Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Does anyone else here feel that WWII was a huge waste while WWI wasn't?
I mean, I know that World War I was extremely atrocious and that I certainly wouldn't have been able to bear fighting in the trenches. However, the outcome of World War I did have a lot of positive aspects to it. For instance, Serbia and Romania were able to achieve their dreams of putting almost all ethnic Serbs/ethnic Romanians under their rule, Czechoslovakia was created, Poland was recreated, the Baltic countries were created, Finland was created, and the Arabs in the Middle East finally became free of Ottoman rule (albeit with them unfortunately being put under British and French rule instead of being given independence). (I'm certainly not forgetting the Armenian genocide here. That was a massive tragedy and atrocity and should never be forgotten. That said, though, as I stated above, World War I did have a lot of positive consequences.)
Now, compare World War I with World War II. I mean, Yes, it's great that Hitler and Mussolini were defeated, but it would have been much better for someone to put a bullet to Hitler's head back in 1923 or even in 1939 (ex. Georg Elser). Indeed, the only positive consequences of World War II was that Japan got kicked out of China and Korea (both of which might have very well eventually happened anyway even without World War II) and that almost all ethnic Ukrainians were put into one state--albeit with this state being the Ukrainian SSR inside of the extremely oppressive and brutal Soviet Union. However, these things in themselves simply weren't worth the war. Indeed, as the result of World War II, Eastern Europe suffered for half a century--first under Nazism, and then under Communism. Western Europe--with the exception of Germany--didn't suffer anywhere as near long-term damage from World War II but, like Eastern Europe, had a lot of its Jews murdered in the Holocaust. As for Germany, its fate would have been much, much better in a scenario where the Nazis never came to power. Indeed, it would have kept its Jewish population, the ethnic Germans in Eastern Europe (including eastern Germany and the Sudetenland) wouldn't have gotten expelled, and East Germany wouldn't have had to endure almost half a century of Communist rule.
Indeed, the one thing about World War I that I deeply regret is the Russian Revolution. Frankly, the victorious Entente/Allies should have tried making a German overthrow of the Bolsheviks a necessary condition for an armistice on the Western Front.
Anyway, though, does anyone here agree with my broad point here? Specifically, that World War I achieved many good things in spite of its brutality while World War II didn't achieve many good things and thus was much more of a waste than World War I was?
Agreed. Many historians regard it, at least in Europe, as a single conflict with a 21 year hiatus. WWI certainly had repercussions, but it really did not settle the political situation in Europe, and the Versailles treaty's harsh terms certainly sewed the seeds for future conflict.
So it would've been better to allow Hitler & Tojo to dominate Europe & the Far East with their authoritarian empires built on genocide?
I didn't say that, now did I? Rather, I would have preferred that both of them would have gotten shot in the head, say, in the 1920s. (Though I am unsure that getting rid of Tojo would have prevented Japan's militarism.)
For the record, I am certainly not saying that World War II was not worth fighting. Rather, what I am saying is that the benefits obtained from this war--such as the destruction of Nazism--could have been obtained at a much lower cost in human lives (for instance, by having someone shoot Hitler in the head back in the 1920s). After all, no Hitler means no Nazi Germany and at a much lower cost in lives than the efforts which were required to destroy Nazi Germany in real life.
and the Versailles treaty's harsh terms certainly sewed the seeds for future conflict.
These terms could have been renegotiated without war, though. Indeed, reparations were indefinitely suspended in 1931 and Germany was able to re-militarize the Rhineland and acquire Austria and the Sudetenland without war.
These terms could have been renegotiated without war, though. Indeed, reparations were indefinitely suspended in 1931 and Germany was able to re-militarize the Rhineland and acquire Austria and the Sudetenland without war.
The Versailles treaty (coupled with the economic trauma of the depression) led directly to the popularity of the Nazis. Once Hitler assumed power, surely you don't think that war could have been avoided, other than by allowing Hitler free reign over Continental Europe/Russia, do you? History has shown that Hitler would not be appeased.
Remilitarization of the Rheinland and the territorial acquisitions you mentioned occurred without war only because France/UK were led by sane leaders who feared a repeat of WWI. They allowed Hitler to do what he did to avoid massive loss of life. Once they realized that Hitler was NOT a sane leader and really wanted to dominate Europe, they were forced into the war. That was the only way to stop Hitler.
I didn't say that, now did I? Rather, I would have preferred that both of them would have gotten shot in the head, say, in the 1920s. (Though I am unsure that getting rid of Tojo would have prevented Japan's militarism.)
For the record, I am certainly not saying that World War II was not worth fighting. Rather, what I am saying is that the benefits obtained from this war--such as the destruction of Nazism--could have been obtained at a much lower cost in human lives (for instance, by having someone shoot Hitler in the head back in the 1920s). After all, no Hitler means no Nazi Germany and at a much lower cost in lives than the efforts which were required to destroy Nazi Germany in real life.
Hitler had quite a few fanatics following him and buying into his ideology. There seems to be a misconception that the Nazis took over Germany without the consent of those living there. That is not the case. The Versailles treaty definitely had a damaging effect on the German economy. The worldwide depression further wrecked the economy, to a much larger degree than in other nations. The German people supported the Nazis out of desperation. Surely had Hitler been assassinated pre-war, some other Nazi leader would have stepped up and run Germany. That may have been an even greater disaster since Hitler was a good political leader, but a horrible military strategist. Hitler time and again insisted on dictating military strategy with disastrous results. Had another leader taken over and NOT insisted on controlling strategy, who knows? Maybe the Germans would have fought a more sane war in Russia, with leaders being allowed to make reasonable tactical retreats in order to avoid disastrous encirclements like Stalingrad. The Eastern Front was a close decision; it was not at all obvious that the Red Army would prevail. With better military strategy, the Nazis might well have won.
Even more, perhaps another leader doesn't have the obsession with invading Russia that Hitler did. With all the resources that in the event were dedicated to the Eastern Front instead focused against Britain and/or Africa, do the Allies even have a chance to defeat Germany? Does the hypothetical new leader even declare war on the US?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
