Most Costly War in Human History

[Rolling squid]

No because the generals until 1917 where all pricks who made the men walk at a machine gun posistion at the same time everytime they attacked! stupid or what and yes because of how bad trench warfare was.

Not really. 1914 and 1915 were like that, but by late 1915-1916, both sides had realized that massive artillery bombardments and frontal assaults were not the way to go, and tried to come up with different tactics. The problem was that most of these tactics were just as bad, if not worse, than frontal assaults, and an sort of effective means of breaking trench lines came in 1917 with tanks. Of course, WWI was really won by the British blockade, which starved the Germans until they collapsed.

[Call to power]

I think we are all forgetting the Star Wars trilogy in this

[The Romulan Republic]

In terms of shear number of death, WW2. In terms of negative impact on human history as a whole, impossible to say. WW1 might win though, as WW2 and the Cold War were largely its results. In terms of deaths as a percentage of the total population, no idea.

[UNIverseVERSE]

Not really. 1914 and 1915 were like that, but by late 1915-1916, both sides had realized that massive artillery bombardments and frontal assaults were not the way to go, and tried to come up with different tactics. The problem was that most of these tactics were just as bad, if not worse, than frontal assaults, and an sort of effective means of breaking trench lines came in 1917 with tanks. Of course, WWI was really won by the British blockade, which starved the Germans until they collapsed.

Mining underneath and blowing their entire trench line to kingdom come worked fairly effectively on occasion.

[Rolling squid]

Not really. 1914 and 1915 were like that, but by late 1915-1916, both sides had realized that massive artillery bombardments and frontal assaults were not the way to go, and tried to come up with different tactics. The problem was that most of these tactics were just as bad, if not worse, than frontal assaults, and an sort of effective means of breaking trench lines came in 1917 with tanks. Of course, WWI was really won by the British blockade, which starved the Germans until they collapsed.

Mining underneath and blowing their entire trench line to kingdom come worked fairly effectively on occasion.

That worked for one line of trenches. The problem is the other guy could fall back to his second line of trenches, and you were right back where you started.

[Khodoristan]

Most people died in WW2, right? That one.


Or the yankie war of independence.

What the hell is a yankie, and who did they gain independence from?

Perhaps he is talking about the New York Yankees?

hell yeah! 1st in the AL east!

[Tsa-la-gi Nation]

I think we are all forgetting the Star Wars trilogy in this

Great post!
& P.S. hey mods, can we get that picture of Jeter off here. I'm a redsox fan & I find that offensive

[Rhodmhire]

hell yeah! 1st in the AL east!

Way to bring sports into this.

You may now be the bane of my existence, but good tactics overall, here's your cookie:

( : : )

[UNIverseVERSE]

That worked for one line of trenches. The problem is the other guy could fall back to his second line of trenches, and you were right back where you started.

Not if you dug enough mines. Also, do it sufficiently stealthily and there isn't much left to fall back with.

[Rolling squid]

That worked for one line of trenches. The problem is the other guy could fall back to his second line of trenches, and you were right back where you started.

Not if you dug enough mines. Also, do it sufficiently stealthily and there isn't much left to fall back with.

It is impossible to dig both a mine large enough to destroy every trench, and keep it hidden. Digging makes a lot of noise, and counter-mining tactics have been around as long as mining tactics have.

[Geniasis]

The reparations and resultant economic damage which resulted from this poor treatment of Germany were directly responsible for the European component of WWII... and thus all the resultant death and destruction that followed.

Nope, Weimar Germany ran itself into the ground due to its woeful economic policies. At no point were reperations higher than 8% of total German industrial output and some small sum of money, the amount of which was repeatedly changed, and which probably would have been written off if they'd continued to play ball with the other European powers and the US.

Hyperinflation was a completely avoidable fuckup which was only done because it made German products a good export for a little while in the post-war readjustment period over Europe. The amount of US loans to the German government and banks was also their own fault. You can't blame Germany for the Wall Street Crash, but you can blame the economic mismanagement which led to it being extra horrible on Weimar policies.

So you're denying that the Treaty of Versailles was a clusterfuck?

[Yootopia]

The reparations and resultant economic damage which resulted from this poor treatment of Germany were directly responsible for the European component of WWII... and thus all the resultant death and destruction that followed.

Nope, Weimar Germany ran itself into the ground due to its woeful economic policies. At no point were reperations higher than 8% of total German industrial output and some small sum of money, the amount of which was repeatedly changed, and which probably would have been written off if they'd continued to play ball with the other European powers and the US.

Hyperinflation was a completely avoidable fuckup which was only done because it made German products a good export for a little while in the post-war readjustment period over Europe. The amount of US loans to the German government and banks was also their own fault. You can't blame Germany for the Wall Street Crash, but you can blame the economic mismanagement which led to it being extra horrible on Weimar policies.

So you're denying that the Treaty of Versailles was a clusterfuck?

Sort of. There was a lot wrong with it, but the failings in the German economy were more to do with their own utter mismanagement than anything else.

[Czardas]

In terms of human cost + financial cost + historical effect, I'd say either WWII or the Mongol invasions. I don't know much about the An Shi Rebellion, so it probably wasn't as influential as they were.

[Bavin]

The Gogulfrinchain War of course. God, learn your 24th century history.

[Geniasis]

Sort of. There was a lot wrong with it, but the failings in the German economy were more to do with their own utter mismanagement than anything else.

I do remember reading about how Germany at one point tried to shut down the money presses but were forced to keep them running by the French. I remember I wrote a paper on how much ass it sucked, but it's lost to the aether now I'm sure.

[Bavin]

In money terms LBJs war on poverty.

The Iraq/Afghanistan war has supposedly cost around 911 billion so far. (911. )

OMG!!! TEH Hitler-Bushbama r did 9/11! Iz proof!

9/11 WUZ A INZIDE JOB! 9/11 WUZ A INZIDE JOB!!

We have proofz now.

You're the real hero.

Godwin's law.

[Korintar]

US Civil War and WWI and WWII tie, from my perspective, due to the economic and political damage that resulted as well as number of lives lost. In a sense WWI was more deadly than WWII, for it set the stage for WWII and the wars of the Cold War.

[Cybach]

The reparations and resultant economic damage which resulted from this poor treatment of Germany were directly responsible for the European component of WWII... and thus all the resultant death and destruction that followed.

Nope, Weimar Germany ran itself into the ground due to its woeful economic policies. At no point were reperations higher than 8% of total German industrial output and some small sum of money, the amount of which was repeatedly changed, and which probably would have been written off if they'd continued to play ball with the other European powers and the US.

Hyperinflation was a completely avoidable fuckup which was only done because it made German products a good export for a little while in the post-war readjustment period over Europe. The amount of US loans to the German government and banks was also their own fault. You can't blame Germany for the Wall Street Crash, but you can blame the economic mismanagement which led to it being extra horrible on Weimar policies.

So you're denying that the Treaty of Versailles was a clusterfuck?

Sort of. There was a lot wrong with it, but the failings in the German economy were more to do with their own utter mismanagement than anything else.

If the Treaty of Versailles wasn't such a clusterfuck, why is it so controversial today? As well as being the last treaty of it's kind. With nearly all future wars and resolutions to the wars lacking such treaties. Even after WW2, learning the lessons of Versaille, it was mostly about rebuilding Germany/Japan and rehabilitating it, then it was about punishing the two nations.

Was the few years smugness and sense of satisfaction of the Versaille Treaty really worth the 50+ million deaths and collapse of the French/Anglo Empires? I personally think not. Since anyone with half a brain could see that another war would be needed to solve the grievances of the Great War. I mean the Anglo/French policy in Eastern Europe was simply nothing short of retarded. How could they not see permanent border problems by forcing areas with 90%+ German populations to be subjugated to nations which then commenced to institute discriminatory practices against them, due to past grievances? Or what the hell was up with Danzig? The city was 97% German, under what logic should it fall under Polish jurisdiction? And then when the citizens of Danzig rise up in revolution and slaughter the Polish administration out of the city, and then call to be united with Germany. The League of Nations doesn't allow that, but compromises allowing Danzig to become a City State instead. Like I said.

Or the Sudetenland. It was only when the Sudeten Germans were on the verge of starting a fullscale civil war in Czechslovakia inorder to attain their freedom and escape the perceived Czech oppression to which the League of Nations was deaf (Sudetens sent envoy after envoy to the LoN for over a decade), that Britain stepped in and under advice of the Ambassador to Prague realized that the hatred and grievances reached such a level that nothing short of a split of the Sudetenland from Czechoslovakia could prevent a violent outbreak. Nothing short of retarded, and as good as asking for a war in the Eastern territories to bring a final solution to the border and population distribution problems. Had Britain/France possessed smart minds or just an inkling of intelligence when drawing up the Eastern borders after WW1, they could have avoided quite a lot of the causes to WW2. Instead they were hellbent on punishing Germans and Germany, completely oblivious to the longterm consequences this could lead to. Now those policies such as the Memel/Sudeten annexations were not strictly part of the Versaille Treaty, but they were a continuation of the policies set forth by the Treaty in the 20s. Or Poland threatening to invade Weimar Germany, with French moral support, unless Weimar Germany stopped laying in protest to the League of Nations to the planned Polish annexation of various parts of Silesia and Mazuria. When smarter minds finally came to power, and realized the shitpit they were brewing up the attempted tries at appeasement came much too late and there was simply too much mud/hatred in the water for things to calm back down. As well as things were simply too fucked up in Eastern Europe at that point for it to be solved in any other way but war.

