Do most people know about WW1?

Question

I have been speaking to some of my friends and other people, and they are not fully aware of WW1. What upsets me is, they knew exactly what 9/11 and other such recent events are. I am NEVER saying these events are NOT tragic. They are heartbeaking. However, surely the war which claimed the most lives of any war in a few centuries should be known? Maybe its just the idiocy of some of us English, but I am interested in history, and can find no one to discuss WW1 with, its upsetting, particularly as Britian and France basically won WW1 alone, yet natives know nothing of it. Please let me know that you people have MORE knowledge than my foolish friends.

Foolishly, I seem to NOT have asked anything specific. Ok, PLEASE tell me everyone commenting knows what the Somme is, the death toll, how heartbreaking it is, and the effect on British morale. Sorry again

I complete agree Brian. The sad truth is the "XBOX" will take precidence over a fascinating and heartbreaking conflict of man's inhumanity to man.

I understand that America remained absent for the majority of WW1, but Britian was not present at events such as Pearl Harbour or Midway, yet I know about that. I understand your point of view, yet I believe that it should be studied by all, whatever country they hail from. THANK YOU SPITICUS, at last someone who can recount perfectly. Also, the majority of the casualties were caused by dismemberment. As such, most graves are "Unknown", or names are left on the memorial which I have visited. Thank you for reinstilling faith in human nature.

I must disagree with that statement. While Britian had barely three weeks of grain stock left, the Royal Navy was the killer to Germany. The blockades starved the German civilians, leading to a smash in morale, ensuring ONLY the massive nationalists wished to continue fighting. While you did bring 100,000 men to the front, it was more resources you traded to us that was your contribution. I stand by that Britian and France won practically alone, and they were not close to ending their manpower, just their resources, but it really was the naval blockades which finished the war in the end.

I'm not sure I understand you Oscar. I never said America played no part in defeating Germany in WW2, in fact im preety sure I hardly mentioned WW2. If you want, I can relate facts about The Black Death, but since it is a natural occurance, its even less interesting to people than a massive "cool" war. I agree, once again with your thesis, and you are quite the philosipher.

Answer 1

the war to end all wars...what do u need to know im all about it, more than 9 million soldiers died i think its worthy of knowing about

The Battle of the Somme, fought in the summer and autumn of 1916, was one of the largest battles of the First World War. With more than one million casualties, it was also one of the bloodiest battles in human history.The Battle of the Somme was planned as a joint French and British operation. The idea originally came from the French Commander-in-Chief, Joseph Joffre and was accepted by General Sir Douglas Haig, the British Expeditionary Force (BEF) commander, despite his preference for a large attack in Flanders. Although Joffre was concerned with territorial gain, it was also an attempt to destroy German manpower

Answer 2

I think that the problem people have with WWI is that for the uninitated it's a little confusing. It has been soooo long since the days of complicated alliances and counter-alliances between empires that spaned a globe, that people can't understand the 'why' of it all.

People are more engaged/knowledgeable about WW II for example, because the reasons for going to war seem simpler to understand. Germany invading Poland, the Holocaust etc. (Although it was actually a bit more complicated than that- and had a lot to do with the same issues that caused WW I!)

I agree that WWI is fascinating, once you get into it. In many ways it was the end of something. Many historians regard the First World War as the true start to the 20th century, rather than 1900.

The thing to remember is that the war brought to an end a relatively long peace in Europe. Since the fall of Napolean in 1815 at Waterloo there had been few major conflicts between countries. One of the few conflicts in this era was the Franco-Prussian war which lasted three weeks. The countries instead dealt with issues and disputes through DIPLOMACY.

However, while all the diplomacy was going on, the rest of Europe (France especially) were alarmed by the rapid rise of the new unified Germany. The reason why the Franco-Prussian war lasted three weeks is because the German army simply crushed the French. This led to a massive arms race across Europe, propelled by advances in technology that made it easier to kill more people quickly.

When the house of cards that made up the various alliances of Europe fell, it fell big time, and the devastation of WWI was the result.

