was world war 2 nessesary? - Armor Games Community

79	11561

offline

TheTerminator

174 posts

Nomad

Posted February 2, '10 11:16pm UTC

Wow. That last posting is dripping with such ignorance I need an umbrella. First off, before the United States invovlement, german U-boats were not attacking the United States supply ships to Britain. This was a touchy subject, and in fact the Nazi's did not want any invovlement with the United States in WW2. Too bad the Japs were not listening and decided to attack Pearl Harbor, which in itself could have been prevented by the United States. Anyways the Axis did include Germany, Italy, and Japan, and even the Soviet Union, at the very beginning of the war. They also forced citizens of the countries they invaded to enroll in their military. But the Allies included at least a dozen countries, United States, U.K, Soviet Union, Canada,Australia, France, India, China, and several African countries. Also the Germans did not have plans to take over the world, because they themselves realized it was not possible. And finally, the war was inevitable, needed to be fought, and rid the world of Nazism.

where safe from countries now aren't we?

first off its "we are" and second...hahahahaha. Safe?! That's a laugh.

Wow. That last posting is dripping with such ignorance I need an umbrella. First off, before the United States invovlement, german U-boats were not attacking the United States supply ships to Britain. This was a touchy subject, and in fact the Nazi's did not want any invovlement with the United States in WW2. Too bad the Japs were not listening and decided to attack Pearl Harbor, which in itself could have been prevented by the United States. Anyways the Axis did include Germany, Italy, and Japan, and even the Soviet Union, at the very beginning of the war. They also forced citizens of the countries they invaded to enroll in their military. But the Allies included at least a dozen countries, United States, U.K, Soviet Union, Canada,Australia, France, India, China, and several African countries. Also the Germans did not have plans to take over the world, because they themselves realized it was not possible. And finally, the war was inevitable, needed to be fought, and rid the world of Nazism. [quote]where safe from countries now aren't we?[/quote] first off its "we are" and second...hahahahaha. Safe?! That's a laugh.

offline

WexMajor82

1,026 posts

Nomad

Posted February 3, '10 12:10am UTC

WWI. The Germans never had a valid reason to invade France in WWI.
Yes they had. The most rich coal mines of Europe are on the border of the two country. They fought over them for centuries.

offline

tomertheking

1,751 posts

Jester

Posted February 3, '10 3:46am UTC

There were enough signs that showed what kind of person Hitler really was.

There also is a dictator in venezuela. I see no sings of help.

offline

tomertheking

1,751 posts

Jester

Posted February 3, '10 3:52am UTC

They fought over them for centuries.

since karl the great.

offline

BigT82887

11 posts

Nomad

Posted February 3, '10 4:58pm UTC

Wat kind of question is this??? Yes, it was very necessary... What kind of country would America be today if it hadn't stepped in to stop Hitler from killing millions of Jewish people?

offline

Bloodscum

115 posts

Nomad

Posted February 3, '10 5:22pm UTC

That is true.... WWII was a neccessary evil to stop an even greater evil.... the brutal tactics of the Nazi Party and Imperial Japan.

offline

WexMajor82

1,026 posts

Nomad

Posted February 3, '10 5:38pm UTC

It was necessary for Germany too! It made come out from economical disaster; during the crack of '29 the Usa cancelled economic help for the country that lost WW1. They got a bad recession (a million marks to go grocery shopping) that brought WW2. As always it was money that carried war along.

offline

iamnotironman

1,287 posts

Nomad

Posted February 3, '10 7:21pm UTC

Well no it wasn't necessary unless if you didn't want to be killed by Hitler.

offline

Armed_Blade

1,482 posts

Shepherd

Posted February 3, '10 8:49pm UTC

It was necessary for Germany too! It made come out from economical disaster; during the crack of '29 the Usa cancelled economic help for the country that lost WW1. They got a bad recession (a million marks to go grocery shopping) that brought WW2. As always it was money that carried war along.

Kinda failish -- Germany was about 4 Billion Marks = 1 USD before Hitler. Before Hitlers WWII he had pretty much resurged the economy, the world was obviously planning to get back at him later saying 'Omgshrz you didn't pay us back for the 22039billion dollars you should for WWI! '
So it might have been necessary to get that off their backs, but overall for the most part Germany didn't really need WWII -- Infact, after conquering Poland and Austria nobody even cared. Due to Nationalist ideals during the Enlightenment era pogroms against Jews in countries like Russia and Germany were fairly common! It had been going on long enough for nobody to care. It was until Germany itself was a threat that had labeled itself as a key to disrupting the world order of Europe was it that people saw a reason to fight back.

Are you asking if WWII was necessary for America? Not until the end in my opinion. Why would America have spent so long to get over there in the first place? Its simple really, Europe, the leading exporter of manufactured goods to the world [besides America] was in trouble, meaning everyone is trading WITH America. So we're getting rich, our economic competitors are pwnt, and the nasty Russians who we're just staaarting to have some competition and dislike with are on the verge of failure.
America stepped up not when they were in awe of the German military, but when the Germans constantly attacked a few Subs to keep Americans to stop supporting their better friends like France and Britain. That, along with the devastation caused by Germany and France and Britain's request for help finally pushed us into the war to attack Germany and France. At that point it was 100% necessary, but now looking back on it -- with all the advantages it gave America for the upcoming decades it can, for the most part, seen as a big advantage.

If your looking at it morally, War is usually a bad thing, especially when directed at specific people [Such as Nazi Germany and their uber nationalist ways]. So of course it was, gotta stop the baddies.

[quote]It was necessary for Germany too! It made come out from economical disaster; during the crack of '29 the Usa cancelled economic help for the country that lost WW1. They got a bad recession (a million marks to go grocery shopping) that brought WW2. As always it was money that carried war along.[/quote]\r\n\r\nKinda failish -- Germany was about 4 Billion Marks = 1 USD before Hitler. Before Hitlers WWII he had pretty much resurged the economy, the world was obviously planning to get back at him later saying 'Omgshrz you didn't pay us back for the 22039billion dollars you should for WWI! :('\r\nSo it might have been necessary to get that off their backs, but overall for the most part Germany didn't really need WWII -- Infact, after conquering Poland and Austria nobody even cared. Due to Nationalist ideals during the Enlightenment era pogroms against Jews in countries like Russia and Germany were fairly common! It had been going on long enough for nobody to care. It was until Germany itself was a threat that had labeled itself as a key to disrupting the world order of Europe was it that people saw a reason to fight back.\r\n\r\nAre you asking if WWII was necessary for America? Not until the end in my opinion. Why would America have spent so long to get over there in the first place? Its simple really, Europe, the leading exporter of manufactured goods to the world [besides America] was in trouble, meaning everyone is trading WITH America. So we're getting rich, our economic competitors are pwnt, and the nasty Russians who we're just staaarting to have some competition and dislike with are on the verge of failure.\r\nAmerica stepped up not when they were in awe of the German military, but when the Germans constantly attacked a few Subs to keep Americans to stop supporting their better friends like France and Britain. That, along with the devastation caused by Germany and France and Britain's request for help finally pushed us into the war to attack Germany and France. At that point it was 100% necessary, but now looking back on it -- with all the advantages it gave America for the upcoming decades it can, for the most part, seen as a big advantage.\r\n\r\nIf your looking at it morally, War is usually a bad thing, especially when directed at specific people [Such as Nazi Germany and their uber nationalist ways]. So of course it was, gotta stop the baddies.

offline

ComradeWolf

358 posts

Nomad

Posted February 4, '10 7:12am UTC

Good point armed. However, once the war was finished in Europe, from a Economical perspective, Im screwing everyone's mroals aside, as they are a waste of time in a matter like this.

Once Europe is knocked out of commission, and Japan, since Japan has been invading China, already Occupied Korea, Mongolia, and most of the Pacific isles, who, would be left? the United States, the split off Common wealth states from britain, the Ex European colonies, and numerous other nations.

Germany, and Japan ,would have seen the USA as a large economical threat after. So rather then deal with you guys as a middleman, and since you had Jewish people and so on, and plus your racial history with Oriental people and Japan, of which Japan remembers well, I believe they would have attacked the United States, rather then leave them open like that. It would make more sense to cut out the middleman, and nto only that, but with their idealogies of Nationilism and Ethnocentrism, they would have surely invaded you, a Dutch-Anglo Mix with numerous italians, some germans, Irish, and Black Africans with Jewish people as well. Because note. Germany hated blacks, and Jews.
Japan hated Italians, and Dutch.
the only ethnicites they may have no killed as much, is Irish descent, and English, and Italy may have stepped in for italian backgrounded people. But besides all the Idealogies, America was also a Industrial, and Military threat. so if you hadn't stepped in, America would have been invaded, one way or another.

Good point armed. However, once the war was finished in Europe, from a Economical perspective, Im screwing everyone's mroals aside, as they are a waste of time in a matter like this. \r\n\r\nOnce Europe is knocked out of commission, and Japan, since Japan has been invading China, already Occupied Korea, Mongolia, and most of the Pacific isles, who, would be left? the United States, the split off Common wealth states from britain, the Ex European colonies, and numerous other nations. \r\n\r\nGermany, and Japan ,would have seen the USA as a large economical threat after. So rather then deal with you guys as a middleman, and since you had Jewish people and so on, and plus your racial history with Oriental people and Japan, of which Japan remembers well, I believe they would have attacked the United States, rather then leave them open like that. It would make more sense to cut out the middleman, and nto only that, but with their idealogies of Nationilism and Ethnocentrism, they would have surely invaded you, a Dutch-Anglo Mix with numerous italians, some germans, Irish, and Black Africans with Jewish people as well. Because note. Germany hated blacks, and Jews.\r\nJapan hated Italians, and Dutch. \r\nthe only ethnicites they may have no killed as much, is Irish descent, and English, and Italy may have stepped in for italian backgrounded people. But besides all the Idealogies, America was also a Industrial, and Military threat. so if you hadn't stepped in, America would have been invaded, one way or another.

offline

German3945

996 posts

Nomad

Posted February 5, '10 4:05am UTC

As I've been saying this entire thread before it was necro'd, there were plenty signs of Hitler's intentions years prior to the war. It's okay to overlook the army being built (seeing as the WWI treaty WAS bogus in that regard), but here:

1) Troops invaded the Rhineland (before their army was even full strength, and before most people were behind the Nazi party). This is completely unnecessary and violates a very basic, understandable, logical part of the WWI treaty. Allies should have attacked the second they saw this.
2) Germany invaded a neighboring country, claiming it united the majority of Germans there. This is hardly overlook-able considering the bunches of speeches being made rallying huge crowds about the master race. I can understand this though. It's O.K., but....

The Real 2) Germany invades neighboring country, after invading a different earlier and promising to both Britain and France in person that "we're done. that was all we want". THIS is unacceptable. Not only are they steadily taking other land, they're lying straight to your face and taking some more after that. Unacceptable under any circumstances.

2 very strong reasons it never should have been such a large war.

