Jump to content


Rugby League World Issue 400 - Out Now!

RUGBY LEAGUE WORLD MAGAZINE - ISSUE 401 - OUT NOW!
84 pages, full colour, in-depth coverage from the grassroots through to the international game.
Click here for the digital edition or just download the Rugby League World app from Apple Newsstand or Google Play now.
Click here to order a copy for delivery by post. Annual subscriptions also available worldwide.
Find out what's inside Issue 401
/ View a Gallery of all our previous 400 covers / WH Smith Branches stocking Issue 401
Read Jamie Jones-Buchanan's Top 5 RLW Interviews including Marwan Koukash, Lee Briers, Gareth Thomas, Steve Ganson & Matt King OBE


League Express

Podcast

Photo
- - - - -

Gove's take on WW1


  • Please log in to reply
290 replies to this topic

#281 Trojan

Trojan
  • Coach
  • 15,021 posts

Posted 20 January 2014 - 11:05 PM


It's good that this debate is open, though. However let's still have a bit of perspective in the fact that hundreds of thousands of people died and very little came out of it, except another war later on.

Which it is estimated cost the lives of 60 million people - 2.5% of the world population


"Your a one trick pony Trojan" - Parksider 10th March 2013

#282 ckn

ckn
  • Admin
  • 16,733 posts

Posted 21 January 2014 - 09:19 AM

Which it is estimated cost the lives of 60 million people - 2.5% of the world population

And even then that's a conservative estimate.  No-one really knows how many Chinese died, it's just guesses and I read something many years ago that the figures could be almost double there because those compiling the official statistics just couldn't make themselves believe the evidence that so many people could be killed in such a very short relative time.  There is credible evidence that the true total of war related deaths from WW2 exceeds 100,000,000 people.


Arguing with the forum trolls is like playing chess with a pigeon.  No matter how good you are, the bird will **** on the board and strut around like it won anyway


#283 tim2

tim2
  • Coach
  • 8,292 posts

Posted 21 January 2014 - 11:28 AM

Slightly off topic, but I guess WW2 was a series of separate conflicts that had been brewing / under way for a while but all got joined together due to the treaties that were in place, or shared political ambitions?
North Derbyshire Chargers - join the stampede

Marathon in 2014 - the hard work starts now

#284 Trojan

Trojan
  • Coach
  • 15,021 posts

Posted 21 January 2014 - 04:47 PM

Slightly off topic, but I guess WW2 was a series of separate conflicts that had been brewing / under way for a while but all got joined together due to the treaties that were in place, or shared political ambitions?

Japan had been conducting a war in China since 1936 ( I think)  They needed raw materials to continue this war, all the raw materials they needed were there in South East Asia, with the colonial powers otherwise occupied in Europe they, concluded an alliance with Hitler, tried to knock the Yank navy out of the war at Pearl Harbor, invaded and plundered the spoils of the Philippines, Malaya, and Indonesia.  The famous "Axis" did not operate as one, Germany needed to threaten the Allies with Japan and vice versa.  Had they really operated as a strategic alliance, and had Japan advanced to India from Burma, whilst the Germans had advanced South from the Caucasus, and East from Africa, who knows what the outcome would have been. But both nations were military dictatorships and presumably organically incapable of trusting one another.


"Your a one trick pony Trojan" - Parksider 10th March 2013

#285 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 17,148 posts

Posted 21 January 2014 - 06:18 PM

Japan had been conducting a war in China since 1936 ( I think)  They needed raw materials to continue this war, all the raw materials they needed were there in South East Asia, with the colonial powers otherwise occupied in Europe they, concluded an alliance with Hitler, tried to knock the Yank navy out of the war at Pearl Harbor, invaded and plundered the spoils of the Philippines, Malaya, and Indonesia.  The famous "Axis" did not operate as one, Germany needed to threaten the Allies with Japan and vice versa.  Had they really operated as a strategic alliance, and had Japan advanced to India from Burma, whilst the Germans had advanced South from the Caucasus, and East from Africa, who knows what the outcome would have been. But both nations were military dictatorships and presumably organically incapable of trusting one another.

Their reason for the Japanese war against the European powers and the USA was the oil embargo against Japan, which was brought in to try to block Japan from conquering more of China. Had the Netherlands, France, the UK and the US carried out a different policy then WW2 would have been very different. It's likely that Japan would have succesfully invaded China but that this conflict would not really be part of WW2. This means to Eastern war for the UK and no Pearl Harbor (and thus a delayed entry or no entry into the war by the USA).



#286 marklaspalmas

marklaspalmas
  • Coach
  • 11,379 posts

Posted 21 January 2014 - 07:14 PM

Their reason for the Japanese war against the European powers and the USA was the oil embargo against Japan, which was brought in to try to block Japan from conquering more of China. Had the Netherlands, France, the UK and the US carried out a different policy then WW2 would have been very different. It's likely that Japan would have succesfully invaded China but that this conflict would not really be part of WW2. This means to Eastern war for the UK and no Pearl Harbor (and thus a delayed entry or no entry into the war by the USA).

