Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(BBC)   World leaders mark 100 years since Britain thought it would be a good idea to get in on this trendy new war   (bbc.co.uk) divider line 75
    More: Sad, France in WW1, Belgium, world leaders, Folkestone, event planning, anniversaries  
•       •       •

2681 clicks; posted to Main » on 04 Aug 2014 at 11:58 AM (37 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



75 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-08-04 11:06:42 AM  
Thus marking the beginning of the first time we had to save their asses in the 20th Century.
 
2014-08-04 12:00:23 PM  
I guess what's sad is it was thought to be the war to end all wars.  Until people saw how much money you could make.  Now, we'll never know a time when we're not at 'war'.
 
2014-08-04 12:01:22 PM  
cllctr.com
 
2014-08-04 12:04:34 PM  
They shall not grow old as we that are left grow old.
Age shall not weary them, nor the years condemn.
At the going down of the sun and in the morning
We will remember them.
 
2014-08-04 12:05:45 PM  

You Are All Sheep: I guess what's sad is it was thought to be the war to end all wars.  Until people saw how much money you could make.  Now, we'll never know a time when we're not at 'war'.


You actually think that prior to WWI, there was a time when we weren't at war?  If so, then you're as naive as the people who thought that WWI was the "war to end all wars".
 
2014-08-04 12:11:23 PM  

dittybopper: You Are All Sheep: I guess what's sad is it was thought to be the war to end all wars.  Until people saw how much money you could make.  Now, we'll never know a time when we're not at 'war'.

You actually think that prior to WWI, there was a time when we weren't at war?  If so, then you're as naive as the people who thought that WWI was the "war to end all wars".


The only difference is now it is companies telling nations to go to wars for profit, instead of the monarch making the lions share of the profit themselves.

Not there is that much difference, its still white people.
 
2014-08-04 12:12:13 PM  

dittybopper: You actually think that prior to WWI, there was a time when we weren't at war?  If so, then you're as naive as the people who thought that WWI was the "war to end all wars".


Europe had been relatively peaceful since the Napoleonic Wars a hundred years beforehand. Most of the men who marched to war had never experienced combat. All of that new technology was untested and that's why the tactics employed by both sides seem so dumb to modern eyes.

The only army that had any real combat experience with the British and even that was against a bunch of farmers. Europe had enjoyed a golden age of peace and trade prior to WWI.
 
2014-08-04 12:13:22 PM  
Triple Entente was a cooler name than Triple Alliance.
 
2014-08-04 12:13:24 PM  
Complex webs of alliances are a biatch
 
2014-08-04 12:13:58 PM  

rockforever: dittybopper: You Are All Sheep: I guess what's sad is it was thought to be the war to end all wars.  Until people saw how much money you could make.  Now, we'll never know a time when we're not at 'war'.

You actually think that prior to WWI, there was a time when we weren't at war?  If so, then you're as naive as the people who thought that WWI was the "war to end all wars".

The only difference is now it is companies telling nations to go to wars for profit, instead of the monarch making the lions share of the profit themselves.

Not there is that much difference, its still white people.


Yeah, it's sad how we white people exported war to all nations, races and creeds. There was never a war till white people came along, now every single war is because of white people. We should be ashamed of ourselves. Shouldn't we?
 
2014-08-04 12:16:55 PM  

Tunney: dittybopper: You actually think that prior to WWI, there was a time when we weren't at war?  If so, then you're as naive as the people who thought that WWI was the "war to end all wars".

Europe had been relatively peaceful since the Napoleonic Wars a hundred years beforehand. Most of the men who marched to war had never experienced combat. All of that new technology was untested and that's why the tactics employed by both sides seem so dumb to modern eyes.

The only army that had any real combat experience with the British and even that was against a bunch of farmers. Europe had enjoyed a golden age of peace and trade prior to WWI.


You have no idea what you are talking about. The War of German Unification, The Balkan Wars (I and II), Italian Unification, all were fought on European soil between that time. The Year 1848 war anything but peaceful as there were literally hundreds of minor and some major revolutions going on that were ended in some cases by not so peaceful means.

Wars fought by Europeans not on European soil; Ruso-Japanese, Boer War, and basically ALL OF AFRICA.

There were many, many veterans fighting in WWI, especially in the BEF where their know-how of Trench Fighting in the Boer Wars basically brought about Trench Warfare.
 
2014-08-04 12:16:59 PM  

rockforever: dittybopper: You Are All Sheep: I guess what's sad is it was thought to be the war to end all wars.  Until people saw how much money you could make.  Now, we'll never know a time when we're not at 'war'.

You actually think that prior to WWI, there was a time when we weren't at war?  If so, then you're as naive as the people who thought that WWI was the "war to end all wars".

The only difference is now it is companies telling nations to go to wars for profit, instead of the monarch making the lions share of the profit themselves.

Not there is that much difference, its still white people.


You, and every person who buys into the "war is a racket promulgated by rich people," are an ignoramus who knows nothing about the history or causes of warfare. BTW, there is far less of it than there was 100 years ago, and far less THEN than 100 years previous, etc., etc. One sign of how war is dying out is how much attention we pay to what would have been considered a minor colonial skirmish in 1800.

Also, one reason white Europeans took over the planet was to stop local warfare so they could make money from trade. That's why the East India Company took over India, to stop all the damn princes fighting each other and getting in the way of making money.
 