As I've been saying this entire thread before it was necro'd, there were plenty signs of Hitler's intentions years prior to the war.  It's okay to overlook the army being built (seeing as the WWI treaty WAS bogus in that regard), but here:\r\n\r\n1) Troops invaded the Rhineland (before their army was even full strength, and before most people were behind the Nazi party).  This is completely unnecessary and violates a very basic, understandable, logical part of the WWI treaty.  Allies should have attacked the second they saw this.\r\n2) Germany invaded a neighboring country, claiming it united the majority of Germans there.  This is hardly overlook-able considering the bunches of speeches being made rallying huge crowds about the master race.  I can understand this though.  It's O.K., but....\r\n\r\nThe Real 2) Germany invades neighboring country, after invading a different earlier and promising to both Britain and France in person that "we're done. that was all we want". THIS is unacceptable.  Not only are they steadily taking other land, they're lying straight to your face and taking some more after that.  Unacceptable under any circumstances.  \r\n\r\n2 very strong reasons it never should have been such a large war.

offline

Armed_Blade

1,482 posts

Shepherd

Posted February 5, '10 5:44am UTC

The Real 2) Germany invades neighboring country, after invading a different earlier and promising to both Britain and France in person that "we're done. that was all we want". THIS is unacceptable. Not only are they steadily taking other land, they're lying straight to your face and taking some more after that. Unacceptable under any circumstances.

I'm not sure thats clearly followable.
I believe Nationalism was a huge ideology in this era. You have to realize that the Purssian Empire/Second Reich was a time of national swell for the Germans, they felt like they were the SH**T. The loss of WWI was nothing of a hard blow, they along with the international community saw that the 'document' based on them was a pure joke and nobody was going to follow it. With Hitlers (Rather unlawful) but genius plan to rise the ranks and patch Germany up was unbelievable, he was smart enough to get Germany back to its running ranks. Eventually, the school brainwashing plus the propaganda was a normal thing in Germany.

The end result is, German Pride is almost when you hear the Russian songs talking about 'Mother Russia'. The point is -- you can't screw with them.
German nationalism continuously boomed, and the Nazi regime was basically an outpouring of it. Jews had long been seen as an 'un assimilation' factor in nationalistic make the countries no empires Europe!
The international regard for the treaty that German is to pay back who knows how many 100 Billion's and not do this and that and never have an army for such a large and rather mighty country was outright bogus -- Germany lost land AFTER WWI, because for a moment, they really couldn't do anything.

Their invasion of the Rhineland, In my opinion, is just a bit justified. It used to be Prussian land, Germany accepted those it conquered, and it was - well, they're river. Its almost like someone snagging the Mississippi [even though its like right in the middle and all that, I know]. But the point is, if it were America, we'd snag it back.

The later acquisitions of Poland and Austria (even though Austria was more like a parade...), many called the invasion of Poland the start of WWII -- it clearly didn't look like it, but whatever. Then again, Hitler started attacking a year later. Was there really much to be done? Even to add to that, nobody knew how strong Germany really was. Not to call the world full of pussycats but... They had WWI just a bit ago, and just about everybody knew that during that time fighting a German is like seeing a bear on the street. Your likely to run :S

So I'm not sure that the treaty itself is valuable support for it not being a big war.

