WWI

[Wilber]

100 Years ago today, Britain (and Canada) declared war on Germany.

[Boges]

I started a thread last month about the 100th anniversary of the Death of Franz Ferdinand being killed. Isn't that seen as the unofficial start of the war?

[Wilber]

I started a thread last month about the 100th anniversary of the Death of Franz Ferdinand being killed. Isn't that seen as the unofficial start of the war?

Yes but we didn't become involved until August 4th.

[Big Guy]

Hey, who won?

[bush_cheney2004]

The Bolsheviks won.

[Boges]

In hindsight no one won because it got followed by a much worse war in 20 years.

[Big Guy]

In hindsight no one won because it got followed by a much worse war in 20 years.

What ??? Why then have a war if nobody wins?

[Wilber]

What ??? Why then have a war if nobody wins?

Lots of wars turn out that way. Pay attention.

[Wilber]

In hindsight no one won because it got followed by a much worse war in 20 years.

For Canada, WWI was actually quite a bit worse than WWII.

[Wilber]

The Bolsheviks won.

Pretty much.

[On Guard for Thee]

What ??? Why then have a war if nobody wins

It's always good for business.

[Moonbox]

What ??? Why then have a war if nobody wins

It's always good for business.

Little bit more to it than that, especially in the case of WW1 and WW2, but I don't think you really care.

[On Guard for Thee]

Little bit more to it than that, especially in the case of WW1 and WW2, but I don't think you really care.

Yes you are correct. There is more to it, but it's still good for business.

[-TSS-]

28th of July was the official start of the war.

[August1991]

What ??? Why then have a war if nobody wins

It's always good for business.

Wars destroy people and things; wars are not good for business.

====

Before 1914, many European cities were multicultural and multilingual. That is, these cities had diverse communities of people who did not share the same language and were frequently unilingual. It was a civilized world where people got along.

By 1950, that world was gone. Because of ethnic cleansing and so-called national self-determination, once multilingual, multicultural European cities had become unicultural, unilingual.

This post-1950 Europe is not sustainable. The world of pre-1914 Europe is natural and inevitable.

[Wilber]

28th of July was the official start of the war.

For us it was August fourth and it cost us nearly 1% of our population killed. It would be the same as going to war today and having 325,000 killed and over twice that number wounded.

Edited August 4, 2014 by Wilber

[GostHacked]

Wars destroy people and things; wars are not good for business.

War is good business for banks and military contractors.

[Boges]

WW2 did effectively end the great depession

[Moonbox]

WW2 did effectively end the great depession

Sort of...

Government borrowing and subsequent military spending certainly expanded the economy and gave people jobs, but that money could have been spent on infrastructure instead of 50,000 soon-to-be-replaced Sherman tanks.

[eyeball]

In hindsight no one won because it got followed by a much worse war in 20 years.

Which in it's turn just morphed into a big endless squabble with outbreaks of violence, big and small, and with no end in sight.

I think most of our grandpops who risked or lost their lives would be puking in their cups if they could see the mess that Gods Kings and Countries have made of things 80 years on.

Edited August 5, 2014 by eyeball

[bush_cheney2004]

...Government borrowing and subsequent military spending certainly expanded the economy and gave people jobs, but that money could have been spent on infrastructure instead of 50,000 soon-to-be-replaced Sherman tanks.

Actually....it was spent on both.

[Moonbox]

Actually....it was spent on both.

Sure, but less money spent on one could mean more for another. I'm not criticizing the Sherman production, especially considering there were 85,000 T-34's in Eastern Europe, but had the war not happened and the government borrowed for infrastructure programs and spent Manhattan Project levels of money on research, it's hard to argue the economy would not have been better off. All of that, of course, assumes that the Axis and Soviets were content within their own borders...

[bush_cheney2004]

....but had the war not happened and the government borrowed for infrastructure programs and spent Manhattan Project levels of money on research

But the war(s) were exactly why the extra R&D and infrastructure spending happened, including post war re-building. There is no way to separate the two into what "might have happened" otherwise.

[Boges]

So the argument immediately shift to WW2.

I read a column in the Sun yesterday claiming that out of the all parties involved Canada could take something tangibly positive out of WW1 as they could find a national identity in their military victories in WW1. Vimy Ridge, Pachendale etc.

[Wilber]

So the argument immediately shift to WW2.

I read a column in the Sun yesterday claiming that out of the all parties involved Canada could take something tangibly positive out of WW1 as they could find a national identity in their military victories in WW1. Vimy Ridge, Pachendale etc.

True, Vimy was the the first big battle planned and carried out by Canadians instead of just being part of a British operation. Also important because they were succesfull where the British and French had failed.