Childhood is liking WW2

Holy fuck, those pics are insane. And people think WW1 was just two trench lines in France....

Do propaganda pics count?

It's basically making fun of Entente's "Right to self-determination of the people and their rights"

>America's subjects represented by bison instead of the bald eagle.
Interesting choice.

Perspective of Europe in 1915.

I'm more interested as to why Texas and Florida are "subjects". I guess I sort of understand if we're going back to the 1830s, but didn't it become a state in 1845?

What is Austria supposed to be?

Childhood is thinking ww1 was about containing germany

Adulthood is realizing Britain wanted to contain Russia AND germany, while it won the battle it ultimately lost the war

bionic-mosquito/britain-destroyed-western-civilization/

>the Russian steamroller
Hilarious how that one worked out

>That Long Anglo

I like how all the animals are straining and roaring except for the bears, which just look bored. Makes Russia look like he's struggling to hold loose ropes.

>Adulthood is realizing Britain wanted to contain Russia AND germany, while it won the battle it ultimately lost the war
Holy fuck.

>France's national animal is LITERALLY a chicken

Yes i forgot the greatest conflict in human history was actually because archduke ferdinand got assasinated and not the geopolitics of competing empires

Pleb

The Irish lion looks especially fucked off.

>the absolute state of the french empire

"Co-opt Russia or destabilize Russia and cause chaos along its entire frontier – this has been the foreign policy of first Britain, then the United States, for well over 100 years. It continues even today."

"…Russia’s influence and involvement in the east continued to expand at accelerating speed as it developed its own Silk Roads. The construction of the Trans-Siberian Railway, and the connection with the Chinese Eastern Railway, led to an immediate boom in trade, with volumes nearly trebling between 1895 and 1914."

"In 1895, Russia established the Russo-Chinese bank, via its embassy in Paris and capitalized by Russia and France. The bank opened an office in Shanghai shortly thereafter. This bank helped finance the Chinese Eastern Railway."

>"In 1894, before the railways had opened up new possibilities, more than 80 per cent of all customs revenue collected in China was paid by Britain and British companies – whose ships also carried more than four-fifths of China’s total trade."

>"Better developed trade routes by land throughout this “world island” would reduce the value (and leverage) of the trade routes via the British-controlled seas and ports"

No no, I just thought that Britain settled their rivalry with Russia after the Great Game ended. But looking through that lens....it makes sense.

Children like WW 2
Teens like WW 1
Adults like the Eighty Years' War

The brits are sneaky, ill keep posting from the article a few more eye openers.

...how eternal can the Anglo get?

"...It was obvious that Russia’s rise, and that of the new land routes that would bring produce to Europe, would come at Britain’s expense"

"It was during this time, in the late 1890s, that Russia began to take steps to woo Persia. At a time when the mountains effectively blocked Russia from Afghanistan (and, hence, India), Persia offered a clear pathway to Britain’s crown jewel of the sub-continent."

"By this time, Russia had already built the Trans-Caspian Railway, skirting the northern borders of both Persia and Afghanistan. By 1900, there were those in Russia advocating the development of connecting lines into each of these neighboring countries – and the British knew this."

"Nevertheless, if Russia was to develop its “distant and inhospitable frontier territory,” and connect it via rail to trading locations east, west, and south, this would be a damaging blow to Britain."

>"Britain’s position in the east was limited and dangerously exposed. What was needed was the reorientation of Russia’s focus away from this region altogether."

WW1 has more soldier per battle than in WW2
they had the human stockpile of 100 years of no major European war and didn't need to have as much men in factories years later

I don't know if Russia could have successfully invaded the Raj though. It would have been a colossal undertaking.

>The Eternal Longlo

>"...And with this, perhaps, one will find the root cause for the Great War in Europe – a root cause just waiting for an exploitable event. Onto the stage steps the soon-to-be appointed Foreign Secretary, Sir Edward Gray:"

>In a bold statement given to The Times just a month before his appointment at the end of 1905, he made it clear that there would be much to gain if an understanding could be reached about “our Asiatic possessions.” No British government, he said, would “make it its business to thwart or obstruct Russia’s policy in Europe.” It was “urgently desirable,” therefore, “that Russia’s position and influence” should be expanded in Europe – and diverted, in other words, from Asia."

"Britain desired alliance with Russia in order to get Russia focused in Europe, which meant, ultimately, a war in Europe that would consume Russia. When looked through this lens, many subsequent events make sense"

the South. It's the North keeping the South on leash.

Ooh, that's a very good and logical explanation, thanks user.

Oh fuck off with this terrible meme. Calling WWI and WWII the same war is like calling the American Revolutionary War and the War of 1812 the same war.

>"The Great War came not because of an assassin’s bullet, not because of Germany’s entry into a naval race, not because of a blind bloodlust from the Kaiser. For Britain, Russia was seen as both an ally and a rival; for Britain, the war was an opportunity to use turn that ally against itself, thus eliminating the threat to Britain’s control of trade along the sea routes that had replaced the Silk Roads."