2014-08-04 12:17:42 PM  

dittybopper: You Are All Sheep: I guess what's sad is it was thought to be the war to end all wars.  Until people saw how much money you could make.  Now, we'll never know a time when we're not at 'war'.

You actually think that prior to WWI, there was a time when we weren't at war?  If so, then you're as naive as the people who thought that WWI was the "war to end all wars".


Hey, we had to show the friggin Spanish that we're just as good as them at empire-building.

/invades Cuba
//eyes Guam hungrily
 
2014-08-04 12:17:57 PM  

Slaxl: rockforever: dittybopper: You Are All Sheep: I guess what's sad is it was thought to be the war to end all wars.  Until people saw how much money you could make.  Now, we'll never know a time when we're not at 'war'.

You actually think that prior to WWI, there was a time when we weren't at war?  If so, then you're as naive as the people who thought that WWI was the "war to end all wars".

The only difference is now it is companies telling nations to go to wars for profit, instead of the monarch making the lions share of the profit themselves.

Not there is that much difference, its still white people.

Yeah, it's sad how we white people exported war to all nations, races and creeds. There was never a war till white people came along, now every single war is because of white people. We should be ashamed of ourselves. Shouldn't we?


Its early, I'll forgive you're lack of a sarcasm meter. Get some coffee and come back.
 
2014-08-04 12:19:54 PM  

LazyMedia: rockforever: dittybopper: You Are All Sheep: I guess what's sad is it was thought to be the war to end all wars.  Until people saw how much money you could make.  Now, we'll never know a time when we're not at 'war'.

You actually think that prior to WWI, there was a time when we weren't at war?  If so, then you're as naive as the people who thought that WWI was the "war to end all wars".

The only difference is now it is companies telling nations to go to wars for profit, instead of the monarch making the lions share of the profit themselves.

Not there is that much difference, its still white people.

You, and every person who buys into the "war is a racket promulgated by rich people," are an ignoramus who knows nothing about the history or causes of warfare. BTW, there is far less of it than there was 100 years ago, and far less THEN than 100 years previous, etc., etc. One sign of how war is dying out is how much attention we pay to what would have been considered a minor colonial skirmish in 1800.

Also, one reason white Europeans took over the planet was to stop local warfare so they could make money from trade. That's why the East India Company took over India, to stop all the damn princes fighting each other and getting in the way of making money.

 
2014-08-04 12:28:51 PM  

rockforever: Tunney: dittybopper: You actually think that prior to WWI, there was a time when we weren't at war?  If so, then you're as naive as the people who thought that WWI was the "war to end all wars".

Europe had been relatively peaceful since the Napoleonic Wars a hundred years beforehand. Most of the men who marched to war had never experienced combat. All of that new technology was untested and that's why the tactics employed by both sides seem so dumb to modern eyes.

The only army that had any real combat experience with the British and even that was against a bunch of farmers. Europe had enjoyed a golden age of peace and trade prior to WWI.

You have no idea what you are talking about. The War of German Unification, The Balkan Wars (I and II), Italian Unification, all were fought on European soil between that time. The Year 1848 war anything but peaceful as there were literally hundreds of minor and some major revolutions going on that were ended in some cases by not so peaceful means.

Wars fought by Europeans not on European soil; Ruso-Japanese, Boer War, and basically ALL OF AFRICA.

There were many, many veterans fighting in WWI, especially in the BEF where their know-how of Trench Fighting in the Boer Wars basically brought about Trench Warfare.


Not to mention the Franco-Prussian war.
 
2014-08-04 12:28:54 PM  

Jaden Smith First of His Name:


That uhlan is going to look pretty silly after his horse dies from mustard gas.
 
2014-08-04 12:28:56 PM  

rockforever: You have no idea what you are talking about. The War of German Unification, The Balkan Wars (I and II), Italian Unification, all were fought on European soil between that time. The Year 1848 war anything but peaceful as there were literally hundreds of minor and some major revolutions going on that were ended in some cases by not so peaceful means.

Wars fought by Europeans not on European soil; Ruso-Japanese, Boer War, and basically ALL OF AFRICA.

There were many, many veterans fighting in WWI, especially in the BEF where their know-how of Trench Fighting in the Boer Wars basically brought about Trench Warfare.


Re-read what I wrote. I said that Europe was  relatively peaceful and that the British had the  most experience. None of that contradicts what you've written above.

France lost 95,000 people in the Crimean War. That sounds like a lot until you compare it to the Napoleonic Wars (900,000+) or WWI (1,350,000+).

Most of the German Unification wars were fought between sides of tens of thousands of men. Germany invaded Belgium in 1914 with an army of 750,000. They had another 750,000 soldiers keeping the rest of the line.
 
2014-08-04 12:30:17 PM  

You Are All Sheep: I guess what's sad is it was thought to be the war to end all wars.  Until people saw how much money you could make.  Now, we'll never know a time when we're not at 'war'.


Well, on the plus side, since the end of WW2, the world has been remarkably peaceful compared to previous centuries.  I know that sounds strange but when you compare war casualty rates of the 20th century to those of previous centuries, then the latter half of the 20th century has been very peaceful.  Historians have even gone on to call it "the Long Peace".  There has been no major war in Western Europe or on the North American continents for decades.  That's something.
 
2014-08-04 12:30:27 PM  
How do you think we got war everywhere? Soldiers go, kill the men and rape the women. Bastards grow up, kill the rapists and they happen to have the genetic make up of the rapist themselves, so they are born warriors as well. Since there was no birth control, war is how population is culled, and most man rather die in battle like men than live to old age. So now we have all these men with no way to kill them and with medicine that extends their life, fighting against rockets or drones. And you question why war is everywhere?
 
2014-08-04 12:33:58 PM  
...and we're still dealing with 1914's aftermath.
 
2014-08-04 12:36:54 PM  

Latinwolf: LazyMedia: rockforever: dittybopper: You Are All Sheep: I guess what's sad is it was thought to be the war to end all wars.  Until people saw how much money you could make.  Now, we'll never know a time when we're not at 'war'.

You actually think that prior to WWI, there was a time when we weren't at war?  If so, then you're as naive as the people who thought that WWI was the "war to end all wars".

The only difference is now it is companies telling nations to go to wars for profit, instead of the monarch making the lions share of the profit themselves.

Not there is that much difference, its still white people.

You, and every person who buys into the "war is a racket promulgated by rich people," are an ignoramus who knows nothing about the history or causes of warfare. BTW, there is far less of it than there was 100 years ago, and far less THEN than 100 years previous, etc., etc. One sign of how war is dying out is how much attention we pay to what would have been considered a minor colonial skirmish in 1800.

Also, one reason white Europeans took over the planet was to stop local warfare so they could make money from trade. That's why the East India Company took over India, to stop all the damn princes fighting each other and getting in the way of making money.


Well there are wars that make you money and wars that don't, just like any investment.
 
2014-08-04 12:37:50 PM  

Tunney: Europe had been relatively peaceful since the Napoleonic Wars a hundred years beforehand.


No, it wasn't.  Here is a list of conflicts in Europe in the century leading up to the beginning of WWI:

1815-1817 Second Serbian Uprising
1817-1864 Russian conquest of the Caucasus
1821-1832 Greek War of Independence
1821 Wallachian uprising of 1821
1823 French invasion of Spain
1826-1828 Russo-Persian War
1827 War of the Malcontents
1828-1829 Russo-Turkish War
1828-1834 Liberal Wars
1830 Ten Days Campaign (following the Belgian Revolt)
1830-1831 November Uprising
1831 Canut revolts
1831-1832 Great Bosnian uprising
1831-1836 Tithe War
1832 War in the Vendée and Chouannerie of 1832
1832 June Rebellion
1833-1839 First Carlist War
1833-1839 Albanian Revolts of 1833-1839
1843-1844 Albanian Revolt of 1843-1844
1846 Galician slaughter
1846-1849 Second Carlist War
1847 Albanian Revolt of 1847
1847 Sonderbund War
1848-1849 Hungarian Revolution and War of Independence
1848-1851 First Schleswig War
1848-1866 Wars of Italian Independence
1848-1849 First Italian Independence War
1859 Second Italian War of Independence
1866 Third Italian War of Independence
1853-1856 Crimean War
1854 Epirus Revolt of 1854
1858 Mahtra War
1861-62 Montenegrin-Ottoman War (1861-62)
1863-1864 January Uprising
1864 Second Schleswig War
1866 Austro-Prussian War
1866-1869 Cretan Revolt
1867 Fenian Rising
1870-1871 Franco-Prussian War
1872-1876 Third Carlist War
1873-1874 Cantonal Revolution
1875-77 Herzegovina Uprising (1875-77)
1876-78 Serbo-Turkish War (1876-78)
1876-78 Montenegrin-Ottoman War (1876-1878)
1877-1878 Russo-Turkish War
1878 Epirus Revolt of 1878
1885 Serbo-Bulgarian War
1893-1896 Cod War of 1893
1897 Greco-Turkish War

20th century[edit]

1903 Ilinden Uprising
1904-1908 Macedonian Struggle
1905 Łódź insurrection
1907 1907 Romanian Peasants' Revolt
1910 Albanian Revolt of 1910
1911-1912 Italo-Turkish War
1912-1913 Balkan Wars
1912-1913 First Balkan War
1913 Second Balkan War
1914 Peasant Revolt in Albania
1914-1918 World War I

In fact, Hiram Stevens Maxim, the man who invented the Maxim gun which was used to horrible effect in WWI, said this:

''In 1882 I was in Vienna, where I met an American whom I had known in the States. He said: 'Hang your chemistry and electricity! If you want to make a pile of money, invent something that will enable these Europeans to cut each others' throats with greater facility.' ''
http://www.nytimes.com/1985/11/26/science/100-years-of-maxim-s-killi ng -machine.html

Doesn't sound like a peaceful place to me.
 
2014-08-04 12:40:49 PM  

dittybopper: Tunney: Europe had been relatively peaceful since the Napoleonic Wars a hundred years beforehand.

No, it wasn't.  Here is a list of conflicts in Europe in the century leading up to the beginning of WWI:

1815-1817 Second Serbian Uprising
1817-1864 Russian conquest of the Caucasus
1821-1832 Greek War of Independence
1821 Wallachian uprising of 1821
1823 French invasion of Spain
1826-1828 Russo-Persian War
1827 War of the Malcontents
1828-1829 Russo-Turkish War
1828-1834 Liberal Wars
1830 Ten Days Campaign (following the Belgian Revolt)
1830-1831 November Uprising
1831 Canut revolts
1831-1832 Great Bosnian uprising
1831-1836 Tithe War
1832 War in the Vendée and Chouannerie of 1832
1832 June Rebellion
1833-1839 First Carlist War
1833-1839 Albanian Revolts of 1833-1839
1843-1844 Albanian Revolt of 1843-1844
1846 Galician slaughter
1846-1849 Second Carlist War
1847 Albanian Revolt of 1847
1847 Sonderbund War
1848-1849 Hungarian Revolution and War of Independence
1848-1851 First Schleswig War
1848-1866 Wars of Italian Independence
1848-1849 First Italian Independence War
1859 Second Italian War of Independence
1866 Third Italian War of Independence
1853-1856 Crimean War
1854 Epirus Revolt of 1854
1858 Mahtra War
1861-62 Montenegrin-Ottoman War (1861-62)
1863-1864 January Uprising
1864 Second Schleswig War
1866 Austro-Prussian War
1866-1869 Cretan Revolt
1867 Fenian Rising
1870-1871 Franco-Prussian War
1872-1876 Third Carlist War
1873-1874 Cantonal Revolution
1875-77 Herzegovina Uprising (1875-77)
1876-78 Serbo-Turkish War (1876-78)
1876-78 Montenegrin-Ottoman War (1876-1878)
1877-1878 Russo-Turkish War
1878 Epirus Revolt of 1878
1885 Serbo-Bulgarian War
1893-1896 Cod War of 1893
1897 Greco-Turkish War

20th century[edit]

1903 Ilinden Uprising
1904-1908 Macedonian Struggle
1905 Łódź insurrection
1907 1907 Romanian Peasants' Revolt
1910 Albanian Revolt of 1910
1911-1912 Italo-Turkish War
1912-1913 Balkan Wars
1912-1913 First Balkan War
1913 Second Balkan War
1914 Peasant ...


How does the Cod War of 1893 last three years.  Something fishy about that.
 
2014-08-04 12:42:22 PM  

Tunney: rockforever: You have no idea what you are talking about. The War of German Unification, The Balkan Wars (I and II), Italian Unification, all were fought on European soil between that time. The Year 1848 war anything but peaceful as there were literally hundreds of minor and some major revolutions going on that were ended in some cases by not so peaceful means.

Wars fought by Europeans not on European soil; Ruso-Japanese, Boer War, and basically ALL OF AFRICA.

There were many, many veterans fighting in WWI, especially in the BEF where their know-how of Trench Fighting in the Boer Wars basically brought about Trench Warfare.

Re-read what I wrote. I said that Europe was  relatively peaceful and that the British had the  most experience. None of that contradicts what you've written above.

France lost 95,000 people in the Crimean War. That sounds like a lot until you compare it to the Napoleonic Wars (900,000+) or WWI (1,350,000+).

Most of the German Unification wars were fought between sides of tens of thousands of men. Germany invaded Belgium in 1914 with an army of 750,000. They had another 750,000 soldiers keeping the rest of the line.


I still don't agree with you. If you are saying that the end of the Napoleonic Wars produced peace thru the Congress of Vienna, then you are way off.

Europe found new places to expand their power, only now they did it at greater cost to their colonies populations. Just because they weren't fighting in Europe doesn't mean Europe had peace, they just found different places to fight. The 1800's were the most tumultuous time for most of Europe, when the changes that would eventually be enacted first got their footing.

Opium Wars, French Intervention in Mexico, Spanish-American War, Crimean War. The list gets longer.

Dittybopper Franco-Prussian War was mentioned; German Unification.
 
2014-08-04 12:44:04 PM  

Prey4reign: How does the Cod War of 1893 last three years. Something fishy about that.


Three wars, one casualty, one wounded.  I am dolphinitely skeptical that they should be included.
 
2014-08-04 12:47:45 PM  
In reality Britain had damned little choice in going to war, once the Belgian frontier had been crossed. All those nice little Belgian ports in the hands of the Germans, their warships and transports just sitting across the Channel couldn't be stomached.
The Kaiser's General Staff had planned for war with France so completely that the thought of NOT attacking France, even though staff planners had regularly drawn up a "what if?" contingency timetable for a state of war with just about every nation on earth independant of any others with the possible exception of Paraguay, was- well, unthinkable. And their main campaign plan aganst France depended on going through Belgium. Ergo, Belgium had to be attacked. Even though that would mean war against Britain.
 
2014-08-04 12:50:17 PM  

rockforever: Tunney: rockforever: You have no idea what you are talking about. The War of German Unification, The Balkan Wars (I and II), Italian Unification, all were fought on European soil between that time. The Year 1848 war anything but peaceful as there were literally hundreds of minor and some major revolutions going on that were ended in some cases by not so peaceful means.

Wars fought by Europeans not on European soil; Ruso-Japanese, Boer War, and basically ALL OF AFRICA.

There were many, many veterans fighting in WWI, especially in the BEF where their know-how of Trench Fighting in the Boer Wars basically brought about Trench Warfare.

Re-read what I wrote. I said that Europe was  relatively peaceful and that the British had the  most experience. None of that contradicts what you've written above.

France lost 95,000 people in the Crimean War. That sounds like a lot until you compare it to the Napoleonic Wars (900,000+) or WWI (1,350,000+).

Most of the German Unification wars were fought between sides of tens of thousands of men. Germany invaded Belgium in 1914 with an army of 750,000. They had another 750,000 soldiers keeping the rest of the line.

I still don't agree with you. If you are saying that the end of the Napoleonic Wars produced peace thru the Congress of Vienna, then you are way off.

Europe found new places to expand their power, only now they did it at greater cost to their colonies populations. Just because they weren't fighting in Europe doesn't mean Europe had peace, they just found different places to fight. The 1800's were the most tumultuous time for most of Europe, when the changes that would eventually be enacted first got their footing.

Opium Wars, French Intervention in Mexico, Spanish-American War, Crimean War. The list gets longer.

Dittybopper Franco-Prussian War was mentioned; German Unification.


RELATIVELY peaceful. In that there was endemic war as had always happened in Europe, but it was fought in brief campaigns between small, professional armies, or in the form of localized revolts. What didn't occur between 1815 and 1914 was mass war involving the entire populations of the Great Powers for years at a time. With the exception of Crimea, those other "wars" you mention were piddly colonial skirmishes involving a few thousand troops on either side.
 
2014-08-04 01:00:12 PM  

LazyMedia: rockforever: Tunney: rockforever: You have no idea what you are talking about. The War of German Unification, The Balkan Wars (I and II), Italian Unification, all were fought on European soil between that time. The Year 1848 war anything but peaceful as there were literally hundreds of minor and some major revolutions going on that were ended in some cases by not so peaceful means.

Wars fought by Europeans not on European soil; Ruso-Japanese, Boer War, and basically ALL OF AFRICA.

There were many, many veterans fighting in WWI, especially in the BEF where their know-how of Trench Fighting in the Boer Wars basically brought about Trench Warfare.

Re-read what I wrote. I said that Europe was  relatively peaceful and that the British had the  most experience. None of that contradicts what you've written above.

France lost 95,000 people in the Crimean War. That sounds like a lot until you compare it to the Napoleonic Wars (900,000+) or WWI (1,350,000+).

Most of the German Unification wars were fought between sides of tens of thousands of men. Germany invaded Belgium in 1914 with an army of 750,000. They had another 750,000 soldiers keeping the rest of the line.

I still don't agree with you. If you are saying that the end of the Napoleonic Wars produced peace thru the Congress of Vienna, then you are way off.

Europe found new places to expand their power, only now they did it at greater cost to their colonies populations. Just because they weren't fighting in Europe doesn't mean Europe had peace, they just found different places to fight. The 1800's were the most tumultuous time for most of Europe, when the changes that would eventually be enacted first got their footing.

Opium Wars, French Intervention in Mexico, Spanish-American War, Crimean War. The list gets longer.

Dittybopper Franco-Prussian War was mentioned; German Unification.

RELATIVELY peaceful. In that there was endemic war as had always happened in Europe, but it was fought in brief campaigns betwee ...


Nations became more warlike, not less. That is not relative peace. Relative peace would be what Europe is experiencing now. Nations are dismantling, not building up. Japan for the past 50 years has been peaceful.

Relative peace doesn't mean, we're not killing each other so everything is fine, but I'm building a bigger and better army so once we do fight I'm gonna murder ya good!

Relative peace means dismantling your armies and not fighting satellite wars with professional armies and calling it diplomacy. It means discussing things instead of just taking away another nations colony for pissing you off.
 
2014-08-04 01:02:32 PM  
Wow, a lot of derp right out of the gate. Off to listen to Blueprint for Armageddon.
 
2014-08-04 01:02:52 PM  

rockforever: Dittybopper Franco-Prussian War was mentioned; German Unification.


Sorry, I missed that, reading quickly of course.
 
2014-08-04 01:13:15 PM  

mainsail: ...and we're still dealing with 1914's aftermath.


The us is still fighting its Civil War. We have seditionists on The House who would reintroduce segregation and restrict voting to property owners and openly brag of wanting to secede because the President is black.
 
2014-08-04 01:15:11 PM  

Gunny Highway: Prey4reign: How does the Cod War of 1893 last three years. Something fishy about that.

Three wars, one casualty, one wounded.  I am dolphinitely skeptical that they should be included.


Well, I was copy-pasta-ing.  I didn't check every single conflict.

My point was that Europe itself was far from peaceful in the 100 years prior to WWI.  Especially considering the bias here in the West to look at Western Europe as "Europe", and ignore anything east of the line between Stockholm and Trieste.

And, after they finished WWI, they *IMMEDIATELY* sowed the seeds of WWII, *DESPITE* some good advice from the United States to not be quite so harsh towards the vanquished.
 
2014-08-04 01:15:39 PM  
Resident of Folkestone here.  Getting a kick, etc...

There are many local residents here who were rather unhappy at our money being spent on that arch, given that we already have a perfectly good war memorial (at which Prince Harry laid a wreath), as well as the Road of Remembrance (which was given that name decades ago).

There have also been comments asking when McDonalds are going to paint the new memorial yellow, or build the second half of it.
 
2014-08-04 01:23:06 PM  

rockforever: Nations became more warlike, not less. That is not relative peace. Relative peace would be what Europe is experiencing now. Nations are dismantling, not building up. Japan for the past 50 years has been peaceful.

Relative peace doesn't mean, we're not killing each other so everything is fine, but I'm building a bigger and better army so once we do fight I'm gonna murder ya good!

Relative peace means dismantling your armies and not fighting satellite wars with professional armies and calling it diplomacy. It means discussing things instead of just taking away another nations colony for pissing you off.


There were two trends happening in the 19th century: first, nationalism and industrialization that made standing mass armies and navies possible. Second, a political reform movement that saw war as an illegitimate means of furthering political ends (this was mainly extant in the democratic countries; increasing democracy was another 19th century trend). In 18th century Europe (other than Parliamentary England), nobody much questioned the right of sovereigns to fight wars. Unfortunately, the ability to fight wars outstripped the reformist trend toward NOT fighting wars at all. World War One was an anachronism, in that it was started by politically obsolescent autocrats in Austria, Russia and Germany. WWII was begun by ONE autocrat.
 
2014-08-04 01:23:42 PM  

Crid: Resident of Folkestone here.  Getting a kick, etc...

There are many local residents here who were rather unhappy at our money being spent on that arch, given that we already have a perfectly good war memorial (at which Prince Harry laid a wreath), as well as the Road of Remembrance (which was given that name decades ago).

There have also been comments asking when McDonalds are going to paint the new memorial yellow, or build the second half of it.


St. Louis has something to say about that:

kickpoint.ca

upload.wikimedia.org
 
2014-08-04 01:30:02 PM  

Tunney: Europe had been relatively peaceful since the Napoleonic Wars a hundred years beforehand.


Relatively.

There was the Greek wars of Independence (1821-1832), the Crimean War (1853), the three Italian wars of Independence (1848-1866), the Austro-Prussian War (1866), the Franco-Prussian War (1870), the Russo-Turkish War (1877-1878), the Greco-Turkish War (1897), the Russo-Japanese War (1904-1905), the Italo-Turkish War (1911), and the 1st and 2nd Balkan Wars (1912-1913).

All of these wars would contribute to why WWI was fought, most directly the Franco-Prussian War (which is why surrendering at Versaille was so symbolically important to both WWI and WWII), the Russo-Japanese War (Russia gets its faced rubbed in it and needs to increase it's self-esteem), and the Balkan Wars (Serbs be nuts).
 
2014-08-04 01:30:20 PM  
I watched the documentary on BBC about The Great Martian War 1913 - 1917 on BBC over the weekend.
 
2014-08-04 01:31:52 PM  

This text is now purple: All of these wars would contribute to why WWI was fought, most directly the Franco-Prussian War (which is why surrendering at Versaille was so symbolically important to both WWI and WWII), the Russo-Japanese War (Russia gets its faced rubbed in it and needs to increase it's self-esteem), and the Balkan Wars (Serbs be nuts).


Morocco saw a few squabbles as well.
 
2014-08-04 01:33:25 PM  

cynicalbastard: In reality Britain had damned little choice in going to war, once the Belgian frontier had been crossed. All those nice little Belgian ports in the hands of the Germans, their warships and transports just sitting across the Channel couldn't be stomached.
The Kaiser's General Staff had planned for war with France so completely that the thought of NOT attacking France, even though staff planners had regularly drawn up a "what if?" contingency timetable for a state of war with just about every nation on earth independant of any others with the possible exception of Paraguay, was- well, unthinkable. And their main campaign plan aganst France depended on going through Belgium. Ergo, Belgium had to be attacked. Even though that would mean war against Britain.


I think WWII demonstrated that Britain was perfectly capable of not coming to an ally's aid when it suited them.

What was hilarious was both Germany and France planned to invade each other through Belgium. Both knew going first would likely cost them Britain's support. Germany expected Britain wouldn't support them regardless, and were probably right.
 
2014-08-04 01:37:37 PM  
1913 Second Balkan War
.

lohphat: mainsail: ...and we're still dealing with 1914's aftermath.

The us is still fighting its Civil War. We have seditionists on The House who would reintroduce segregation and restrict voting to property owners and openly brag of wanting to secede because the President is black.


Yup, don't I know it. Scotland is still ticked at England, Wars don't seem to end for a loooooong time.
 
2014-08-04 01:37:48 PM  

LazyMedia: Unfortunately, the ability to fight wars outstripped the reformist trend toward NOT fighting wars at all. World War One was an anachronism, in that it was started by politically obsolescent autocrats in Austria, Russia and Germany. WWII was begun by ONE autocrat.


Wilhelm and Franz Josef were mostly against the war. Nicholas came around late. The group most eager for a war was France, the only one without a monarch.

Basically, France goaded Russia into a starting a war with Austria via Serbia. Austria and Germany agreed to fight because they perceived they had no choice -- they were fighting a war whether it was declared or not.
 
2014-08-04 01:38:45 PM  

Prey4reign: dittybopper: Tunney: Europe had been relatively peaceful since the Napoleonic Wars a hundred years beforehand.

No, it wasn't.  Here is a list of conflicts in Europe in the century leading up to the beginning of WWI:

1815-1817 Second Serbian Uprising
1817-1864 Russian conquest of the Caucasus
1821-1832 Greek War of Independence
1821 Wallachian uprising of 1821
1823 French invasion of Spain
1826-1828 Russo-Persian War
1827 War of the Malcontents
1828-1829 Russo-Turkish War
1828-1834 Liberal Wars
1830 Ten Days Campaign (following the Belgian Revolt)
1830-1831 November Uprising
1831 Canut revolts
1831-1832 Great Bosnian uprising
1831-1836 Tithe War
1832 War in the Vendée and Chouannerie of 1832
1832 June Rebellion
1833-1839 First Carlist War
1833-1839 Albanian Revolts of 1833-1839
1843-1844 Albanian Revolt of 1843-1844
1846 Galician slaughter
1846-1849 Second Carlist War
1847 Albanian Revolt of 1847
1847 Sonderbund War
1848-1849 Hungarian Revolution and War of Independence
1848-1851 First Schleswig War
1848-1866 Wars of Italian Independence
1848-1849 First Italian Independence War
1859 Second Italian War of Independence
1866 Third Italian War of Independence
1853-1856 Crimean War
1854 Epirus Revolt of 1854
1858 Mahtra War
1861-62 Montenegrin-Ottoman War (1861-62)
1863-1864 January Uprising
1864 Second Schleswig War
1866 Austro-Prussian War
1866-1869 Cretan Revolt
1867 Fenian Rising
1870-1871 Franco-Prussian War
1872-1876 Third Carlist War
1873-1874 Cantonal Revolution
1875-77 Herzegovina Uprising (1875-77)
1876-78 Serbo-Turkish War (1876-78)
1876-78 Montenegrin-Ottoman War (1876-1878)
1877-1878 Russo-Turkish War
1878 Epirus Revolt of 1878
1885 Serbo-Bulgarian War
1893-1896 Cod War of 1893
1897 Greco-Turkish War

20th century[edit]

1903 Ilinden Uprising
1904-1908 Macedonian Struggle
1905 Łódź insurrection
1907 1907 Romanian Peasants' Revolt
1910 Albanian Revolt of 1910
1911-1912 Italo-Turkish War
1912-1913 Balkan Wars
1912-1913 First Balkan War
1913 Second Balkan War
...


We had a lot of cod, then. Ammo is ammo.
 
2014-08-04 01:48:45 PM  

This text is now purple: cynicalbastard: In reality Britain had damned little choice in going to war, once the Belgian frontier had been crossed. All those nice little Belgian ports in the hands of the Germans, their warships and transports just sitting across the Channel couldn't be stomached.
The Kaiser's General Staff had planned for war with France so completely that the thought of NOT attacking France, even though staff planners had regularly drawn up a "what if?" contingency timetable for a state of war with just about every nation on earth independant of any others with the possible exception of Paraguay, was- well, unthinkable. And their main campaign plan aganst France depended on going through Belgium. Ergo, Belgium had to be attacked. Even though that would mean war against Britain.

I think WWII demonstrated that Britain was perfectly capable of not coming to an ally's aid when it suited them.

What was hilarious was both Germany and France planned to invade each other through Belgium. Both knew going first would likely cost them Britain's support. Germany expected Britain wouldn't support them regardless, and were probably right.


Czechoslovakia was only an indirect ally (France stabbed Czechoslovakia in the back, but Britain's defense pact was only with France, not Czechoslovakia). And Britain declared war over Poland. They didn't DO anything about it right away because they were militarily unprepared, not because of a lack of political will.

Also, no. France did not plan to fight Germany in Belgium in 1914. France's war plan (Plan 17, for those counting) was to attack on their right and to take back Alsace and Lorraine, then drive on to Berlin, cutting off the German right as it drove into Belgium. They were VERY careful to protect Belgian neutrality until Belgium asked them to help fight off the German attack. One of the reasons they nearly lost the war in the first month was that they were unprepared for the German assault through western Belgium.

Germany decided in 1914 that going to war with Britain didn't matter, because the war with France would be over in 2-4 months, long before Britain could raise an army of any significance, and whipping the Russians afterward would take even less time. Britain fielded only 6 divisions in 1914, compared to 70 each for France and Germany. If the Germans defeated France and Russia, they could dictate peace to Britain on whatever terms they liked, the thinking went.
 
2014-08-04 01:49:54 PM  
The UK had a treaty with Belgium to come to its aid if it was attacked.    Germany tried to get Belgium to let them pass through to attack France, the Belgians said no and rightfully so as doing would have angered France and they knew the UK  had their back.

The UK  also warned Germany not to do so, Germany decided to go through with it and so UK declared war along with her commonwealth.

Basically very similar circumstances to when Germany Invaded Poland in 1939, The UK had no choice but to declare war.
 
2014-08-04 01:57:37 PM  

This text is now purple: LazyMedia: Unfortunately, the ability to fight wars outstripped the reformist trend toward NOT fighting wars at all. World War One was an anachronism, in that it was started by politically obsolescent autocrats in Austria, Russia and Germany. WWII was begun by ONE autocrat.

Wilhelm and Franz Josef were mostly against the war. Nicholas came around late. The group most eager for a war was France, the only one without a monarch.

Basically, France goaded Russia into a starting a war with Austria via Serbia. Austria and Germany agreed to fight because they perceived they had no choice -- they were fighting a war whether it was declared or not.


Yeah, none of that is true. France wanted Alsace and Lorraine back, but Wilhelm wanted to be the dominant power in Europe. Austria forced Russia's hand by presenting Serbia with an impossible ultimatum. They did that because Wilhelm told them they could do it without fear of Russia. At the last second, Willy had cold feet and wanted to avoid attacking France (because he REALLY didn't want to go to war with Britain), but he was A-OK with fighting Russia for no reason other than to push them around.

France would never have attacked Germany just becase they went to war with Russia, despite treaties, because a) the government would have fallen if they'd tried to push it through and b) they knew Britain would never go for it. A lot of Frenchmen were glad of the war when it came, because of revanchist sentiment about Alsace-Lorraine, but they weren't ardently pursuing it to reach their perceived geopolitical place in the sun the way the Germans were.
 
2014-08-04 02:19:41 PM  

Tunney: dittybopper: You actually think that prior to WWI, there was a time when we weren't at war?  If so, then you're as naive as the people who thought that WWI was the "war to end all wars".