Answer 3

I am a history buff. It has been over 20 years since I studied WWI to be honest.

I think it is sad as well that people don´t know the history as it is so well said that history repeats in certain senses...and to know your history is to have the better chance to avoid mistakes...not unlike Pres. Bush is now facing.

However, I do take exception to the idea that France and Britain "basically won WW1 alone" as you put it.

France and Britain were at their manpower and material end. Had the US not entered the war it would have been won by the Hun.

Best Regards.

Answer 4

Both were really sick. WWI might have been a bit worse because it was a battle of three Emperors who should have known , if they had had any brains, that they were on their last legs. WWII was about revenge, and how a two-bit corporal could take over the world (and almost did). It's tough to say which war took more lives - a lot of people died from starvation in the first dust-up, but then their were a whole lot of people that were deliberately murdered in the second go-round. Personally, I think it's a toss-up. Whenever a person dies because of the decisions made by another person - it's f***ed up.

Answer 5

OK. If your friends are not fully aware of ww1 then they better be really good friends because otherwise i would advise you to stop associating with them. You are absolutely right, it was one of the most revolutionary wars in that it was the first real "world" war in history. There had never been a war that required the majority of the world to wage total war with multiple allies due to a small act of belligerency. I am happy to know some people care about events of the past. it is a shame people are as uneducated as they are. To answer your question, every one i know has general knowledge of the war, and the U.S only participated for like a year. (I'm American) but there are many things kids i know are unhealthily dim about.

Answer 6

Most people do not have a good understanding of events that happened prior to the year of their birth. It is a simple fact of human behavior. Learning about "ancient history" such as WWI takes too much effort, and too much time away from the XBOX.

Answer 7

You should read more if you say Britain and France won it alone. Without Russia throwing cannon fodder to the eastern side of Germany, tieing up millions of soldiers, Germany would easily have defeated the inferior tactics of the British and French. Two books you should consider reading are "The Guns of August" by Barbara Tuchmann and "World War I" by Martin Gilbert.

Answer 8

Most people don't pay attention in world history, unfortunately... If it doesn't have the strange twisted sickness of Hitler, they generally don't care. Also, since we weren't so much involved...

And I agree with the guy who said that learning about this stuff takes too much time away from the xbox. That's probably what most peoples' reasons are for not learning more, it's not 'entertaining.' Sad but true.

Answer 9

~Actually, WWII had more than twice the body count of WWII and most Americans believe that the US played a major role in the defeat of Hitler. Seems no one gives a damn about history and the lessons so blatantly obvious there. Thus the support for Georgie the Younger (initially) and his ill-advised and doomed attempt to invade Afghanistan and Iraq. Of course, now that the inevitable has come to pass, that support has waned significantly.

As to WWI, the Black Death killed more than either world war in raw numbers, and exponentially more by proportion. It is the most significant event in human history and had the most far-reaching effect of any (save possibly Gutenberg's printing press). How much do you know of it? One can learn a little about more until one knows nothing about everything (a generalist) or one can learn more and more about less and less until one knows everything about nothing (a specialist), or one can do what one can within one's abilities and interests and perhaps make a difference somehow, somewhere. But in the age of Nintendo and the "Gimme Gimme, I deserve it because I'm me" generation, don't count on too much.

Edit to cychuck: The WWII reference was not directed at your statement, but at your premise. It is a ratification of the ignorance of most people regarding their own history and contemopary, if not current events. And it is a prime example of why neocons can get away with illegal invasions and countless other miscreant deeds (like passage of the Patriot Act or the torture chambers at Gitmo) with impunity. No one gives a damn because they lack the background to understand why they should and they don't have the ambition to want to learn. But ty for the comment.

Answer 10

Perhaps you can introduce your friends to WWI by some excellently researched, riveting fiction!
I just recently finished this one and found it historically accurate (although the British and French may not totally agree) and an extremely good read!
Jeff Shaara -- To the Last Man
http://www.jeffshaara.com/lastman.html