>"The end of the war came: Germany was forced to accept all blame for the war. Meanwhile, Britain achieved its objective: progress in Russia would grind to a halt, with the revolutions of 1917 ensuring Russia would remain diverted for quite some time."

>"The cost? Ten million dead from fighting, half-again from disease. Two-hundred billion dollars spent; European economies shattered. Deficits piled high, empires that dominated the globe destroyed."

"Britain had won the battle, if one can refer to the Great War as such within the context of containing Russia; it lost the war."

>"And it took European civilization down with it."

Thats a rooster, ever been attacked by a pissed rooster? i did, these fuckers are crazy and violent, also sharp ass claws.

I run a WW1 blog. What sort of shit ya want?

I'll just dump some shit.

Also doing a phd on WW1. Can answer questions if anyone has any.

I'm very interested in the Eastern Front. Are there any more obscure fronts/battles in the Eastern Front that had some serious influence in the war/front? I recall there being some conflict among Russian generals in Tannenberg or w/e.

the eternal *nglo always win

Eastern Front in WW1 is majorly understudied,probably because what happened after that overshadowed it
i'm 1000% certain there's more men involved in it than in WW2 though

...

Ring of Steel: Germany and Austria-Hungary at War, 1914-1918 is a really good book about the eastern front.
Yeah, one of the common themes when you have army groups is rivalries between generals and the Russian invasion into Prussia was rife with that amongst the Russians. Compound that with terribly trained and equipped troops and basically no communication or coordination and you have a recipe for a standard early War battle.
There was a fair bit of back and forth in terms of who was successful in the east and the war had a lot more of a mobile feel to it. Much bigger distances covered by all forces involved and bigger use of cavalry and less sophisticated defences and attack doctrines.
The Siege of Przemysl was a pretty big deal and an interesting lesser known battle.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Przemyśl

The Italian Front is a really cool one just because of the crazy mountain warfare shit. The stories of Italians and Austro-Hungarians tunneling into mountains and building barracks on the sides of mountains is really interesting.

...

If you're still around, can you dump some Italian Front/War in the Dolomites? Thanks lad, you're a legend for keeping a blog on WW1, people need to know about it.

Sure thing.

...

Meh, I've never really enjoyed sequels.

Still blows my mind how they made the maps so accurately before satellites

...

...

Fucking Italians and their crazy gun carriage.

...

Thanks friend. By the way, what do you plan on doing with your WW1 degree? I fucking love reading about it but I don't know if I could ever do anything with that major.

I hope to teach history at a uni and/or work at a military museum/archive.
But I usually tell people I'm doing it cause I hate money.

tbqh I like world war one especially the concept of dragging Europe into the modern age mixed with the old school imperial mentality seen with having Germany fight for its place in the sun, France out for revenge, and Britain to maintain its empire being very nation centric.
but COME THE FUCK ON WW2 is fucking biblical with cities being engulfed in infernos, mass sea and airborne invasions, the largest tank battle taking place under one of the largest air battles in history, whole armies being crushed with 1000000+ casualties, theaters in Europe/Africa/Asia/Pacific/Middle East, genocide on an unprecedented scale, espionage that inspired bond, and the stakes are way higher with the winning ideologies becoming how everyone would view the modern world and lead to the cold war, the war Ending with one axis nuked, one changing sides, and one being utterly destroyed.
WW2 is fucking mind blowing.

...

This

...

I honestly don't say this much, but that's a wonderful goal. Passing on knowledge is a great gift, I wish you the best.

this
there are a lot of claims from soldiers of the White army that Allies never supported Russia as much as they could, they wanted it to stay weak.

The average life expectancy in Stalingrad was 23 hours,the average life expectancy in Verdun was 17 hours
trench warfare is unimaginably horrendous
WW2 had better scale but WW1 has better battles even if they're all stalemate

Thanks user. I love what I'm doing, and I'm really passionate about passing on my love of history.
I'm actually teaching some 1st year undergrad classes on WW2 at the moment. It's a bit interesting cause I'm at a military university.

Pleb.

Damn, how'd you get into that? I'd love to teach history.

>Verdun is a better battle rather than a depressing shit show
The thing about WW2 battles is that they act as epic moments where the momentum of a theater wide offensive is ground to a halt. Sure WW1 had Verdun but in the end it just wound down into another attack at the Somme. Stalingrad saw an army destroyed by another that had to cross the volga to get to the city and see the Germans reversed.
WW1 saw Galipoli which was equally depressing but D-day sees the Free French return to their homeland in not only the largest seaborne invasion in history but also one of the most symbolic events of the 20th century showing a reversal on the western front.
On the seas WW1 saw Jutland yet in the pacific WW2 saw Pearl Harbour reversed in the quintessential naval battle at Midway ambushing the Japanses.
Look at Dresden and Tokyo, Humanity poured all its resources into destroying each-other in "Fire and Fury" not seen in WW1.
WW1 has a race to the sea but WW2 has a race to Berlin for the fate of Liberalism and Communism.
WW1 is about power but WW2 is ideological.

WW2 has way better battles because they aren't just a meat grinder, they lead to brilliant tactical maneuvers and are key to the momentum of offences and defenses. The stagnant and depressing nature of WW1 is just that, dull, dreary, and depressing where like you said everyone dies super quick and horrendously.

Plus you don't even have commando raids which are awesome.

>WW1
>WW2
Come on niggas, use WWI and WWII.
It's classier.

ITT: babbies first warz

>No soviet "invasion" of afghanistan
Plebs the lot of you

youtube.com/watch?v=lJmnZzduYlE

I believe that being in a trench in ww1 was waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay more fucked up than anythign ww2 had to offer.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_Quiet_on_the_Western_Front
you guys should read this.

>lets give money to bat shit insane Wahhabi rebels
>they are our allies because they believe in god while the communist are godless heathens
>this will never come back to bite us in the ass when we want to take Afghanistan for ourselves

> Florida
> Texas

That's kind of a stretch, Willy

I think its like them being the beging and ending of a story, that story being the end of western European dominance.

WW1 is a war where 50 years of advancements are all pushed together into 4 hellish year of all out war
everything that has been done in WW2 sees its roots in WW1,blitzkrieg,deep battle,combined arms etc

100 million dead people would like to argue against that

How many people in a single corp?

WW2 had two things over WW1:
1. better technology, allowing the developement of effective and rewarding offensive operations. WW1 tech was just too good on the defensive and nigh useless in attacking (see machine guns, heavy artillery). Plus breaking the front brought no good as troops moved on foot and thus had no way to exploit initial successes.
2. stronger national identities, which led to "all or nothing" strategies and impressive scale of conflict.

Side note: you should be burned for saying that there are no commando raids in WW1.
>corps francs
>stosstruppen
Read about it, its gold. Fights in trenches with pistols, handgrenades, carbines and fucking shovels.
Hell commandos were even the chosen German tactic at the end of the war, though they proved a porr choice compared to tanks and motorization.

No

Didn't the guys who were shooting at it know how slope armor works

Imagine the colossal foulup that was the Russian Navy's journey to the East during the Russo-Japanese war, but with infantry.

That's Veeky Forums as fuck

Truly an aesthetic war that was. Humiliating for the Soviets, and still one of my favorite conflicts

Where are the Americans in that pic?

I wish there were more WW1 movies.

WW1 uniforms look like police uniforms, not cool.

...

You have any recommendations for reading about mountain warfare between Austria-Hungary and Italy? I've always wanted to know how that played out.

>The stories of Italians and Austro-Hungarians tunneling into mountains and building barracks on the sides of mountains is really interesting.

That's pretty neato. The only other time I've heard of stuff like this happening was at Dien Bien Phu.

You shut up right now boi

WWI uniforms are cool as fuck

roughly 50 thousand

early war uniform were comfy and dandy
shows that no one really thought this war was gonna go on for more than 1914 actually

Germans learning how to use trench mortar.

German field arty emplacement

ACK THAT PICK HAS LEFT OUT GERMANY'S COLONIES AND THEY ARE OF THE TIME AFTER THE WAR ENDS WHEN BRITIAN PORTUGAL AND FRANCE CONQURED THEM ALREADY

4th row down, two on the right are a marine and army gal.

This chain of logic doesn't make sense. Perhaps England's interests in Asian possessions correspondingly benefited from the effect the war had on Russia, but that doesn't mean in any way that England's actions were the cause.

The main ally of Russia was France - an alliance that started in reaction to the new Kaiser's aggressive actions and was nurtured in heavy economic ties with French investment in Russian railroads. England was mostly indifferent.

If you look at the chain events of the start of the war, England plays no part. It only came in after all the parts were in motion and Germany was marching through Belgium.

I have a couple questions I've been really dwelling on if you had the time to answer them.

Do you believe Germany ever had a chance of victory in the first battle of the Marne, let's say if they had committed to the left flank and hadn't left a gap between Bulow's and Kluck's armies? In my mind after that battle the war was over for the Germans, although if you have a differing opinion I'd love to hear it.

Also, to what degree did the confusion in the upper command of the Germany army effect the outcome of the Battle of Verdun? (i.e. Falkenhayn being secretive af and the commanders never being really sure whether or not to actually take the place)

I'm also trying to visualize the Eastern front and I'm having a bit of trouble. Since the lines were so vast, it seems impossible that either army could cover the whole front, let alone dig trenches across the whole thing. What was they dynamic of warfare there (cavalry running around everywhere while the army randomly set up trenches where needed?)? How did the front (and corresponding breaks in the front) work?

That's all I can think for now. thanks a ton in advance. btw what part of WWI is the phd focusing on?