Is Ww1 starting to be forgotten?

At least by people who don't a large interest in history. Is ww1 starting to fade from people's minds, how long until it might be considered just another war or something people vaguely learn about.

It became that in most countries after ww2 there is just a revival right now because of 100 years celebrations

>WWI
Irrelevant sideshow that only served to distract from the truly seminal conflict of the 1910's

>took the opportunity to attempt an uprising while the majority of british troops were fighting in abroad
>still fails
Paddies really are shit

I'm guessing you don't know what Battlefield 1 is?

WW1's view is starting to be shat up by Anglos media who try to make people believe that Britain rather than France was the main allied power of the war (BF1, 2017 Wonder Woman, most American movies about WW1....etc)
That shitty pic you used won't help as well

>fails

>Tooks five more years to establish their shite republic
>still hasn't taken the north
I would call the easter rising a failure

Pic is Brit propaganda and I find most American movies about ww1 focus on America

Isn't it a bad sign that a game was needed to remind people of ww1

>how long until it might be considered just another war or something people vaguely learn about
soon IMO
it will happen in our lifetime
it will fade into relative obscurity as one of the major events everyone learns about but no one really knows about if you know what i mean
the narrative that it was pointless and inevitable and sort of naturally happened because empires r dum amirite xD will win over
it will become a two-sentence caricature in the same sense civil war or the revolutionary war are distilled into "it was about slaves" (not trying to be edgy here, i know the majority (all?) of the south seceded literally because of the institution of slavery, just that the war and the politics are far more complex) and "it was about freedom/taxes/representation"
so some twenty, forty years down the road we will have "empires itching for war culminated into a big war. everyone wanted it. no one was ready for it. it was bad. there was gas and machineguns. it spawned a lot of politics that would shape the 20th century"

also i might sound bitter but it is only understandable

Battlefield 1 is a terrible interpretation of WW1

>but it is only understandable
i mean the above process (but it also applies to my bitterness haha)

Honestly, that's happening even now.
In highschool, the extent to which we covered WWI was mostly limited to Canada's role (Vimy ridge, Canada's 100 days, etc) and the root cause for it was distilled down to "Everyone was allied with each other so they got forced into a global war over a regional conflict, old tactics were ill suited for new weaponry so we got trench warfare."

...

I wish germany had won
Fuck you, USA

In belgium basicly everybody knows the basics now it has been 100 year. my sister of 10 even knows.

They'd have won if they had focused on Russia instead of invading left and right
France greatly overestimated Germany and wanted to avoid war at all cost
Had Germany not attacked them, it's almost certain France would have stayed out of it

>Had Germany not attacked them, it's almost certain France would have stayed out of it
And endanger themselves with the danger that Germany might vanquish Russia, and come out of the war twice as strong, now looming aggressively France who had lost her sole ally Russia on the continent? Meh.

Nah, France cherished their alliance with Russia as pretty much the only thing that prevented them from being steamrolled by Germany (Germany having twice the population France had, and being more industrialized too) so France would've probably held true to their oath to Russia, and declared war on Germany had it attacked Russia.

Think about it: why would France prefer the idea of fighting Germany alone, rather than the one of fighting Germany alongside Russia?

>Germany lost because the Americans intervened
Shush, calm down little American.

Oesterreich should have its rifle up its bum.

It's ok, current year vidya will help.

>Think about it: why would France prefer the idea of fighting Germany alone, rather than the one of fighting Germany alongside Russia?

France prefered the idea of not fighting Germany at all
Why would Germany even need to attack France after having beaten Russia?

>It's ok, current year vidya will help.

It sure will help to make disgusting britbongs even more overrated than they already were at the expense of France and Russia

WW1 was covered abit at my school, instead we had 4 years of Hitler and the Holocaust
If America hadn't intervened and sold arms to anyone then UK definetly would have won but France would be more ruined.
Germany never could have won a siege war against the great empire

>If America hadn't intervened and sold arms to anyone then UK definetly would have won but France would be more ruined.

If by more ruined you mean having a few hundreds thousands losses, sure
But French and Brits were already winning before Americans arrived
The war would've just been won in mid 1919 instead of late 1918

Because Germans are paranoid and wanted conquest.

No I just mean as in the occupied cities would be worse off and the country side would be more unstable and muddy.

All the Americans brought was morale and STD's

That's more depressing, then something to be celebrated.

America had terrible industry in ww1. Its intervention did not turn the tide of the war at all; it had a small moral impact on the french armies who had been foghtg an enemy twice as strong for 4 years, but not much else.

> that jap
lord, how times change

>UK as leader

lmao, have bongs ever been not deluded?

>he says during the centennial
Maybe in a couple years it'll start, but right now is the peak of remembrance.

Pretty might this

It's a decent-enough mainstream shooter that's historical-enough.
Small victories.

Delusion is their most defining trait

>Germany brings an [on paper] entirely unrelated Great Power into the war and gives another one a pretty great excuse to also get involved solely due to fears of encirclement and having to fight both France and Russia at the same time
>ends up fighting both at the same time anyway, plus Britain
>the war against France bogs down to an endless stalemate and Russia, the big bad wolf that everyone thought was comig to blow the Kaiser's log cabin down, just crumbles like wet paper

What is this, the most historically damning case of overthinking things ever?

>They'd have won if they had focused on Russia instead of invading left and right
Utter nonsense. Both France and Russia had offensive military planning. If they did NOT focus on the west France would have taken the Rhein-Ruhr area and cut out the industrial heart of Germany, making them lose pretty much instantly.

>France greatly overestimated Germany and wanted to avoid war at all cost
They were reasonable in their assessment because without British support Germany would have defeated both France and Russia. If anything, Germany overestimated France and Russia. The Schlieffen-Plan through Belgium would have been unnecessary because they could have beaten France and Russia conventionally.

>Had Germany not attacked them, it's almost certain France would have stayed out of it
Complete nonsense. Poincaré assured the Tsar of his absolute support and there is absolutely no evidence that France wouldn't have followed through with their offensive planning.

This.

It happens to most things in history once they become older.

While WE WUZ KRAUTZ N SHIET might put it in the public's consiousness for a while, i doubt it will last much, specially in time as tense as these.

Schlieffen-Plan
Quick conquest of france, so all the focus could then be put on russia

Yep

A game isn't needed to remind people, it is capitalising on the centenary and increased interest around it, plus the best known US WWI films are arguably Paths of Glory, and All Quiet on the Western Front.

its connection to ww2 will mean it will never be forgotten.
Even if both wars come to remembered by different names, ww1 will always be seen as one of the main causes of ww2

...

>Because Germans
Really? It can't be the Kaiser or his cohorts? It must be the evil and vindictive German citizenry who are 99% genetically and culturally identical to the rest of Western Europe?

Even if France didn't want to fight (and after begin humiliated in 1871 I'd say a sizeable part of the French population did want to fight) they were still allied with Russia.

So underrated you may as well be in your own network.

but they're not, you're talking out of your ass
>they're close, so they must be same!

Stupid. A good amount of french wanted revenge for Alsace-Lorraine. And letting a superpower, extremely hostile to you, with already twice your population take the totality of europe under its rule is not a bright idea.