Doesn't really justify the Germans going out to cement their claims, and take what they thought was rightfully theirs. Except probably in the bloodless re-annexations of the former German territories of the Sudetenland and Memelland. However the whole situation borne out of Versaille was very detrimental to the whole situation, almost pushing the unstable relationships of Eastern Europe to a war. As history has it the war was started by the Germans. However had the Germans not begun it. It probably would not have even been a decade before there would have been Slovak, Hungarian, Croat or Romanian uprisings due to the border and population inconsistencies.

[Ploutokratia]

Many more people died in WW1 than in WW2

Edit: Oops, sorry. I meant more people died in WW2 than in WW1

[UNIverseVERSE]

Many more people died in WW1 than in WW2

Prove it.

[Yootopia]

If the Treaty of Versailles wasn't such a clusterfuck, why is it so controversial today?

Eh I don't disagree that it was a total mess as regards the Sudetenland and all the rest, but trying to blame all of Weimar Germany's problems on Versailles is rather passing the buck. The reason it collapsed was due to economic instability which led to its political instability, in conjunction with the slightly bizarre choice to go from a repressive monarchy to one of the first states with proportional representation as a way of voting in governments. Changed too much all at once, really.

[South Lorenya]

Going purely by numbers, WWII.

Keep in mind, however, that [at least according to wikipedia] the three kingdoms period wiped out between a half and two thirds of china's population.

The Three Kingdoms period was one of the bloodiest in Chinese history. A population census during the late Eastern Han Dynasty reported a population of approximately 50 million,[2] while a population census during the early Western Jin Dynasty (after Jin re-unified China) reported a population of approximately 16 million.[2] However, the Jin dynasty's census was far less complete than the Han census, so these figures are in question. Even after taking into account the possible inaccuracies of these census reports, the fact a large percentage of the population was wiped out during this period of constant war is beyond doubt.

[Gun Manufacturers]

Most people died in WW2, right? That one.


Or the yankie war of independence.

What the hell is a yankie, and who did they gain independence from?

Perhaps he is talking about the New York Yankees?

I don't remember them being involved in a war either.

[Cybach]

If the Treaty of Versailles wasn't such a clusterfuck, why is it so controversial today?

Eh I don't disagree that it was a total mess as regards the Sudetenland and all the rest, but trying to blame all of Weimar Germany's problems on Versailles is rather passing the buck. The reason it collapsed was due to economic instability which led to its political instability, in conjunction with the slightly bizarre choice to go from a repressive monarchy to one of the first states with proportional representation as a way of voting in governments. Changed too much all at once, really.

Obviously. Also don't mistake me for an apologetic. At the core of the matter, WW2 and the events leading up to it were to the largest degree the fault of Germany. No one forced them to take such a militant and aggressive stance to solve their problems.

However my historical sensibilities are a bit perturbed when some people seem to give off the impression that Germany had no reasons for it's actions, and was a roving band of psychopaths bent on conquering and pillaging all in their way. Using the kind of "IT all started in '39 when the Jerries attacked poor innocent Poland," mantra is somewhat similar to stating that "Those evil Native Americans scalped and murdered them poor innocent farmers," without taking the liberty to actually realize as to why the Native Americans were fighting the colonist, the history and events leading to Native American revolts on reservations. If one takes the time to study the events of central Europe from 1919-34, it can be reasonably argued that Germany had a stronger cassus belli and moral justification for war than the US did for the current Iraq campaign.

At the end of the day it was German militancy, just as much as questionably retarded foreign policy towards Germany that put down the inevitable seeds for the second world war. By the time the appeasement phase arrived, it was too late to undue the political damage and the course that had already begun. However the attitudes and actions of Poland, Czechoslovakia and Lithuania towards Germany when Germany was at it's weakest was bound to have consequences. What kind of a nation tolerates the annexation of territory full of it's citizens? Then sits by idly as it's protests are ignored in the League of Nations, and there are credible claims of abusive discrimination against the ethnic Germans in those territories. The result is the Weimar Republic loses face heavily among outraged Germans who demand action. In the end there is only one guy from a radical party who promises to put an end to the so-called "oppression" and this is why he got 12 million votes in the end. And tragedy takes it's course.

[Macindia]

Voted WWII due to the amount of casualties, Holocaust, Unit 731, Little Boy and Fat Man, + Nanking of Massacre (a couple of years earlier, but I think it was important enough to warrant a mention)