The Great War

WW2 was the same exact thing, Germany just doubled down and the casualties doubled aswell

the first world war is the first example of modern warfare. world war two was just more brutal and was fought by a man who didnt mind killing millions just to see Germany get the allies back for embarrasing him the last time around. our modern world has been effected by the first world war more then the second.

it was a long time ago

WW1>WW2 in terms of aesthetic. Snow is nice, but Mud is a better background.

Because America had little to no part in it. You feel like WW1 is less popular than WW2 mostly because less movies are about WW1 ans your History teacher focused more on WW2.

Burgers always want to feel like they are the main character and it's impossible with WW1. Since their culture is now globalized, everyone now assumes WW1 is less important.

And that's bullshit. WW2 is just an aftermath of WW1 and the first War destroyed European power way more than the second. More soldiers died in WW1, more civilians in WW2

WWI is my favorite industrialized war desu.

WW2 had mud also.

Faciam or nazism isn't socialism you dumb American

Muh genocide. Sure, Willy could be a bit of a bastard, but he wasn't muh 6 gorillian evil.

That's not to say the Holocaust didn't happen or some idiotic /pol/ shit, but every good story needs a good villain. Genocide makes for a better villain than strictly geopolitical goals.

>More soldiers died in WW1
"No". Unless you mean percentage of army divisions then Russia almost lost more soldiers in WW2 that all of WW1 combined.

Because no portion of either side in ww1 had conflicting ideologies or had any type of moral upper hand. Just a bunch of old aristocratic colonial leader who wanted a war for various old world reasons. It was the war that you pointed to say that war is hell with soldiers dying at rates nobody thought could happen again in the civilized countries. It had no major advances or breakthroughs at the end like in ww2. A stalemate in the east and a surrender after years of fatigue in the west. Plus America had very little to do with it and Hollywood can't make some cowboy movie about soldiers saving the day.

that's not true, Germany was an autoritarian regime based on the all mighty military power and old aristocracies while France was a post Dreyfus country with intellectuals ruling the political scene, pro-jewish socialists who barely accepted to support the military

> national socialism
> socialism

Americans are incapable of perceiving reality in more (or fewer) categories than "good and evil", or "right and wrong".
Since american culture and thinking is currently dominant, any part of history that can not be pressed into these two categories without too many contradictions is ignored in the mainstream.

To add to this, evil nazis and/or commies (depending on your own political leanings) are still lurking around every corner, so WW2 can be used for propaganda purposes. On the other hand, nobody seriously advocates for a return of the old-school imperialism that led to WW1. We have more subtle methods of enslavement today.

Most people on Veeky Forums don't really care about history. WW1 is uninteresting to most people because it's not as relevant to modern politics and discourse as later conflicts.

The only people who have much reason to be interested in WW1 are Prussiaboos, communists, Turk shills, and autistic Balkanites.

Which was offset by their alliance with a tsarist russia.

Had it been AH, Germany and Russia v Britain and France than it wouldve made sense.

It depends on what country you are in. There were massive commemorations in the UK a few years ago.

You don't know what imperialism is if you think it ended in 1917

Yeah but Westerners don't like to admit that the Eastern Front happened

>hurr durr it has socialism in the name it must be socialism
The frightening thing is that idiots like you are exactly like the people who were duped by Hitler. If some party came along with the hot meme buzzwords you like in the name, you'd vote for and join them no questions asked.

What country are you in?
We commemorate it yearly in the UK.

>WW1 was old world order vs new world order
Is that why the most autocratic state fought on the side of the "good guys" who won? Also Greece wasn't exactly much better than Russia and also went Allies, it was just a 19th century war over territory fought with 20th century technology

>socialism/communism
powerful state with cucked people
>fascism
powerful state with cucked people

America wins again

>America talking about cucked people

Agreed
The splintered treelines have always struck me.

We've moved past extreme clashes of ideology. Rich assholes fighting over who gets to exploit more people hits closer to home to the modern elite. They're not going to let the masses focus on the latter.

b/c the ruling class doesn't want to remind people they sent millions of young men to a miserable death, all so they could gain new colonies to rape and pillage

>Not really. WW1 was old world order vs new world order
Uh no. It was a classic clash of empires.

You had 3 of Europe's oldest empires fighting each other, in addition to colony-grabbing abroad.

T. Europoor who relies on America for national defense

>he says as the police come to arrest him for islamophobic thoughts

No Hollywood style story to tell there, unless you throw wonder woman in. The simple fact is that there were many people to blame, yet none of those people were actually in the war

You expect far too much from the average commie and germaboo.

it seems to have made a large resurgence with the release of battlefield 1 for better or for worse

It's a pointless war

Here in Belgium WWI remembrance is way bigger than WWII desu, and i'm guessing it's the case in France and the UK as well.
>WWII: nothing really happens for a few years, some combat here and there at the beginning and the end but that's about it
>WWI: West-Flanders becomes Stalingrad-tier

United States

It started over a hundred years ago and the war that happened 20 years later was more destructive

>all these people assblasted at the US

>You don't know what imperialism is if you think it ended in 1917
Probably because he uses the original definition of imperialism rather the marxist definition.

World War 1 was a bunch of European Empires killing each other because Serbs decided to Chimpout and killed the heir to the Habsburg Empire. World War 2 was a clash of Ideologies, Civilizations, and Races. Fascism vs Communism, Chinese Civilization vs Japanese Civilization, Germans vs Slavs. World War 2 also lead to Pax Americana and the invention of Nuclear weapons. which are the only reasons World War 3 hasn't happened yet.

it's still the edgy sequel that steals the glory.

If WW2 never happened, the first world war would still be "that one particularly shitty war"

Another reason is that America had a more significant participation in the second war, and Hollywood ran with it.

Anyone whose opinion differs from this is uninformed.

Comparing socialists to national socialists is like comparing modern liberals to classical liberals.

They share a name but they aren't the same fucking thing.

>You don't know what imperialism is if you think it ended in 1917

He said the beginning of the end, not the end. And the first world war basically set off the collapse that occurred over the following 50 years or so.

Why should it surprise you that a war that the US hardly participated in (at least militarily) is overshadowed by a war the US participated in considerably?

The first world war wasn't America's war, not to the same degree it was for most of Europe, and not to the same degree the second war was for the US.

WW1 was an incoherent mess of a plot. There was no telling who the bad guy was really. Motivations were whack.

The sequal however took the initial idea and ran with it. It took the best parts and blew it up times 100.

More machine guns, more planes, more tanks, more deaths.

It also trimmed the fat and replaced it with the best parts (goodbye trenches, hello urban warfare).

They also expanded the antagonist. Clear motivations (now with the added threat of genocide helping add tension to the plot. Plus it had the most memorable central antagonist ever (Hitler himself, who's likeness rivals Darth Vader in fame)

And it did that thing where the obscure characters from the first one get bigger roles. Italy's character arc was interesting, as a country unhappy with the result of the first story accidentally causes an ideology that leads to the events of the sequel. Japan's inclusion was also a good favorite, it added the Asian market, along with more exotic locations to explore.

As well they realized Americans were well received the first time so this time they brought them in earlier and gave them more things to do, and bigger toys to use.

As well the whole subplot of different ideologies working together to defeat a common enemy was also new at the time. No longer was everyone a boring nationalist, now you add communism and capitalism to the mix (to foreshadow another rivalry from the disappointing threequal stuck in development hell)

>W1 was an incoherent mess of a plot. There was no telling who the bad guy was really. Motivations were whack.

"In the Great War, we were all orcs." J. R. R. Tolkien

>Japan's inclusion was also a good favorite
Japan was in WW1 as well you retard.

Too defensive. You only need to stack 5 infantry 5 planes, sit down and watch your enemy troops getting slaughtered.

all your wars belong to US

...

>8%

Damn, and that was before Battlefield 1 came out. I like that the Russian Empire wasn't even on the list though.

The correct answer is Austria-Hungary.

Overestimated by 8%.

Jews weren't a primary victim.

They both started because of the same reasons

No clear bbeg to hate. Killing Nazis is always okay because they're all Jew murderers right ? Killing Hans who just wants to get back to his family in Hamburg not so much . Makes morality much more black and white. Harder to tell stories.

I am ashamed of being human.

Because it's been turned into a meme war. Gas was a shitty weapon that was only ever effective against Russian troops because they didn't have masks. Artillery at the time was still tossing shrapnel shells rather than high explosives, meaning they were essentially shooting flak at each other. Most soldiers spent relatively little time in front line trenches and those shell-shock movies are heavily exaggerated when not outright fakes.

Most importantly the French and Germans were the important players and pop history is nothing if not ethnocentric. A British solider was more likely to die in the Crimean War than in WWI. By itself, the Union army in the American Civil War was bigger than its WWI military per capita.

The thing that gets me with WW1 is the landscapes, really.
It makes it much more real.

People think of WW1 as "that terrible war that happened in the Trenches" when many forget that these hellscapes were beautiful parts of Europe at one point.

When you imagine something like pic related as a beautiful green rolling European countryside and see what's been done, it brings to reality the nature of the war.

>not remembered as much
>literally a 5 year programme of memorials, exhibitions, documentaries and shows

yank spotted

>implying it isn't

Europe remembers it as it should be.

America doesn't.
Nothing bad has ever really happened to America on a similar scale except things that America inflicted upon itself.

Americans are store-bought europeans.

In terms of holding off the Germans (human sacrifice) it was France. In terms of actually beating (starving) them it was Britain.
I think both were necessary components. Without either one Germany probably wins in the West or at least holds out long enough to negotiate a favorable deal.

>Americans are store-bought europeans
>Americans are Europeans
You take that back.

WW1 didnt really have a major populist take power from the old goverment. Its more of an awkward showing of the old goverments fucking up which the people that be dont really want to remind people of. WW2 on the other hand shows the follies of facism and populism so it isnt as awkward to mention.

Because the 140 character limit

Lack of Kike shill

I fucking know you aggressive swine, did you not see the beginning point about RETURNING actors with bigger roles

B-

Do you think Germany could have won if they didn't attack Belgium and brought the Brits into the war?

They all are.

>Gas was a shitty weapon that was only ever effective against Russian troops because they didn't have masks.

Definitely. That's where the stalemate that lead to the development of chemical weapons happened. totes.

not him, but the British would almost certainly join the allies even if Beligum wasn't invaded, but it might have took a few more weeks or months, definitely when gas started to get used. You have to realize that Germany was completely isolated diplomatically at the start of WW1, the British were at first fairly neutral at the turn of the 20th century to Germany but after the two Moroccan Crises and the naval arms race the British realized that Germany was a huge threat to them and supported France even if not bound by treaty.

a terrible brother's war
we remember

Lafayette, we are here!

>.com

Is this shit real?

Commiefornia aint america famalamadingdong

>"... people duped by Hitler "
So Europeans then?

The Somme was just a meme guise

>lead to the development of chemical weapons
Yeah, they were trying to develop something that was actually useful. Something that didn't immediately dissipate in cold weather like early irritant gases (essentially tear gas), something that couldn't be effectively countered by a wet rage as with chlorine, something that didn't take 48 hours to produce symptoms as with phosgene.

This eventually led to mustard gas, itself only effective as the blistering agent produced temporary casualties, casualties from which nearly all recovered. Something like 95% of British gas casualties were the result of mustard gas, yet only 1% of British post-war disability pensions went to gas victims.

Gas caused

WWII way overshadows it, in almost every way possible, technological advancement, ideology, motive.

there's clear villains in WWII that most all can agree are the bad guys, WWI is a lot more nuanced and needs more background information and patience to understand.

>Democratic People's Republic of Korea
must be democracy then

>Since american culture and thinking is currently dominant
no it is not stop with this meme

No it doesn't offend me at all. It's baffling me. American flag looks like clown pantalons kek. And these oversized cars.

Some good answers in this thread
But also perhaps because it's not a simple good Vs evil narrative.
Kaiser Wilhelm was no Hitler

Because normies think it's not good guys vs bad guys like ww2, even though the entente were clearly morally higher. Also you're reflecting the American cultural idea there, which although spread easily because of their hegemony is quite wrong, but because they didn't play that large a part in ww1 the whole war is downplayed
So bolsheviks and Mensheviks don't count?

No because of the aftermath of ww1 not being dealt with properly, Germany should have gone back to Hannover, Bavaria, Austria and the other electors

They're both retarded ideologies, and let's leave it there
>no moral hand
>Kaiser 'genocide some African nations then enslave the belgiums because we ran out of blacks' Wilhelm