WW II Historical Thread, Discussion, Pics, Videos

[Jura The idiot]

It is somewhat Euro-centric to take this date and place. Better choose the Marco Polo bridge incident, July 7, 1937.

great, my early morning post got noticed for years I've been not only taught, but also reminded at the beginning of each school year (it's generally September 1 in Central Europe), the WW2 started at 0445 when the Schleswig-Holstein started shelling Westerplatte ... but only now I checked if this is accurate and indeed, wiki says fire was opened at 0447

... and only about half a year ago on the SDF (was it a post by Lezt? by the way, Lezt, how are you? I've heard about

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

as an alternative starting date of WW2

... another alternative would be September 3, 1100 hours of London time; by the way I remember reading kind of recollections of Doenitz, at that time the commander of Kriegsmarine's submarine force, who was appalled by the fact Germany was at war that soon (from his perspective -- German submarines were not yet ready for their strategic goal, now called

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

-- but tactically ... what immediately comes to my mind is U-47 -- Prien -- Royal Oak)

 

[Lezt]

great, my early morning post got noticed for years I've been not only taught, but also reminded at the beginning of each school year (it's generally September 1 in Central Europe), the WW2 started at 0445 when the Schleswig-Holstein started shelling Westerplatte ... but only now I checked if this is accurate and indeed, wiki says fire was opened at 0447

... and only about half a year ago on the SDF (was it a post by Lezt? by the way, Lezt, how are you? I've heard about

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

as an alternative starting date of WW2

... another alternative would be September 3, 1100 hours of London time; by the way I remember reading kind of recollections of Doenitz, at that time the commander of Kriegsmarine's submarine force, who was appalled by the fact Germany was at war that soon (from his perspective -- German submarines were not yet ready for their strategic goal, now called

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

-- but tactically ... what immediately comes to my mind is U-47 -- Prien -- Royal Oak)

I am good, and yourself?

I don't recall talking about marcopolo bridge; but it could have been me.

But yes, WW2 starting in 1939 sept 1st is a euro centric view. Those who view Marco Polo as a Sino-Nippon war starting point, or Lake Khasan July 29, 1938 is the prelude to the Soviet-Nihon war, should remember the fact that, Japan did not declare war on the UK/USA untill Dec 7th 1941; the phoney war was a strickly Western European affair and have not reached world war status until Dec 7th 1941.

Thus, if one view WW2 as strictly begining on Sept 1st 1939, is only based on Germany invading Poland, and the UK/France declaring war on Germany. Even this ignores, Germany invading Czechoslovakia, Russian invasion of Finland, or the Italian invasion of Ethopia... so it is more of a Western European interpretation

 

[delft]

Nope. The World War II started September 1 1939. It's not Euro-centric. It's a fact.

It could have ended in a few weeks or maybe months if France had started the offensive on western Germany as they were sheduled around 20 September but a certain French general was so afraid of the chance to make a decissive blow on Germany and make France the biggest winner in the history of Europe that he chose a course which reulted in a 'phoney war'. I wonder if he could still sleep at night knowing how many people had died and what he did to his own country which lost in a war against Germany just one year later...

Who says so?

 

[Jura The idiot]

I am good, and yourself?

I'm fine, hope there'll be more posts in this thread

I don't recall talking about marcopolo bridge; but it could have been me.

But yes, WW2 starting in 1939 sept 1st is a euro centric view. Those who view Marco Polo as a Sino-Nippon war starting point, or Lake Khasan July 29, 1938 is the prelude to the Soviet-Nihon war, should remember the fact that, Japan did not declare war on the UK/USA untill Dec 7th 1941; the phoney war was a strickly Western European affair and have not reached world war status until Dec 7th 1941.

Thus, if one view WW2 as strictly begining on Sept 1st 1939, is only based on Germany invading Poland, and the UK/France declaring war on Germany. Even this ignores, Germany invading Czechoslovakia, Russian invasion of Finland, or the Italian invasion of Ethopia... so it is more of a Western European interpretation

well my point was that when the Great Britain declared war on Germany this included
1) the participation of the Commonwealth plus the colonies (now I checked -- it was not "automatic":

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

) with the total area of about 12 million square miles
2) Naval Warfare -- for example the "pocket battleship" Graf Spee, at that time in the Atlantic, became the predator/prey

 

[Janiz]

Who says so?

