Some may argue there was no progess, because of WW2 happening soon after. Some may say the Allies totally won. What's your take and why?
2007-02-15 14:59:22 · 7 answers · asked by cheeseprincess4eva 2 in Arts & Humanities ➔ History
The closest thing to a real winner in the fight was probably the United Kingdom. They managed to stave off their biggest economic rival, Germany, from setting up an economic hegemony over the continent of Europe. And that's about it. I'd say that not a heck of a lot more was accomplished, other than the destruction of men and materiel, and even that outcome was of marginal utility.
2007-02-15 17:45:13 · answer #1 · answered by bdunn91 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I don't think anybody really wins a war. All lose something. Individually some participatants may avoid what they might have suffered if they did not fight; some may reap benefits they could have got without the costs if there were no war; and all lose those and other benefits available through co-operation rather than war. So everyone loses far more than merely the costs in lives and direct destruction. World Wars 1 and 2 demonstrate this, as do the lasting animosities in the Balkans and elsewhere. But like the idiots who break the road rules for the sake of some immediate percieved advantage in traffic and cause a fatal crash, politicians and nations go to war persistently to preserve existing privilege, grab more, and avoid real change (which happens anyway, through war!). There's an analagy to this in climate change if you think about it.
2007-02-15 23:34:38 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The only country that could be called a winner was the USA.The US lost the least amount of men in the war. Also the US sold a large amount of goods to the Allies and also loaned the Allies money. The Roaring 20's were fueled by loan payments from Europe.
But Altametly, all of the nations will lose in the short-term or in the long term. From Economical
loses and deaths. to the start of world War Two.
No mater what war is always brings no true winner.
2007-02-15 23:19:00 · answer #3 · answered by MG 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Those who entered in 1914 generally were losers. Massive manpower losses and monetary outlays could in no way be balanced by any gains. The US did pretty well. We made a ton of money before we entered, and we wound up with a big army and world-power status at the end, and at a lot less cost than that paid by the European powers.
2007-02-15 23:51:57 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The one thing we can learn from history is that each war just sets the stage for the next one and sometimes you have to fight no matter how much you don't want to. What is the solution? I don't know except freedom of speech and freedom of the press seem to be important.
2007-02-15 23:20:15 · answer #5 · answered by chris B 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Nope because everyone just pretty much pulled out and made agreements to give each other land because all the sides were running out of troops and supplies for solders. But then they made Germany pay for everything.
2007-02-15 23:08:17 · answer #6 · answered by Iitami© 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't think there was really a winner, though you can definitely say that Germany lost.
2007-02-16 04:51:24 · answer #7 · answered by Saint Bee 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