Most Costly War in Human History

by **Tsa-la-gi Nation** » Sat Sep 19, 2009 9:06 am

I agree that WWII was the most costly. As an American, I know the the War between the States (AKA Civil War) still sturs up deep feelings upon our nation. Especially upon those whose ancestors fought in it. I'm curious if the same holds true for Europians an WWII?

"Skallvia" · by **Maurepas** » Sat Sep 19, 2009 9:07 am

Tsa-la-gi Nation wrote:I agree that WWII was the most costly. As an American, I know the the War between the States (AKA Civil War) still sturs up deep feelings upon our nation. Especially upon those whose ancestors fought in it. I'm curious if the same holds true for Europians an WWII?

I think thats illegal in Germany, if Im not mistaken,

by **Peace for men** » Sat Sep 19, 2009 9:07 am

instead of looking to the most costly war in history has anyone thought about the fact that humans have a nack for deciving and killing? So really war is just mans faveorite past time.

"Skallvia" · by **Maurepas** » Sat Sep 19, 2009 9:08 am

Peace for men wrote:instead of looking to the most costly war in history has anyone thought about the fact that humans have a nack for deciving and killing? So really war is just mans faveorite past time.

Doesnt mean we cant figure out who had the best game,

by **Peace for men** » Sat Sep 19, 2009 9:10 am

good point i think that WW1 was the worst one.

by **Tsa-la-gi Nation** » Sat Sep 19, 2009 9:12 am

Peace for men wrote:good point i think that WW1 was the worst one.

Because of how terrible trench warfare was?

by **Peace for men** » Sat Sep 19, 2009 9:16 am

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.

by **Tsa-la-gi Nation** » Sat Sep 19, 2009 9:19 am

Peace for men wrote: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.

I guess they didn't learn the leasons of Fredericksburg & Gettysburg

by **Peace for men** » Sat Sep 19, 2009 9:24 am

Yep they sure didn't but mind you. You americans didn't join in till the last minute in the first world war but yeah they just walked or ran towards these machine guns.

"Skallvia" · by **Maurepas** » Sat Sep 19, 2009 9:57 am

Peace for men wrote:Yep they sure didn't but mind you. You americans didn't join in till the last minute in the first world war but yeah they just walked or ran towards these machine guns.

Well, it wasnt really our war, tbqh...Until Germany decided it was time to attack us anyway, :roll:

poor strategy on their part, in retrospect...

by **Call to power** » Sat Sep 19, 2009 10:52 am

Tsa-la-gi Nation wrote:I'm curious if the same holds true for Europians an WWII?

Britain and France worked together on something so we'd all rather just forget it ever happened

Peace for men wrote: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.

actually they walked because if they ran they would be exhausted by the time they reached the enemy trench and if they advanced on pogo sticks they risked missing the trench completely

by **Gauntleted Fist** » Sat Sep 19, 2009 11:01 am

In terms of sheer death and destruction done around the world? WWII.

by **Caninope** » Sat Sep 19, 2009 11:09 am

The first war. If this war hadn't have begun, then none others would have came after., because there is no such thing as war.

I know, I know. Bizarre Logic, but if you think about it- you begin to actually understand.

by **Gauntleted Fist** » Sat Sep 19, 2009 11:15 am

Caninope wrote:The first war. If this war hadn't have begun, then none others would have came after., because there is no such thing as war.

I know, I know. Bizarre Logic, but if you think about it- you begin to actually understand.

Conflict can exist without war.

by **Ascelonia** » Sat Sep 19, 2009 11:21 am

A costly war can't be restricted to definition by the number of casualties. What did the An Shi Rebellion cost China? It cost them the opportunity to become a global superpower early on in history. The An Shi Rebellion was one of the most costly wars in human history by percentage and by numbers. Imagine in ancient times, having a war that killed 36 million people. That's pretty hard ass shit.

by **Yootopia** » Sat Sep 19, 2009 11:23 am

Peace for men wrote:good point i think that WW1 was the worst one.

Oh ffs. Surprise surprise another hammer and sickle bearer is infected with a case of the Wrongs.

by **Drachmar** » Sat Sep 19, 2009 11:32 am

Ascelonia wrote:A costly war can't be restricted to definition by the number of casualties. What did the An Shi Rebellion cost China? It cost them the opportunity to become a global superpower early on in history. The An Shi Rebellion was one of the most costly wars in human history by percentage and by numbers. Imagine in ancient times, having a war that killed 36 million people. That's pretty hard ass shit.

Over 15% of the estimated population at that point in history. In today's terms that would equal over 1 billion people. Yeah, I think An Shi takes the prize.

by **Caninope** » Sat Sep 19, 2009 11:33 am

Gauntleted Fist wrote:
Caninope wrote:The first war. If this war hadn't have begun, then none others would have came after., because there is no such thing as war.

I know, I know. Bizarre Logic, but if you think about it- you begin to actually understand.

Conflict can exist without war.

Ah, but not such large scale conflicts.

by **The Archregimancy** » Sat Sep 19, 2009 12:26 pm

I'm surprised we've even needed four pages to discuss this.

Total number of dead = The Second World War

Highest percentage of global population killed in single conflict = An Shi Rebellion.

While others have mentioned the An Shi, a quick recap for those who may not be familiar with the conflict....

The conflict took place during the Tang Dynasty of China, and lasted about 8 years between 755 and 763 AD. It was initiated through a rebellion by the Tang general An Lushan, who tried to overthrow the Tang and found a new dynasty, the Great Yan.

The Great Yan proved to be inherently unstable, and were eventually replaced by general Shi Siming (hence 'An Shi', for both the An and Shi families), though Shi Siming was himself killed by his son. Meanwhile the Tang made it through three emperors themselves during the same period. Several major cities, including the imperial capital Chang'an, changed hands several times during the rebellion.

The death toll - anywhere between 33-36 million - represents two thirds of the Chinese tax tolls during the mid 8th century. The Tang dynasty would continue until 907AD, but after the An Shi were in a state of near-constant decline.

by **Lacadaemon** » Sat Sep 19, 2009 1:08 pm

In money terms LBJs war on poverty.

by **Gauntleted Fist** » Sat Sep 19, 2009 1:15 pm

Lacadaemon wrote:In money terms LBJs war on poverty.

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

)

I have no idea how much that "war" cost. Got any figures?

wikistates page. · by **Epicnopolis** » Sat Sep 19, 2009 1:19 pm

Any sensible person would say world war 2. 60 million people lost there lives. And I'm not sure if that counts the holocaust.

by **Tranquilizer Cyborgs** » Sat Sep 19, 2009 1:21 pm

Vietscam.

by **Rhodmhire** » Sat Sep 19, 2009 1:22 pm

The Eternal Netherwold wrote:WWII, no contest.

Depends.

Absolute number-wise, obviously you're right.

Percentage-wise, as many have pointed out, the An Shi Rebellion is more suitable.

However, I still believe there was probably some "war" amongst humans long, long ago when the population was only ten that killed six of them, amounting to 60% of the human population being killed in one war: amounting to +3.6 billion people if it were to happen today.

by **Rhodmhire** » Sat Sep 19, 2009 1:25 pm

Gauntleted Fist wrote:
Lacadaemon wrote: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.

Most Costly War in Human History

Most Costly War in Human History

My opinion

Who is online