad from his predicament. Begging someone to shoot him.
>mfw i couldnt do it.

That's Sup Forums in WWI form

Actually though, even in our parents lifetime, one was conscripted to basically be the Elite's pawn.

Eh but that was the thing at the time. The British although their race was superior, so did the French, and so did the Germans. And each 'race' had an appreciation for the others. Wwii was "Germans are superior to all other and gas the kikes, Slavs capitalists and commies and kill the others who stand in our way". It was just more radicalized in every aspect.

WWI for the soldiers. WWII for civilians.

WW2

Far far more brutal civilian casualties

Entire cities flattened

Nuke invented

Well you see an Austrian was killed and we you have a secret treaty with them and my country has a guarantee of the defense of another country. Very simple.

>Entire cities flattened
Because that didn't happen in wwi, right leaf?

>outcome
WWII

>combat
WWI

Read storm of steel by Ernst Junger and any WWI books by John Keegan or Hew Strachan.

t. autist

Has anyone read ken follets century long trilogy?
It captures the different nations involved attitudes rather well. Both from perspective of the upper and lower classes.
It really presidents the war as the result of bickering Elite's.

You could not be more wrong.

Germans had respect for the English and the French. It was the slavs and the russian bolsheviks they saw as subhuman.

Hitler wanted Britain to keep her empire. The world would be
>japan rules the east
>german rules europe
>america rules america
>britain fills in the gaps

The modern rhetoric makes it easy to demonize nationalism though - most blue pilled people immediately associate nationalism (let alone natsoc) with "muh master race".

>(If I recall correctly) pic is of Australians
>that guy smiling

Fuckin Aussies

...

this

Shellshock.jpg

seriously, you're a faggot and I'm sure if I got your reddit-tier references I'd be snorting my upper lip as well.

WWII you at least had a 50% chance of returning home alive.

WWI was basically a death sentence.

There was another great bit of foresight by a German officer. I saw it in the youtube.com/watch?v=GAhtrvRQGJU documentary but I forget the episode. I think it was Colmar Freiherr von der Goltz, saying at the siege of kut (British Indian army got beat by Ottomans with the Goltz colonel commanding) that the 20th century would be the story of the "colored nations of the world rising up and throwing off the yoke of our European hegemony" or some such. It was either in that global jihad episode or one of the last ones in the documentary.

But yeah, like said WW1 really defined the modern era. WW2 you could argue equally but beyond mere chronological succession even the major defining features of WW2 were rooted in WW1:

Worldwide crusade of communism? WW1's Russian revolution, the strong momentum socialists and communists got from the chaos and suffering of WW1.
Israel? The 6 gorillion may have fueled sympathies for the creation of Israel by the UN but the idea of a Jewish state was put on paper by the British during WW1.
The shattered confidence and capacities of the colonial powers began the momentum for revolution by those colored nations.


Destroyed the certainties and self-assurance of 19th century European cultural gestalt like said.

Keeping in mind history rhymes rather than repeats I can't help but be cassandra screaming about that ruse-cruise of a Greek horse with regards to always remembering that the progressivist notion of history is utterly false. We can, and eventually will, relapse and go retrograde. It won't necessarily be WW3, might not even be race-war (though I think it will be). But basically - don't take anything for granted.

WW1 definitely.

>time to run across no-man's-land
>If you come back alive we'll shoot you
WWI

...

How will WW3 turn out?

Nazis wanted the world. If they took Europe and Russia, Britain was next, then the US, then Japan.

Some trenches especially on the German side actually weren't that bad

The jungle on the other hand is hell because of the WAY you die. If it's not the enemy it's the jungle itself in the form of disease or animals. Geurilla traps designed not even to kill but to brutality wound so as to demoralize the enemy. If captured you'll wish you were dead

Trench warfare at least had a bit of "honour"
jungle warfare is simply pure hell

Why would Nazi's want to rule land that white people don't live in? Are you this retarded?

...

...

>be british
>die because germany decided to attack a neutral country because it made it easier to attack france because france was allied with russia and Russia was allied with Serbia, and an independent group of serbian civilians murdered an austrian in bosnia

god what a waste, pretty based decade afterwards tho

...

...

Also it's more of a stretch but even the jihadism we face is rooted roughly in WW1 or right after it with the Hashemite/Al-Saud competition for being the holders of the Hijaz/mecca/Medina.

If the Hashemites had won you would have had another tepid Arab state in the Arabian Peninsula a'la the Hashemite monarchies in Iraq and Jordan. Al-Saud won, the saud arab clans had since the emergence of Abdul Al-Wahaab back in the 17th century been the patrons of the Wahhabist creed. They held the Hijaz and the oil-rich Arabian peninsula and have been able to export wahhabi Salafist dogma.

Had the Saudis not won you would have still had jihadism, the Muslim brotherhood was not Wahhabist and I'd contend they've been the big sponsor of jihadism prior to the later 80s and early 90s. But nothing like Al-qaeda or ISIS, no petro-islamist terrorism.

Before the 20th century disease always killed the vast majority of soldiers far more than action. But the sheer magntitude of how much disease would kill vs killed in action is obscene when it came to white folks fighting in jungles.

This was partially because of the retarded break-neck pace and terrible logistics of the French conquest of Madagascar, but that expedition had 6,000 dead of a force of 15,000 men and 6,000 porters (not sure if the 6,000 dead include porters).

25 were killed in combat.

5,975 were killed by disease, malnutrition, or literally killing themselves because of how deplorable conditions were.

WWI was more brutal because it was the world blowing up from decadence. Civilization had reached critical mass, and the decadence started the decline. The decline started with this conflict, which was only as bad as it was because the contrast between what life was prior to WWI and what life was like during WWI.

The 20's saw people attempt to get back the life they had before the collapse - one of decadence and excess. It caused the Great Depression.

The WWII generation grew up during the Great Depression. They grew up during the decline, so war wasn't as bad to them as it was to the generation before them. Because the WWII generation was created in strife and conflict, they fared better in it. That is why we see them as generally better than subsequent generations.

However, civilization is still in decline. Whenever a group of people realizes that civilization is declining rather than advancing, civility will break and there will be violence. Bullshit is the only thing insulating us from what is coming.

Trench warfare was absolutely terrifying. >Line up in trench at tiny port to charge the enemy trench.
>Begin charge
>Enemy begins machine gun fire
>Hope there is enough wall of flesh of others being shot that you get to enemy trench
>Probably not
>Get to enemy trench
>Barbed wire surrounding
>Get shot

Side story: during the war on Christmas, the Brits and Germans met in no man's land and had a little party. This grinded the generals gears btw. The next day they continued the killing.