About what?

About September 1, 1939 as the start of the WWII: those who say that conflicts between two countries which aren't colonial superpowers nor have third party countries participating in the conflict openly on the basis of international treaties aren't called 'world wars' says so.

About war lost by Germany if French Army had taken offensive in the September of 1939 General Alfred Jodl and Field Marshal Wilhelm Keitel told that they wouldn't stand a chance in case of such scenario. An exact passage from Alfred Jodl during Nuernberg Trials in 1948

if we did not collapse already in the year 1939 that was due only to the fact that during the Polish campaign, the approximately 110 French and British divisions in the West were held completely inactive against the 23 German divisions.

I think that's the most reliable source on that case and ends the discussion imo.

 

[Lezt]

well my point was that when the Great Britain declared war on Germany this included
1) the participation of the Commonwealth plus the colonies (now I checked -- it was not "automatic":

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

) with the total area of about 12 million square miles
2) Naval Warfare -- for example the "pocket battleship" Graf Spee, at that time in the Atlantic, became the predator/prey

I mean, that is true, but the Russia consisted of 6 million square miles of territory, China consisted of 5 million square miles of territory - people often forget how big these countries are.

About September 1, 1939 as the start of the WWII: those who say that conflicts between two countries which aren't colonial superpowers nor have third party countries participating in the conflict openly on the basis of international treaties aren't called 'world wars' says so.

Thats not really plausible, first thing, super power is a post WW2 term, if you mean great colonial power; then Germany never was a great colonial power; while Russia who fought the Fins, were a great colonial power

About war lost by Germany if French Army had taken offensive in the September of 1939 General Alfred Jodl and Field Marshal Wilhelm Keitel told that they wouldn't stand a chance in case of such scenario. An exact passage from Alfred Jodl during Nuernberg Trials in 1948I think that's the most reliable source on that case and ends the discussion imo.

I mean, Generals generally remember the wars and campaigns differently than reality. Erich von Manstein said in "lost victories" that Germany could have won if Hitler did not intervene with him, does that make it the truth or one man's educated opinion? I am sure, Eisenhower or some other allied general will disagree. Educated, but anecdotal at best.

 

[Jura The idiot]

I mean, that is true, but the Russia consisted of 6 million square miles of territory, China consisted of 5 million square miles of territory - people often forget how big these countries are.
...

yeah but obviously the area of the USSR should be considered here (I just wrote a longer post on this but my web-browser crashed :-( so I'll be brief now): about 8.5 million sq. miles; and I'm not sure about the borders you considered for China, or maybe you just "rounded" your figure, but:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

say less than 4

I wonder what Janiz will tell us about the sworn testimonies at Nuremberg tribunal he quoted ... by the way, those testimonies didn't help those two defendants, did they?

 

[Lezt]

yeah but obviously the area of the USSR should be considered here (I just wrote a longer post on this but my web-browser crashed :-( so I'll be brief now): about 8.5 million sq. miles; and I'm not sure about the borders you considered for China, or maybe you just "rounded" your figure, but:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

say less than 4

I wonder what Janiz will tell us about the sworn testimonies at Nuremberg tribunal he quoted ... by the way, those testimonies didn't help those two defendants, did they?

Jura, well I took the republic of China area which included outer Mongolia, outer Manchuria and other parts of the country which the China of today eventually lost

 

[Jura The idiot]

Jura, well I took the republic of China area which included outer Mongolia, outer Manchuria and other parts of the country which the China of today eventually lost

I see ... I'm very careful when discussing "historical lands of a nation" ... but when I added the area of

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

to my estimate of the area of

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

and to the current area of China, I got 4.5 million sq. miles, which rounds off to five from your claim

 

[Lezt]

I see ... I'm very careful when discussing "historical lands of a nation" ... but when I added the area of

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

to my estimate of the area of

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

and to the current area of China, I got 4.5 million sq. miles, which rounds off to five from your claim

No prob,

Also, Taiwan adds around ~14K sq mile to the modern PRC numbers.

it is actually does hit 5 million sq mile peoper; have a look at the late qing dynasty map:

5,077,243 sq mi according to wikipedia:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

But yeah, this post is not about lost lands, but that China and Russia are big countries in terms of land mass.