Europe had been relatively peaceful since the Napoleonic Wars a hundred years beforehand. Most of the men who marched to war had never experienced combat. All of that new technology was untested and that's why the tactics employed by both sides seem so dumb to modern eyes.

The only army that had any real combat experience with the British and even that was against a bunch of farmers. Europe had enjoyed a golden age of peace and trade prior to WWI.


And some Russians, but that was against those Japanese, who clearly weren't as good soldiers as Europeans.
 
2014-08-04 02:29:29 PM  

This text is now purple: Tunney: Europe had been relatively peaceful since the Napoleonic Wars a hundred years beforehand.

Relatively.

There was the Greek wars of Independence (1821-1832), the Crimean War (1853), the three Italian wars of Independence (1848-1866), the Austro-Prussian War (1866), the Franco-Prussian War (1870), the Russo-Turkish War (1877-1878), the Greco-Turkish War (1897), the Russo-Japanese War (1904-1905), the Italo-Turkish War (1911), and the 1st and 2nd Balkan Wars (1912-1913).

All of these wars would contribute to why WWI was fought, most directly the Franco-Prussian War (which is why surrendering at Versaille was so symbolically important to both WWI and WWII), the Russo-Japanese War (Russia gets its faced rubbed in it and needs to increase it's self-esteem), and the Balkan Wars (Serbs be nuts).


Not to mention the long decline of the Ottomans, and that sudden opportunity in 1914 to regain lost territory & glory.
 
2014-08-04 02:33:25 PM  

dittybopper: Tunney: Europe had been relatively peaceful since the Napoleonic Wars a hundred years beforehand.

No, it wasn't.  Here is a list of conflicts in Europe in the century leading up to the beginning of WWI:

1815-1817 Second Serbian Uprising
1817-1864 Russian conquest of the Caucasus
1821-1832 Greek War of Independence
1821 Wallachian uprising of 1821
1823 French invasion of Spain
1826-1828 Russo-Persian War
1827 War of the Malcontents
1828-1829 Russo-Turkish War
1828-1834 Liberal Wars
1830 Ten Days Campaign (following the Belgian Revolt)
1830-1831 November Uprising
1831 Canut revolts
1831-1832 Great Bosnian uprising
1831-1836 Tithe War
1832 War in the Vendée and Chouannerie of 1832
1832 June Rebellion
1833-1839 First Carlist War
1833-1839 Albanian Revolts of 1833-1839
1843-1844 Albanian Revolt of 1843-1844
1846 Galician slaughter
1846-1849 Second Carlist War
1847 Albanian Revolt of 1847
1847 Sonderbund War
1848-1849 Hungarian Revolution and War of Independence
1848-1851 First Schleswig War
1848-1866 Wars of Italian Independence
1848-1849 First Italian Independence War
1859 Second Italian War of Independence
1866 Third Italian War of Independence
1853-1856 Crimean War
1854 Epirus Revolt of 1854
1858 Mahtra War
1861-62 Montenegrin-Ottoman War (1861-62)
1863-1864 January Uprising
1864 Second Schleswig War
1866 Austro-Prussian War
1866-1869 Cretan Revolt
1867 Fenian Rising
1870-1871 Franco-Prussian War
1872-1876 Third Carlist War
1873-1874 Cantonal Revolution
1875-77 Herzegovina Uprising (1875-77)
1876-78 Serbo-Turkish War (1876-78)
1876-78 Montenegrin-Ottoman War (1876-1878)
1877-1878 Russo-Turkish War
1878 Epirus Revolt of 1878
1885 Serbo-Bulgarian War
1893-1896 Cod War of 1893
1897 Greco-Turkish War

20th century[edit]

1903 Ilinden Uprising
1904-1908 Macedonian Struggle
1905 Łódź insurrection
1907 1907 Romanian Peasants' Revolt
1910 Albanian Revolt of 1910
1911-1912 Italo-Turkish War
1912-1913 Balkan Wars
1912-1913 First Balkan War
1913 Second Balkan War
1914 Peasant Revolt in Albania
1914-1918 World War I

In fact, Hiram Stevens Maxim, the man who invented the Maxim gun which was used to horrible effect in WWI, said this:

''In 1882 I was in Vienna, where I met an American whom I had known in the States. He said: 'Hang your chemistry and electricity! If you want to make a pile of money, invent something that will enable these Europeans to cut each others' throats with greater facility.' ''
http://www.nytimes.com/1985/11/26/science/100-years-of-maxim-s-killi ng -machine.html

Doesn't sound like a peaceful place to me.


Minor problem: a lot of those were in either Eastern Europe (which may as well have been a different continent) or in the Middle East. From the Napoleonic Wars to World War I, Europe only had a couple of major, widespread conflicts--the 1848 revolts and the 1870s Franco-Prussian War being the prime examples.
 
2014-08-04 02:48:40 PM  

Tunney: dittybopper: You actually think that prior to WWI, there was a time when we weren't at war?  If so, then you're as naive as the people who thought that WWI was the "war to end all wars".

Europe had been relatively peaceful since the Napoleonic Wars a hundred years beforehand. Most of the men who marched to war had never experienced combat. All of that new technology was untested and that's why the tactics employed by both sides seem so dumb to modern eyes.

The only army that had any real combat experience with the British and even that was against a bunch of farmers. Europe had enjoyed a golden age of peace and trade prior to WWI.


Bwahahaha pick up a book Austro-Prussian war, Franco-Prussian war, Boar War, Russo-Turkish war. To name a few
 
Displayed 50 of 75 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report