B Gates Posted March 31, 2000 Share Posted March 31, 2000 In IMHO the Big winner of WWII was Russia. And the Big losers were the Eastern European countries that became known as 'Eastern Block' countries. They still havn't recoverd. An over simplification I know, but a directin this thread hasnt taken yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark IV Posted March 31, 2000 Share Posted March 31, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Did you win or lose the American Civil War?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> We won. A Yank. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DEF BUNGIS Posted March 31, 2000 Author Share Posted March 31, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by T-34\85: As usual everyone forgets that the battles in Western Europe were pathetic skirmishes compared to the titanic battles of the Eastern front. So ... the USSR won WW2 (against Germany at ,against Japan the US kicked ass) <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> OK........ TROLL!!!!!!!!!!!! ------------------ Better to make the wrong decision than be the sorry son of a bitch to scared to make one at all Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Major Tom Posted March 31, 2000 Share Posted March 31, 2000 The reason the USSR lost the Cold war was because it was so demo'd from the Second World War. Canada and America were entirely untouched, these were the only nations that completely benefited from the Second World War. Russia couldn't have won the war without the allies, and the allies couldn't have won the war without the Russians. At least it would have taken twice at long for either side to independently become victorious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wesy Posted March 31, 2000 Share Posted March 31, 2000 But Major Tom...not to extend this thread, but I'd also state that W. Europe/Japan also benefited from the war (for Japan and Germany - at great loss of property and life relative to the allied powers during WWII - with the exception of the USSR) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hakko Ichiu Posted March 31, 2000 Share Posted March 31, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by guachi: I became interested in WWII at the age of four. Loved all the planes and tanks and stuff. Got the American Heritage Picture History of WWII as a gift when I was five. the book is, like, 600 pages long and is a 'coffee table' sized book. Tough reading and brutal pictures for a five year-old! One of the very first pictures is of a person liberated from a concentration camp. I don't even need to open the book to know what the picture looks like. It took me two years to finish that book... and it is still sitting on my bookshelf behind me. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I remember that book, although I was a good few years older when my family got it. Unfortunately, it's not my copy, so it's still sitting on my folk's bookshelf. An excellent broad view of the war for younger readers -- and a definite influence in my development as a student of military history. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>From Hundminen: Seems like there's an awful lot of that going around. I wonder how many history teachers or professors ended up in history due to the process of elimination, rather than genuine interest. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> As someone who narrowly avoided a career in academic history, I can assure you that -- at the university level at least -- the competition for professorships in history is extremely tight. There are a lot of unemployed history Ph.D.s out there. It is pretty unlikely that a history professor at a good college ended up there by default. The default positions go to other departments that I won't talk about for fear of starting a thread on PC. Ethan ------------------ Das also war des Pudels Kern! -- Goethe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hakko Ichiu Posted March 31, 2000 Share Posted March 31, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Wesy: But Major Tom...not to extend this thread, but I'd also state that W. Europe/Japan also benefited from the war (for Japan and Germany - at great loss of property and life relative to the allied powers during WWII - with the exception of the USSR) <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> As my professor of modern Japanese history liked to point out, Germany and Japan had their old, turn of the century industrial plant completely demolished and re-built to the latest modern standards at the expense of the U.S. taxpayer. No wonder they made great economic strides in the 50s through the 80s. As a side issue, does anybody know whether the USSR ever paid back its debts accrued during the Lend-Lease program? Ethan ------------------ Das also war des Pudels Kern! -- Goethe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Major Tom Posted March 31, 2000 Share Posted March 31, 2000 Europe and Japan benefited from the aftermath of the war. However, if Japan were to have won, or if Germany would to have won, they would be in a MUCH better situation then they actually are now. Japan would control vitrually all of the Pacific, along with most of China. Europe's industrial power would be united under Germany, which would also posess a big chunk of Russia. Seeing what they could have had, and what they actually ended up with I would have to say that Europe and Japan were still the big losers of WWII. It also goes beyond that of economic success. They lost loads of Prestige for losing WWII, internally and externally. Sure they were rebuilt, but, not to the extent they could have been had they won. Like the US taxpayer felt much pain after WWII in aiding Europe. The 1950's was an economic boom. The US was smart enough not to make the same mistake twice, and decided to help Europe and Japan so they wouldn't become enemies again in 20 or so years. I would also have to state that the United States and Canada, have and will be for the longest time, the greatest benefiters of the post-war era. The US is still the military powerhouse of the world. Canada is also constantly being rated as the best country to live in. This is 55 years after the end of the war. Sure, Japan and Germany weren't blasted back into the stone age, but, I would rather live here in Canada than in Europe or Japan. It is just too crowed over there Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Captain Foobar Posted April 1, 2000 Share Posted April 1, 2000 In the literal sense, The Axis lost WW2. There is no dispute over this. To say that by prospering in the aftermath of the war, they won the war...well that's just a mental stretch IMO. Maybe a better way of saying it is that they are better off for having the war happen? It might seem this way economically, but the human cost was just a LITTLE too high to justify some new factories... There doesn't have to be a loser AFTER the war ends. In a general sense, it was a war of haves (Allies) against have-nots (Axis), so why keep them in a state of have-not, where we end up fighting over resources again? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wesy Posted April 1, 2000 Share Posted April 1, 2000 Major Tom, I would argue that Japan, may not have been better off had they won. Essentially, Japan had their equivalent of their "industrial revolution" in the late 1800's/early 1900's. A significant portion of the budget was allocated to military spending. Had Japan "won" - (an uneasy peace treaty at best), they would have had to devote significant amount of their GDP towards military/defense spending - far more than today. Japan would have also had to deal with latent and not so latent "wars of national liberation" in South East and North Asia (Indonesia, Vietnam, China, Tibet etc). This would mean large armed forces to police those states as well as defending large borders of China, India, Soviet Union/Russia and defending maritime sealanes from the US. Completely agree that the US did have the right policy (the world learned from Versailles). As such, this allowed them to industrialize and mass product products that were based on Japanese wartime technologies (ie. Optics, Cameras, Radios etc.). They did not have to allocate many resources towards defense. Even today they devote a very small percentage of their GDP (about 1%) to defense - although in real dollars her defense budget is larger than France, Germany, UK and Italy individually. I heard a great joke at work today actually told from one of my Canadian coworker - Q: What is a Canadian? A: An Unarmed American with Healthcare Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest mch Posted April 1, 2000 Share Posted April 1, 2000 Actually,WWII was won by a guy right here in my hometown!His name is Tom.don't believe me? go ask him!He'll tell you straight! Don't worry,He's been unemployed for around ten years now,so,He'll have time to tell you all about it! if I may Quote: Yea...I went over there an,if it woulddna been fer me...they wouldda los' the whole damn thing...an i aint never got no credit fur it neither.. ------------------ It is no disgrace to be defeated...It is a disgrace to be surprised. -attr.to Fredrick the Great- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Compassion Posted April 1, 2000 Share Posted April 1, 2000 "We're 10 and 1" Bill Murray - Stripes! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark IV Posted April 1, 2000 Share Posted April 1, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>I would argue that Japan, may not have been better off had they won<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> They got firebombed, nuked, and occupied from one end to the other. Their overseas possessions were lost, their national treasures destroyed, their women violated. If that ain't losin' I don't know what is. The phrase "unconditional surrender" is illuminating here. After they LOST the hell out of the war, the world changed and they are doing well in it (winning the peace). New subject, different issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neutral Party Posted April 1, 2000 Share Posted April 1, 2000 There is no doubt that it was of some benefit to Germany and Japan to lose the war. IMHO this is because the outcome of war generally means no fundamental change for the "victors" but the possibility of radical change for the "losers". Let's take the example of Great Britain which hasn't been conquered ever (actually) - southern Britain was conquered by the Normans in 1066. What is the end result of having a state persist for such a long time without any radical change in its system of government. You end up with a set of anachronistic institutions based on "tradition", no written constitution - which basically means rule by a "nod and a wink" and a fundamentally corrupt system based on class and hereditary privilege that has its root in the Monarchy. In fact not too dissimilar to pre-war Japan. Losing the war means there is the opportunity to wipe the slate clean and start again with a modern political constitution. This is what happened in post-war Germany and also in Japan (although it retained its Monarchy). Due to a number of factors including the beginning of the cold war and the belief that punitive reparation were counter-productive, the only economic superpower left in the aftermath of ww2 (i.e., the USA) came to the conclusion that it was a good idea to help rebuild the nations that had been devastated by war and were in its sphere of influence. Contrast this with the behaviour of the USSR that