Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

This war was completely retarded. Horrible tactics and strategy, inept military commanders, trench warfare...sheesh. I cannot even decide who the 'bad guys' were. The only positive things that came out of it were gas masks, plastic surgery, and tanks.

Actually, now that I think of it, the British were pretty much assholes at the end of it. And Haig...wasn't good.

What are your thoughts on WWI?

Haig was not the right man for the job. A cavalry man in a trench warfare situation? Not smart. And yes, it was a horrific disaster in terms of tactics.

u son of a........

thats why it is called the uneccesary war..or the great war..or both

Commonly Believed Cause of WW1

Strong feelings of nationalism throughout Europe prior to The Great War created an atmosphere in Europe which made war a likelihood. The spark which ignited the flame and transformed these underlying problems into a frenzy of hostilities happened on June 28, 1914, when Archduke Francis Ferdinand of Austria was assassinated by a Serbian student, Gavrilo Princip, while visiting Serbia.

The Real Cause of WW1

According to Albert Pike, the First World War was designed to enable the Czarist Government in Russia to be finally and completely overthrown and replaced with a new atheist, Communist government.

History records that this First World War did indeed occur as predicted. The Western powers in Europe, in conjunction with the United States, financed Lenin's expedition into Russia, and financed his government consistently. The US has financed Russian Communism at least once per decade since then.


A little closer to home:

In 1909, the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace was tasked to answer the following question posed by the US government: "If it is desirable to alter the lives of an entire nation, is there any means more efficient than war?" After a year of research, the answer came back: "There are no known means more efficient than war, assuming the objective is altering the life of an entire nation."



And for what reason would anyone want to alter the lives of an entire nation?



Historian Walter Mills wrote the following about the purpose of the war and about Colonel House's basic intent: "The Colonel's sole justification for preparing such a batch of blood for his countrymen was his hope of establishing a new world order, of peace and security...."

Actually, I like pre-Passchendaele Haig.

Casualties in WW1
Germany 1,800,000
Soviet Union 1,700,000
France 1,385,000
Austria 1,200,000
Great Britain 947,000
Japan 800,000
Romania 750,000
Serbia 708,000
Italy 460,000
Turkey 325,000
Belgium 267,000
Greece 230,000
USA 137,000
Portugal 100,000
Canada 69,000
Bulgaria 88,000
Montenegro 50,000
TOTAL 11,016,000

Why are you posting that?

all wars are retarded

tanks? a destructive weapon is a positive thing

Albert Pike needs to read history a bit closer

albert pike predicted the wars before they started
One message that Albert Pike received from his spirit guide, and which in reality we know to be a demonic vision, he described in a letter that he wrote to Mazzini, dated August 15, 1871. This letter graphically outlined plans for three world wars that were seen as necessary to bring about the One World Order, and we can marvel at how accurately it has predicted events that have already taken place. This is not because the devil has powers of prophecy, but because his agents have undertaken to manipulate political events to closely follow his designs.

his prediction of why WW I started was wrong

if you study the build up of society and its always moving boundaries it aint all that hard to predict future wars or events. Key elements here Nasionalism and religion

WW1 started because they were two big familes. ONe failmy(austria) attacked a small member of the other family(Serbia).So then the elder (russia) got invlovecd. THen germany, then france then Britain and its whole empire. Then after years of bloodshed the Americans came in late.

No, not all wars are retarded. And yes, technological advances are a good thing; tanks were one of the things that eliminated trench warfare (thank goodness).

This thread is not yet prepared to die.

People- especially people who have only studied this at school- often talk loosely about 'horrible tactics' but unless you are spending your entire career studying Gallipoli, the truth is far more complex. Some of the finest tactics in the history of warfare were employed by both sides.

It was going to happen anyway. There were too many ethnic differences and too many disputed territories. Add to that the hostility between nations and some broken treaties and you get WWI.

And what's interesting about this is that after the war was over and everyone was signing papers in Versailles. Another war could have been avoided earlier. The Vietnam war would have never happen or would have been very different if only diplomats could had listen to Ho Chi Minh when he petition equals rights in Indochina. But of course the man was Asian and in room full of arrogant aristocrats no one paid attention.

Ush made a good point.

Dean about ppl predicting anything I call it pure luck

schmoll

and as always my poor country has been ignored.

Poland was not an independant nation during wwI

You think you're the only one? Where's India. We helped Britian in WWI, and WWII. And yet, we get no/little recognition.

Cockal Doodle F*cking Do Britain, thanks for nothing.

again, Indian casualties is listed as British since you were under British rule at that time

How were the Brittish assholes at the end of it?