 

Setting aside the appalling loss of human life in WW2...

 

And my own suerficial knowledge of the proceedings....

 

I've always wondered exactly why Japan bothered bombing Pearl harbour and how much of a mistake it was for them. They seemed to be doing fine with their empire building and were perhaps slipping under the radar in terms of international attention which inevitably focussed on Europe. Ive heard it said they were 'getting their retaliation in first' for what they thought the USA was going to do to them, but Im not sure what if anything the US were planning.


 

You Can't Buy Team Spirit

 

 

 

 


#287 GeordieSaint

GeordieSaint
  • Coach
  • 4,756 posts

Posted 21 January 2014 - 07:31 PM

Setting aside the appalling loss of human life in WW2...

 

And my own suerficial knowledge of the proceedings....

 

I've always wondered exactly why Japan bothered bombing Pearl harbour and how much of a mistake it was for them. They seemed to be doing fine with their empire building and were perhaps slipping under the radar in terms of international attention which inevitably focussed on Europe. Ive heard it said they were 'getting their retaliation in first' for what they thought the USA was going to do to them, but Im not sure what if anything the US were planning.

 

A few lectures I have attended highlight they adopted a pre-emptive to destroy the threat the US Pacific Fleet posed as they attempted to exert their dominance over the Pacific. I believe they launched their invasion of the Phillipines on roughly the same date, which was home to US troops. Destroying the Fleet would remove the threat to their own invasion forces and wider Pacific aims.


Edited by GeordieSaint, 21 January 2014 - 07:31 PM.

Kings Lynn Black Knights Rugby League Club - http://www.pitchero....nnblackknights/


#288 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 17,148 posts

Posted 21 January 2014 - 08:18 PM

Setting aside the appalling loss of human life in WW2...

 

And my own suerficial knowledge of the proceedings....

 

I've always wondered exactly why Japan bothered bombing Pearl harbour and how much of a mistake it was for them. They seemed to be doing fine with their empire building and were perhaps slipping under the radar in terms of international attention which inevitably focussed on Europe. Ive heard it said they were 'getting their retaliation in first' for what they thought the USA was going to do to them, but Im not sure what if anything the US were planning.

The Japanese arrived at the view that only the resources of South East Asia, particularly Indonesia, would give them enough power to conquer China. The USA was part of the blockading nations and with the Europeans committed elsewhere, only the USA seemed to stand between them and domination of the Far East. They thought that after they crippled the American fleet at Pearl Harbor, the Americans would be forced to stay out.  



#289 Trojan

Trojan
  • Coach
  • 15,021 posts

Posted 23 January 2014 - 11:02 PM

The Japanese arrived at the view that only the resources of South East Asia, particularly Indonesia, would give them enough power to conquer China. The USA was part of the blockading nations and with the Europeans committed elsewhere, only the USA seemed to stand between them and domination of the Far East. They thought that after they crippled the American fleet at Pearl Harbor, the Americans would be forced to stay out.  

But they didn't cripple the US Fleet at Pearl Harbor, the aircraft carriers, the key to the Pacific War, as it turned out, weren't there.  Six months later these same carriers were instrumental in destroying three Japanese carriers at the Battle of Midway, the American victory at Midway enabled the US to fight a holding action in the Pacific, while they pursued the agreed "Germany First" policy.  The Japanese opting for the easy pickings in the Pacific also enabled Stalin to transfer hardened crack troops who were in Siberia guarding against a Japanese attack to the Western front, thus stalling the German 1942 new Spring offensive. Again had the Axis actually operated as an axis, the Japanese would have attacked the USSR and effectively it would have been game over.  


"Your a one trick pony Trojan" - Parksider 10th March 2013

#290 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 17,148 posts

Posted 24 January 2014 - 12:11 AM

But they didn't cripple the US Fleet at Pearl Harbor, the aircraft carriers, the key to the Pacific War, as it turned out, weren't there.  Six months later these same carriers were instrumental in destroying three Japanese carriers at the Battle of Midway, the American victory at Midway enabled the US to fight a holding action in the Pacific, while they pursued the agreed "Germany First" policy.  The Japanese opting for the easy pickings in the Pacific also enabled Stalin to transfer hardened crack troops who were in Siberia guarding against a Japanese attack to the Western front, thus stalling the German 1942 new Spring offensive. Again had the Axis actually operated as an axis, the Japanese would have attacked the USSR and effectively it would have been game over.  

Evidently it did not cripple the US fleet but the Japanese assumption was that it would.



#291 Wolford6

Wolford6
  • Coach
  • 9,738 posts

Posted 10 February 2014 - 06:52 PM

http://www.bbc.co.uk...siness-25558632


Under Scrutiny by the Right-On Thought Police





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users