basically nicked everything that wasn't nailed down (and most things that were nailed down) from the nations in its sphere of influence. When people discussed the German economic miracle in the 80's they sure weren't talking about the DDR. So when you say that Germany (or Japan) won the war what you really mean is that losing the war and a fortuitous set of circumstance forced a radical change in the political and economic systems of these countries which proved to be of some benefit in the medium term. In the long term, of course, we are all dead - as John Maynard Keynes pointed out. Joe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bazooka10165 Posted April 1, 2000 Share Posted April 1, 2000 Yeah - If the the German's had conquered England, maybe pubs would be allowed to stay opened past 11 pm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hundminen Posted April 1, 2000 Share Posted April 1, 2000 I apologize to all the History Academics out there. No offense. As an Engineer, I just couln't pass up the opportunity to take a shot. Hundminen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T-34\85 Posted April 1, 2000 Share Posted April 1, 2000 Very true Mark IV Many people in this forum confused winning the war with winning the peace. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
werfer Posted April 2, 2000 Share Posted April 2, 2000 Good post t34/85, peace is the major victory for all wars. The Japonese and Germans have both become major players in the world economy (no one knows about the soviet union) and for the most part, the world is war-free still. This is a good thing that needs to last for several hundred years (hope,hope). werfer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
COMMO CHIEF Posted April 2, 2000 Share Posted April 2, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by werfer: and for the most part, the world is war-free still. This is a good thing that needs to last for several hundred years (hope,hope). werfer<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> It depends on what you consider a war. My ass gets tired of deploying to all these F**ked up 3rd world countries, with fanaticals shooting every damn direction thier barrels turn. The world may be WAR free, but it damn sure ain;t peace free. ------------------ [This message has been edited by COMMO CHIEF (edited 04-02-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Major Tom Posted April 2, 2000 Share Posted April 2, 2000 It is too bad that us in the First World are primarily responsible for the disasters in the Third World. Then we have to send in our troops to die to try and clean up the mess. Couldn't we have avoided the mess to begin with? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Echo Posted April 3, 2000 Share Posted April 3, 2000 i get sick of americans thinking it was just them alone in these wars. i seem to remember a little organisation called the " UN " dont know if u have heard of them before... Sure, Ive heard of "it". 1/3 of their budget is subsidized by the U.S. , and "it" has never gone to war without the U.S. leading it there. Not only that, it was founded by the U.S., and in and of itself, it has no standing military body (but it would love to establish a soverein one at our expense), and doesnt have the capacity to wage war independently. ------------------ As I walk through the Valley of Death, I will fear no one, for I am the meanest mother*#*#** in the valley. (George S. Patton) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Echo Posted April 3, 2000 Share Posted April 3, 2000 Originally posted by Mark IV: They got firebombed, nuked, and occupied from one end to the other. Their overseas possessions were lost, their national treasures destroyed, their women violated. If that ain't losin' I don't know what is. The phrase "unconditional surrender" is illuminating here. LOL! Man, they lost worse than that, they were fighting harder than we were, with the kamikazee tactics and all, and they still were beat to the ground. ------------------ As I walk through the Valley of Death, I will fear no one, for I am the meanest mother*#*#** in the valley. (George S. Patton) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Echo Posted April 3, 2000 Share Posted April 3, 2000 It depends on what you consider a war. My ass gets tired of deploying to all these F**ked up 3rd world countries, with fanaticals shooting every damn direction thier barrels turn. The world may be WAR free, but it damn sure ain;t peace free. Amen Brother. Thats the very reason I eneded my service in '94. When I saw what our Chief Executive was doing with the military (Dont ask dont Tell....feed this nation....feed that nation...), I read the writing on the wall and bailed. Your one patient SOB to still be serving. S! ------------------ As I walk through the Valley of Death, I will fear no one, for I am the meanest mother*#*#** in the valley. (George S. Patton) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trooper Posted April 4, 2000 Share Posted April 4, 2000 If I recall, the first UN peace-enforcing operation was the Congo. I can't say I much recall hearing of masses of US troops heading over that way, though I know we used the USAF to get there.. can anyone enlighten me? NTM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darren J Pierson Posted April 4, 2000 Share Posted April 4, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Hundminen: I apologize to all the History Academics out there. No offense. As an Engineer, I just couln't pass up the opportunity to take a shot. Hundminen<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Hey, no problem. Have to plead guilty to a few engineer comments in my past, especially here at a big engineering school. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts