Ww1 Or Cw

[LordJaric]

I've all ways wondered how can the first world war be called a world war when it was only fought in europe, it was more like a continental war.

[cookie]

it was the Great War. WW2 was mostly in Europe and Asia as well, didnt touch American soil but thats called a world war as well.

[SuperDeagle]

World War implies on the countries partaking in the War, not where it is fought at.

[Demosthenez]

The Mid East was involved (Ottoman Empire). As was Asia (Russia).

And it could be called this because of the colonial implications. Indian troops fought on the line, Africans fought on the line, American troops fought on the line etc. etc. Granted, the colonials would probably have rather sat at home than fight some random war in Europe but they were kind of forced by their colonial masters.

[SuperDeagle]

WW1 was said to be the war to end all wars.
If anything all it has done is bring upon us more wars then we would like.
Even the problems today can stem back to WW1.

Knowledge Is Power!

[LegendaryLukus]

There was also fighting, no matter how little, in the Pacific involving the Japanese.

But, as has already been said, it was the countries involved that made it a world war.

[Bolo]

At 5/28/07 02:05 PM, LegendaryLukus wrote: There was also fighting, no matter how little, in the Pacific involving the Japanese.

But, as has already been said, it was the countries involved that made it a world war.

You're thinking World War II. The Japs weren't with the Central Powers in WWI.

[emmytee]

WW1 was what fucked what was left of the British empire up. Shoulda just let the damn ruskies and Germans kill each other. Us Brits and French should have just sat back and bask in our awesomeness. But not the French, they were just our sidekick. On a sidenote, the Germans were in the right.

[SuperDeagle]

Do you even know what happened in WW1 and why we wouldn't be able to watch the russians and germans fight it out?

[LordJaric]

At 5/28/07 05:49 PM, emmytee wrote: WW1 was what fucked what was left of the British empire up. Shoulda just let the damn ruskies and Germans kill each other. Us Brits and French should have just sat back and bask in our awesomeness. But not the French, they were just our sidekick. On a sidenote, the Germans were in the right.

Central powers started fight the allies because of jelously, some of them were land locked nations and some of the others didn't have much excess to the oceans so they couldn't spread out like everyone else, so the us and the british got involved because they were threatened.

[emmytee]

At 5/28/07 05:56 PM, SuperDeagle wrote: Do you even know what happened in WW1 and why we wouldn't be able to watch the russians and germans fight it out?

I know how it started etc, and there was nothing to stop the UK and France saying "your mess, your problem" to the Russians. Russia mobilized first over some dumbass assassination, with millions of Russians coming down on you a pre-emptive strike is kind of necessary. When the Russians and the Germans were going at it, the French mobilized with the intention of defending Russia (who they had an alliance with). The Germans did the maths (Alliance with someone we are war with + shitloads of French troops massing on the border) and figured that they would try take France out the game early and sneak through Belgium. But it turns out the Belgians are hard as fuck and held them up until we jumped in. From then on Germany was screwed.

Point being: If France had just said "fuck the archduke and fuck russia" none of this would have happened.

[ErwinR0mmel]

The different colonies of the colonial powers were involved. The Ottoman empire too. The whole world was involved because the war did not only have inplications for the Europian powers but also for their colonies and allies overseas. So naturally most of the world's nations took sides, some even as going as far as pledging military support in a worst case scenario.

[LordJaric]

At 5/28/07 06:06 PM, emmytee wrote:

It was Austria-Hungry that moblized first becuse the duke was assanated, they went to war with a nation that was an allied with russia, so they declared war which brought in austria's ally germany to declear war, than france got involved, it was a domino effect that got all those nations involved.

[HighlyIllogical]

At 5/28/07 01:24 PM, cookie wrote: WW2 was mostly in Europe and Asia as well, didnt touch American soil but thats called a world war as well.

Uhm, Pearl Harbor was in the then-territory of Hawaii...the Phillipines were American-controlled (in the process of being turned over IIRC)...Wake was an American posession...Guam...

[Karzand]

At 5/28/07 02:53 PM, Bolo wrote:

At 5/28/07 02:05 PM, LegendaryLukus wrote: There was also fighting, no matter how little, in the Pacific involving the Japanese.

But, as has already been said, it was the countries involved that made it a world war.

You're thinking World War II. The Japs weren't with the Central Powers in WWI.

Japan was on the side of the Allies in WW1 they siezed control of German colonies in the Pacific/Asia.

[SmilezRoyale]

It was originally called the great war [Not great as in good, great as in Large] because it involved a huge percentage of nations. [Compaired to your regular war]

and more people died as well...

[drDAK]

Although the combat only featured a European theatre (for the most part), it had a global impact. Whether that impact was physical or not does not play a factor.

[Draconias]

At 5/28/07 01:24 PM, cookie wrote: it was the Great War. WW2 was mostly in Europe and Asia as well, didnt touch American soil but thats called a world war as well.

WW2 did in fact touch American soil. The Japanese assault on the island chain of Alaska successfully took quite a few islands and we had to fight for control of them back.

[Dr-Worm]

At 5/28/07 01:24 PM, cookie wrote: it was the Great War. WW2 was mostly in Europe and Asia as well, didnt touch American soil but thats called a world war as well.

It did touch American soil. You know, the day that will forever live in infamy.

Also, the war was fought in Africa. So was WWI, for that matter. Actually, WWI is considered a "world war" because all of these European powers' continents around the world were involved in this.

[J1993]

most countries across the world fought in ww1 because of colonialism but italy joined in 1915 and the us joined in 1917.

[LegendaryLukus]

At 5/28/07 02:53 PM, Bolo wrote:

At 5/28/07 02:05 PM, LegendaryLukus wrote: There was also fighting, no matter how little, in the Pacific involving the Japanese.

But, as has already been said, it was the countries involved that made it a world war.

You're thinking World War II. The Japs weren't with the Central Powers in WWI.

No I am not thinking about WWII. The Japanese were on the Allied side in WWI. The Anglo-Japanese naval alliance signed in, I think it was 1902, ensured this but led to the larger problem of dealing with the Japanese in the Pacific later on, during the Second World War.

[LegendaryLukus]

At 5/28/07 06:06 PM, emmytee wrote:

Point being: If France had just said "fuck the archduke and fuck russia" none of this would have happened.

It's not quite as simple as that though. While the short-term 'spark' of the First World War was the assasination of Arch-duke Ferdinand in Serbia, this war had been building up for about 20 years or so.

Germany was seen by Britain as a great threat to the balance of power in Europe that it had maintained so that it would never have to become involved in European affairs (Crimea being the only European conflict involving Britain after 1815). Thus, tensions began to build through various means: the naval race, the arms race, the German inteference in the Second Boer War etc.

Thus, the British began to realign their policy with Europe. Their traditional allies, Germany (Prussia), became their main enemy, while their traditional enemies, France and Russia, became their allies. Naval forces were consolidated and transferred back to Europe through resolving issues with the US over the panama canal and agreeing an alliance with Japan (which would cause major problems later, as I have already stated.)

The pressure built up so much over the course of the early 19th Century, with public opinion becoming excited for a chance to fight in a war and diplomatic communication between the opposing rivals unable to to do anything (I believe this war could have been averted if more talks had been held). Thus, the First World War broke out at the very first spark - and people joyously rushed to join up.

[TheMason]

At 5/28/07 01:22 PM, LordJaric wrote: I've all ways wondered how can the first world war be called a world war when it was only fought in europe, it was more like a continental war.

There was also much fighting in Africa...

[MrMiau]

At 5/28/07 06:06 PM, emmytee wrote:

At 5/28/07 05:56 PM, SuperDeagle wrote: Do you even know what happened in WW1 and why we wouldn't be able to watch the russians and germans fight it out?

I know how it started etc, and there was nothing to stop the UK and France saying "your mess, your problem" to the Russians. Russia mobilized first over some dumbass assassination, with millions of Russians coming down on you a pre-emptive strike is kind of necessary. When the Russians and the Germans were going at it, the French mobilized with the intention of defending Russia (who they had an alliance with). The Germans did the maths (Alliance with someone we are war with + shitloads of French troops massing on the border) and figured that they would try take France out the game early and sneak through Belgium. But it turns out the Belgians are hard as fuck and held them up until we jumped in. From then on Germany was screwed.

Point being: If France had just said "fuck the archduke and fuck russia" none of this would have happened.

Do you know what the "Schlieffen-Plan" was? Germany already had a strategy to attack both Russia and France, so what you said is just wrong. PLUS there was a Triple Entente, a military treaty between UK, France and, guess what, Russia.