The First World War

Discussion in 'Historical Events Coffee House' started by totalwar, Feb 28, 2012.

?

who really won the first world war? The Axis or the Allies?

Axis 13 vote(s) 19.7%
Allies 45 vote(s) 68.2%
The Jews!!! 15 vote(s) 22.7%
Multiple votes are allowed.
  1. Bart (Moderator) NKVD Channel Maintainer

    Member Since:
    Mar 28, 2011
    Message Count:
    4,048
    Likes Received:
    578
    Trophy Points:
    294
    Location:
    Nootdorp, The Netherlands
    Haha, the hypocrite. He was the biggest idiot of all generals.
  2. Vassilli1942 Well-Known Member

    Member Since:
    Sep 4, 2011
    Message Count:
    2,042
    Likes Received:
    509
    Trophy Points:
    143
    Location:
    Long Island, NY USA
    "It takes 15,000 casualties to train a major general." ~ Ferdinand Foch
    DutchMasterRace likes this.
  3. Da Julii Member

    Member Since:
    Apr 8, 2012
    Message Count:
    62
    Likes Received:
    27
    Trophy Points:
    12
    The central powers should have won World War I after the collapse of the Russian Empire they took millions of men off the Eastern front and trasported them to the Western front. In a last ditch attempt to reach Paris and end the war the German's threw every unit they had against the dug in allies. thousands died although they advanced farther then they had since 1916. The offensive stalled and with new American troops being deployed every day and hundreds of thousands of German civilians dieing in the streets and rumors of a socialist revolution the Germans were forced to capitulate even though the allies never entered Germany. Austria had been fighting a desperate war against Italy and was being forced back because of lack of a proper military as well as not being properly supplied. The Ottoman Empire was unable to do anything in the latter years of the war because of nationalist rebellions happening in it's outlying territories as well as it's major cities, corruption was also rampant.
  4. Shisno Doesn't know who did this

    Member Since:
    Feb 27, 2012
    Message Count:
    2,641
    Likes Received:
    739
    Trophy Points:
    139
    Location:
    NKVD Underground
    No, the Central Powers should not have won. Austria was on the brink. In fact, they had attacked German grain shipments because they were in a state of starvation. They were the ones who in fact proposed peace! The Ottoman Empire was collapsing, as the Brits were pushing through the Middle East, and were almost in Turkey. All that was left was Germany, which was blockaded, soon to be isolated, and starving, as well as Allied troops on their territory.
  5. Da Julii Member

    Member Since:
    Apr 8, 2012
    Message Count:
    62
    Likes Received:
    27
    Trophy Points:
    12
    If the Germans had choosen to dig in they could have made the war go on for years. There were still rogue U boats scouring the Atlantic and the British nobility seeing the Russian Revolution was horrifyed of a socialist rebellion in their own nation. The Germans could have outlasted the British and French and with out the British and French the war would have came to a stalemate between Germany and the United States. America would have either had to really commit to the war devoting all of it's resources and man power to the war effort or would have had to settle for a white peace.
  6. Shisno Doesn't know who did this

    Member Since:
    Feb 27, 2012
    Message Count:
    2,641
    Likes Received:
    739
    Trophy Points:
    139
    Location:
    NKVD Underground
    Yes, but with American reinforcements, the Allies slowly began pushing the Germans back from their fortifications and trenches, back through Belgium, back through most of north-eastern France.
  7. Da Julii Member

    Member Since:
    Apr 8, 2012
    Message Count:
    62
    Likes Received:
    27
    Trophy Points:
    12
    A Russo German alliance was possible, French, British, American and Japanese troops were being deployed to eastern Russia in an attempt to aid the White Army trying to depose of Lenin. If the Germans and Lenin had allied the outcome of the war may have been very different.
  8. Toast Well-Known Member

    Member Since:
    Feb 13, 2011
    Message Count:
    4,180
    Likes Received:
    630
    Trophy Points:
    183
    Location:
    Sierra Leone
    It's debatable whether or not the war would have went on for years. I'd estimate a year at most. The British didn't need to worry about Socialism, decent wasn't really a problem because of the Defense of the Realm Act. The Germans couldn't have outlasted the Entente. Germany was in a state of starvation, as well as being ravaged by the Spanish Influenza, plus they couldn't possibly continue to fight the war while being blockaded so effectively. Don't even mention the Americans. They don't matter. I hate Americans who think that the USA had any effect on the war other than prolonging it, see-sawing between sides in an attempt to make money.
  9. Shisno Doesn't know who did this

    Member Since:
    Feb 27, 2012
    Message Count:
    2,641
    Likes Received:
    739
    Trophy Points:
    139
    Location:
    NKVD Underground
    Yeah, we actually had a shit influence on the outcome on the war. The Entente simply had to wait, let armies attacking Austrian and Ottoman Empire do their work, and bam, all done. America only joined in 1917, the second to last year of the war, and we only sped up the process of destroying the Germans.
  10. Nathan New Member

    Member Since:
    Apr 5, 2012
    Message Count:
    37
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    2
    Location:
    Down The Rabbit Hole
    Preceding Japan's attack (on Pearl Harbour) were numerous communiqués between Berlin and Tokyo. The respective ambassadors Ott and Ōshima tried to draft an amendment to the Tripartite Pact, in which Germany, Japan and Italy should pledge each other's allegiance in the case one signatory is attacked by – or attacks – the United States. And also for the fact that, In the face of his failing Blitzkrieg tactics, Hitler's confidence in a successful and swift conclusion of the war diminished, especially with a US-supported Britain being a constant threat in the Reich's western front. Furthermore, it was evident that the "neutrality" which the US had superficially maintained to that point would soon change to an open and unlimited support of Britain against Germany. Hitler thus welcomed Japan's sudden entry into the war

    *Source* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German...t.2C_Axis_and_World_War_II_.281920_to_1945.29

    I think thats pretty much why -- probably a number of other reasons as well.
  11. Shisno Doesn't know who did this

    Member Since:
    Feb 27, 2012
    Message Count:
    2,641
    Likes Received:
    739
    Trophy Points:
    139
    Location:
    NKVD Underground
    No, I understand that they were in an alliance and what not, but they really didn't have to intervene for Japan. Japan could neither, bomb, attack, or do anything to Nazi Germany. There was in fact no point in helping Japan, because Japan did nothing. If America was so committed to stopping Japan, it may have stopped sending supplies to the UK, USSR, etc. Hitler should have remembered what happened in the First World War when American manpower tipped the scales more heavily in the Entente's favor.
  12. Da Julii Member

    Member Since:
    Apr 8, 2012
    Message Count:
    62
    Likes Received:
    27
    Trophy Points:
    12
    The British may not have had to worry about a rebellion but they did care enough about it to deploy troops. If Germany had found a way to lift the British blockade the war could have gone on for years or if they were able to get supply lines through the USSR. Spanish Influenza was ravishing all sides the French and British were hit hardest by it since their trenches were compared to those of the Germans. Also America did not switch sides back and forth the Amerian public did but those in the state department as well as the president had been on the side of the allies since day one. Many things including the invasion of Veracuz, Mexico by the United State's Marines and the American public being deeply divided on the matter prevented any action being taken militarily. Also the Republican party who was against any action being taken could have prevented a motion being made in the Senate or Congress.
  13. Shisno Doesn't know who did this

    Member Since:
    Feb 27, 2012
    Message Count:
    2,641
    Likes Received:
    739
    Trophy Points:
    139
    Location:
    NKVD Underground
    But the Germans could never break the British blockade. Why? Because there navy was outnumbered compared to the blockading force, and U-boats were around this time being countered using the convoy system. The Americans, despite their limited action during the WW1, were more troops for the Entente to throw at the Germans that weren't disease ravaged.
  14. Toast Well-Known Member

    Member Since:
    Feb 13, 2011
    Message Count:
    4,180
    Likes Received:
    630
    Trophy Points:
    183
    Location:
    Sierra Leone
    Germany could not have lifted the British blockade. Simple as that. Nothing beats the British navy. And what makes you think that the Russians were going to comply with the Germans? The Russians desperately wanted to be isolated from all wars. The Russians had already taken catastrophic casualties and they were in no position to return to the war. I've already told you to stop mentioning the Americans - this really wasn't their war and they had little to no effect on it. However, patriotic Americans insist on claiming that they won it, just like in WW2.
  15. Nathan New Member

    Member Since:
    Apr 5, 2012
    Message Count:
    37
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    2
    Location:
    Down The Rabbit Hole
    Ah you mean from a practical standpoint?

    Yeah it does seem kind of a silly decision. Going up against Russian manpower, US industry and British intelligence is always doomed to fail on your part. :p
  16. Shisno Doesn't know who did this

    Member Since:
    Feb 27, 2012
    Message Count:
    2,641
    Likes Received:
    739
    Trophy Points:
    139
    Location:
    NKVD Underground
    Exactly. Japan didn't have the capabilities to attack Germany, so it seems silly that they want to fight US.
  17. Da Julii Member

    Member Since:
    Apr 8, 2012
    Message Count:
    62
    Likes Received:
    27
    Trophy Points:
    12
    Your comment about World War II is absurd who do you think fought the war in the Pacific who do you think battled the Germans across Africa who do you think invaded Italy and Sicily and who do you think masterminded and invested most in the D-Day invasions? Without American support the USSR would have fallen along with Britain. It was American supplies that kept Leningrad supplyed not Russian. It was American made planes that helped fight the Battle of Britian. By saying that America did not do anything to win World War II shows that you must know nothing about it. In the Pacific theater we battled the Japanese army and navy across a whole ocean and beat them. We dropped the first atomic bomb on Japan. World War II would have been unwinable without America.
  18. Toast Well-Known Member

    Member Since:
    Feb 13, 2011
    Message Count:
    4,180
    Likes Received:
    630
    Trophy Points:
    183
    Location:
    Sierra Leone
    Jesus Christ. Another one of you people.
    Jack118 and DutchMasterRace like this.
  19. Kali The World's Best Communist

    Member Since:
    Mar 13, 2012
    Message Count:
    1,168
    Likes Received:
    1,065
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Is this really a question? How can you reasonably argue that the Central Powers beat the Entente?
  20. Toast Well-Known Member

    Member Since:
    Feb 13, 2011
    Message Count:
    4,180
    Likes Received:
    630
    Trophy Points:
    183
    Location:
    Sierra Leone
    Are you leaving or not?

Share This Page

Facebook: