Russia Actually managed to send millions of soldiers againt AH and Germany forcing Germany to deploy 3 armies at his Eastern border. Thanks to Russia, Germany had to fight in two front and this strategic advantage is priceless. Without it, Germany could have put all his armies against France and AH could have also sent severals armies.
Without this second Front, AH, Bulgaria and Ottomans could have controlled all the Balkans Front without any problems and Italy would likely never accept to enter the war.
so russia essentially gets bonus points for existing? a higher ranking just because of its geography?
britain did contribute more effective troops and unlike ww2 the western front was the decisive front
Hudson Hughes
For real though: 1) British Empire 2) German Empire 3) USA 4) French Empire 5) Russian Empire 6) Austro-Hungarian Empire 7) Irrelevant Based on available manpower, industrial production, GDP, naval size, artillery suze etc.
>Based on available manpower, industrial production, GDP, naval size, artillery suze etc. The only thing GB is ahead of Germany in any of these things is Naval Power.
Kayden Phillips
You must also include the empire however. The British empire had a larger GDP, nore industrial output, greater manpower and a larger navy
>LE BONG XDD When will /int/posters go back? They're just as bad as /pol/tards.
Noah Powell
Colonies are a meme. They basically fall under naval power.
Justin Rivera
For comparison see this. British empire was number 1 in WW1 until 1918 where USA took over THE ECONOMICS OF WORLD WAR I: AN OVERVIEW ... - University of Warwick PDFwarwick.ac.uk ww1overview2005
Still the London government did not have the amount of control over these areas that you can just add up these numbers. Where in the war did this adventage manifest itself anyways? Every plus of having colonies like resource supply can also be fulfilled by controling global trade, or am I missing out on something obvious?
Kevin Lopez
Britain blockaded Germany and could rely on resources from outside rather than having to do production itself
Ryder Parker
>uk lower than russia >russia fucking pulled out of the war before it was over >uk there to the end and enforced the naval blockade which contributed massively to starving Germany of food and supplies
el oh el
Henry Green
>the continentals are mad at Based Britain yet again hence the creation of this thread
oh, think twice it's just another day for you and me in paradise
Something you might find interesting the deaths caused by the British Blockade amounted to around 750,000 which is 300% more than the deaths suffered by the German Army in the Eastern Front and roughly around 50% less than the casualties suffered on the Western Front.
Dominic Thomas
German propaganda
Chase Williams
Yes but this is because of naval power.
Colton Hall
This level of delusional is legendary
Aaron Williams
This would be true even if Britain wouldn't have any colonies. The strangulation they put on thr German economy is in the first place because they denied Germany the access to tbe world market. With their superior navy the Brits have access to oversea goods, either from colonies or the world market. I don't think the difference would be to great.
Jackson Wright
With colonies you don't have to pay for the goods. You can seize it just like you do in Britain
Thomas Thomas
>the combat strength of Russian land troops was a disappointment for everyone And the British wasn't?
Jordan Price
Tell that to the Germans who shit themselves during the mad minute and thought they were fighting MG's
Hunter Cruz
>The men all chilled to the bone, almost too exhausted to move and with the depressing consciousness of defeat weighing heavily upon them. A bad defeat, there can be no gainsaying it... we had been badly beaten, and by the English – by the English we had so laughed at a few hours before.[56]—Captain Walter Bloem
> Four German battalions attacked the Nimy bridge, which was defended by a company of the 4th Battalion, Royal Fusiliers and a machine-gun section led by Lieutenant Maurice Dease. Advancing at first in close column, "parade ground formation", the Germans made easy targets for the British riflemen, who hit German soldiers at over 1,000 yards (910 m), mowing them down by rifle, machine-gun and artillery fire.[25][26] So heavy was the British rifle fire throughout the battle that some Germans thought they were facing batteries of machine-guns.[27]
The English army was literally the worse army in the war between 1915-1917. Shit trenches,shit equipment,shit artillery and shit troops. The 100,000 initial troops were good, but the 800,000 people conscripted were awful. If it wasn't for the French the Western front wpuld have fallen pretty quickly
Kayden Cox
Of course you have to pay for imports and to seize goods as a government should be much more difficult in a country which you do not control and tends to be unstable.
Angel Johnson
>shit equipment You’ve just proven that you know nothing
Dominic Peterson
I'd agree the 800,000 were pretty awful soldiers initally, one of the failures in the Dardanelles was not putting the newbies in the already dug trenches and using veterans for the second round of landings
Hunter Young
They were fresh conscripts. It was the first time in Britain's history of using a conscript army. The performance of the BEF in the first days of the war was vital for buying time for the French to counter attack at the Marne.
Anyways, all this "if it wasn't for the French army being in France..." is getting tiresome. You kind of expect the French to put some effort into defending their homeland. As it is, the BEF lasted longer before retreating than the French Fifth Army, and towards the end of the war the British conscript army was really dialing it up. The French armies at that point had a higher rate of desertion than the British, despite defending their own homeland.
Josiah Hughes
What a fucking awful reply
Gavin Jones
>shit equipment Gee i wonder who invented the tank...
Xavier Gonzalez
The French
Tyler Morris
Conceptually or actually? Because Austria had a guy proposing a three man armoured tractor with a revolving turret in 1911, but everyone thought it sounded dumb
>England = Britain It's one of the easiest way to weed out brainlets about British history
Jose Cook
I didn't say Britain though, nor mean it. The first true tank (i say true to refer to use of caterpillar tracks) was designed and built in England (Birmingham i think)
Kayden Phillips
They were Churchill's idea, though and he was English.
Yes, in Britain Churchill formed a committee to look into the feasibility of it, he didn't come up with the fucking idea because the idea had existed at least 4 years prior to that committee
Jack Martin
Churchill was the biggest proponent of it, though, and his influence ensured that the program would receive funding. Even after Churchill was demoted from being Sea Lord after the Gallipoli debacle, he made sure to impress upon his successor the importance of the project before leaving.
Robert King
>the combat strength of Russian land troops was a disappointment for everyone It's not the troops fault that their leadership was retarded.
Josiah Young
Still dosen't make it his idea, especially when it was the army rejecting the idea that led to the admiralty picking it up in the first place
Thomas Hughes
No idea comes from just one person. It's reasonable to say that Churchill was the most influential proponent, and that it wouldn't have gotten anywhere if he hadn't been pushing for it so hard.
Nathan Adams
It's reasonable to say the committee was a deciding factor, it's not reasonable to say "the tank was Churchill's idea"
Easton Evans
Pretty good list, but I'd tie Russia and France, and I'd put A-H above UK
Brayden Myers
The British Naval blockade of Germany was arguably a bigger factor in the outcome of the war than all of the land battles.
Wyatt Thompson
A-H should be the very bottom of the list considering its potential and failures
Thomas Martinez
>putting anyone above UK Why can't people just use numerical comparisons
Wyatt Wright
The blockade didn't really start hurting Germany's ability to fight until late 1916.
Elijah Hughes
Without even necessarily agreeing with that statement, that's only halfway thorough the war.
Jason Fisher
>Canada not on the list
You have any idea how important creeping barrage was?
Connor Brooks
>Germans who shit themselves during the mad minute and thought they were fighting MG's
To whoever say that Italy was irrelevant, you're dumb. Italy single handedly kept the austro-hungary army occupied since the fall of Russia in march 1917. Imagine if they all send their troops in France in 1917, when America still had not joined the conflit.
Wyatt Peterson
1. USA 2. UK 3. Germany 4. Japan 5. France 6. Italy 7. Austria/Hungary 8. Russia 9. Ottoman
Anyone who says different is an idiot desu
Jonathan Bennett
Unless they were under the direct command and supervision of their German allies, they would get in the way or worse. Their army was a shamble on the brink of total collapse for years running. That the Duel-Monarchy limped into the 20th century at all is miraculous.
Ian Hernandez
OP said WW1, moron This means UK is behind France, USA behind UK and Japan behind everyone
Kevin Morgan
>japan behind everyone >ww1 Lol. No.
Brayden Jenkins
Behind everyone he listed at least Their navy was pretty useful in some remote theaters, but that's it
Sebastian Flores
Navy is really only the key factor when talking about WW1 “strength”.
Cameron Garcia
>21st century bongophiles who think bolt action rifle fire was the prime battlefield threat of WW1
Luke James
>Their navy was pretty useful in some remote theaters, but that's it >Asia and Mediteranean >remote theaters >bongs BTFO in both short decades later
>Americans who were armed with French weapons, trained by French troops, and contributed nothing to the war except for loans to the Entente powers and a few troops at the end are ranked higher than France
Jonathan Bennett
Gee I wonder who pioneered combined arms tactics
Julian Kelly
Personally I don't agree with the Yanks being ranked #3, fucking silly, but >except for loans And, well, you know, material goods that let France dedicate all of its production to military goods in the first place >from the US, which supplied cereals, steel, explosives, copper, oil, and machinery, it imported 27,000 million francs’ worth of goods and created another 18,000 million deficit. >The USA became its main supplier of flour, oats, and sugar, and sent large quantities of meat. Hence the French were as nervous as the British when the North American winter threatened grain shipments > By securing an early lead in industrial conversion, they concentrated their restricted industrial resources on finished weapons and on munitions production, but at the price of depending on their maritime partners not just for steel, coal, and finance but also for food. And well supplying Britain with the majority of its food: > Whereas in 1913 the US and Canada accounted for 34.7 per cent and 22.5 per cent of Britain’s wheat and flour imports, by 1918 the figures were 52.3 per cent and 25.1 per cent. For bacon and ham the percentages rose from 44.9 and 5.8 to 83.7 and 15.2; for other meats from 1.6 and 0.1 to 31.2 and 5.0; for dairy produce from 0.2 and 10.4 to 37.8 and 20.6. According to a food ministry appraisal of the 1918 prospects, ‘supplies from North America. . . are vital’ |Although I agree that USA being ranked #3 is fucking stupid.