Kept the blockade up and starved 750,000 Germans.

The allies were assholes during WWI, that's for sure. They blamed everything on Germany, which caused them to go into dpression. Maybe if the allies ha some mercy in the Treaty of Versailles, WWII wouldn't have happened. Hitler came into power because the allies were afraid to look into him and what the Germans were doing during the 'time of peace' (1918-1938). The allies at least could have defended their own Treaty...

I believe Hitler (and many historians in general) call the
Versailles Treaty a "Carthaginian Peace" (?), in reference
to the peace treaty that ended the first war between Rome
and Carthage. That treaty was also unjustifiably harsh to
Carthage (that war's causes were also unclear); it would
also lead to a second, more destructive war (sort of).

By the way, I should point out that people who obsess over
"trench warfare" seem to be forgetting that trench warfare
was only present in the western European front. The Eastern
European front (Germany against Russia; Soviet Union didn't
exist then), the southern European front (Italy against
Austro-Hingarian Empire), and the "Middle Eastern" front (UK
aganst the Ottoman Empire), were not fought in the trenches.

As for the causes, considering that Europeans already fought
three all-out wars with each other (The Thirty Years War; The
Seven Years War/French-Indian War; The Napoleanic Wars),
it isn't the least bit surprising that they would fight two more
ones. You can't have so many ethnic groupsnations living in
such a small peice of land, and not have occasional conflict,
especially when severla of these nations are world colonial
powers.

Originally posted by FeceMan
This war was completely retarded. Horrible tactics and strategy, inept military commanders, trench warfare...sheesh. I cannot even decide who the 'bad guys' were. The only positive things that came out of it were gas masks, plastic surgery, and tanks.

Actually, now that I think of it, the British were pretty much assholes at the end of it. And Haig...wasn't good.

What are your thoughts on WWI?

Yeah, world war 1 sucked. Wolrd war II kicked ass though

ehh , 30 years war was a war fought between 1618 -1648, the midle part there was a war fought in America!!!!! 1754-1763(actually 9 years) and Napoleonic wars 1796-1815 so what consideration of what wars fought 100 years prior to WW I with totally different enemys has to do with WW I , i really am pussled too and intriged to learn about

you know, i said world war 1 sucked, but the trenches were pretty cool.

guess you would have a different opinion if you were a soldier in those cool trenches of yours

Originally posted by finti
guess you would have a different opinion if you were a soldier in those cool trenches of yours

Probably, but you got to admit that the footage from world war 1 is shit compared to the footage from world war II

might be because of the simple reason that fotage like most things developed to be more advanced during the 21 years prior to the end of WWI and begining of WW II

Originally posted by finti
ehh , 30 years war was a war fought between 1618 -1648, the midle part there was a war fought in America!!!!! 1754-1763(actually 9 years) and Napoleonic wars 1796-1815 so what consideration of what wars fought 100 years prior to WW I with totally different enemys has to do with WW I , i really am pussled too and intriged to learn about

First off, The French/Indian war was an extension of the Seven
Year's War.

As far as your general query, I never meant to make a direct causal
connection between these wars, and WWI, the point I was making
was that such all-out continent-wide European wars, where certain
nations ally themselves to others, usually to fight one very powerful
enemy (and his allies), are not new. WWI was just another such war.

Originally posted by King Burger
By the way, I should point out that people who obsess over
"trench warfare" seem to be forgetting that trench warfare
was only present in the western European front. The Eastern
European front (Germany against Russia; Soviet Union didn't
exist then), the southern European front (Italy against
Austro-Hingarian Empire), and the "Middle Eastern" front (UK
aganst the Ottoman Empire), were not fought in the trenches.
Germany vs. Russia....hahahaha.

I apologize, but that is a real joke.

Originally posted by FeceMan
Germany vs. Russia....hahahaha.

I apologize, but that is a real joke.


????

^ Russia was beyond pathetic in WWI.

World War I was the tutorial for World War II.

Everyone knows that.

I mean, George Bush is obviously a keen video games player, He's already got us onto level III and is probably doing his best to get us into IV.

*spoilers*

The final level will be fought on the antarctic against the Eskimos.

What a guy.

I am the GM so I promote GWB to level 17. He now can cast Atomic Rain on all those sorry-ass Orcs.

Ah yes...World War I.
I was alive back then (past life).

Back then we called it 'The Great War.'

It really was

you mean beside the fact that they had huge domestic turmoil that ended in a civil war at that time?

Originally posted by finti
you mean beside the fact that they had huge domestic turmoil that ended in a civil war at that time?
And they charged into battle with inadequate equipment...go hand-to-hand combat vs. machine guns.