[quote]The Real 2) Germany invades neighboring country, after invading a different earlier and promising to both Britain and France in person that "we're done. that was all we want". THIS is unacceptable.  Not only are they steadily taking other land, they're lying straight to your face and taking some more after that.  Unacceptable under any circumstances. [/quote]\r\n\r\nI'm not sure thats clearly followable.\r\nI believe Nationalism was a huge ideology in this era. You have to realize that the Purssian Empire/Second Reich was a time of national swell for the Germans, they felt like they were the SH**T. The loss of WWI was nothing of a hard blow, they along with the international community saw that the 'document' based on them was a pure joke and nobody was going to follow it. With Hitlers (Rather unlawful) but genius plan to rise the ranks and patch Germany up was unbelievable, he was smart enough to get Germany back to its running ranks. Eventually, the school brainwashing plus the propaganda was a normal thing in Germany.\r\n\r\nThe end result is, German Pride is almost when you hear the Russian songs talking about 'Mother Russia'. The point is -- you can't screw with them.\r\nGerman nationalism continuously boomed, and the Nazi regime was basically an outpouring of it. Jews had long been seen as an 'un assimilation' factor in nationalistic make the countries no empires Europe! \r\nThe international regard for the treaty that German is to pay back who knows how many 100 Billion's and not do this and that and never have an army for such a large and rather mighty country was outright bogus -- Germany lost land AFTER WWI, because for a moment, they really couldn't do anything.\r\n\r\nTheir invasion of the Rhineland, In my opinion, is just a bit justified. It used to be Prussian land, Germany accepted those it conquered, and it was - well, they're river. Its almost like someone snagging the Mississippi [even though its like right in the middle and all that, I know]. But the point is, if it were America, we'd snag it back.\r\n\r\nThe later acquisitions of Poland and Austria (even though Austria was more like a parade...), many called the invasion of Poland the start of WWII -- it clearly didn't look like it, but whatever. Then again, Hitler started attacking a year later. Was there really much to be done? Even to add to that, nobody knew how strong Germany really was. Not to call the world full of pussycats but... They had WWI just a bit ago, and just about everybody knew that during that time fighting  a German is like seeing a bear on the street. Your likely to run :S\r\n\r\nSo I'm not sure that the treaty itself is valuable support for it not being a big war.

offline

ComradeWolf

358 posts

Nomad

Posted February 5, '10 8:49am UTC

Mhm. The Treaty was not really followed. HOWEVER. I do not believe the Invasion of Poland was the start of the second world war. I do not even believe the Germans started it.

I believe the second world war started (unofficially) in the Mid 30's, when Japan invaded Manchuria, and China. And they also invaded Hong Kong, a British colony, and sent threats to RUssia. They were also expanding in the Pacific ocean. But a real qeustion is, if Britian itself was attacked by Japan, why didn't they step in, and when they saw another Nationilist, and Fascist state like Japan, Germany, do the exact same thing, and to allies of the Allies( no pun intended.) Why didn't they step in? well they're lazy, and didn't expect Germany to come marching across France's border's, and not only that, many people didn't want a war. The Depression just hit, and not to mention the Spanish flu was also rampant. And also to mention, Germany was in a war before the invasion Czecholovakia, and Poland. The Spanish Civil war. So they already had a Military force that could invade a country. Thats why (besides WWI) Was the reason for the German army to be so experienced.

Mhm. The Treaty was not really followed. HOWEVER. I do not believe the Invasion of Poland was the start of the second world war. I do not even believe the Germans started it.\r\n\r\nI believe the second world war started (unofficially) in the Mid 30's, when Japan invaded Manchuria, and China. And they also invaded Hong Kong, a British colony, and sent threats to RUssia. They were also expanding in the Pacific ocean. But a real qeustion is, if Britian itself was attacked by Japan, why didn't they step in, and when they saw another Nationilist, and Fascist state like Japan, Germany, do the exact same thing, and to allies of the Allies( no pun intended.) Why didn't they step in? well they're lazy, and didn't expect Germany to come marching across France's border's, and not only that, many people didn't want a war. The Depression just hit, and not to mention the Spanish flu was also rampant. And also to mention, Germany was in a war before the invasion Czecholovakia, and Poland. The Spanish Civil war. So they already had a Military force that could invade a country. Thats why (besides WWI) Was the reason for the German army to be so experienced.

offline

Bloodscum

115 posts

Nomad

Posted February 5, '10 9:27am UTC

Don't forget the Italian invasion of Abyssinia, after which the League imposed such weak and pathetic sanctions that no one could ever take it seriously. That was a major cause too.

offline

balerion07

2,837 posts

Peasant

Posted February 5, '10 10:12am UTC

Japan already had economic control of Manchuria before the so called invasion. The sent in troops to protect their investments when the Chinese tried to regain the economic power of the region that they had earlier lost.

Categories

Quests

Community

Forums → WEPR → was world war 2 nessesary?