WWI was atrocious!
Debate Rounds (3)
To define 'atrocious' as used in this context, I am stating that the First World War was stupid, the trench warfare of it was dumb and it was an almost pointless war. The idea of 'I'll run at your guys and get mowed down and you'll do the same' was really stupid.
1) Why or how was the war needed? If we didn't have it, Germany would have lived in ruins and then some new rule would have came in overtime and changed things. All WWI did was bring Germany under embargo and suppression, causing Hitler to rise to power as chancellor in 1933 and then soon enough, dictator. After WWII, Hitler died and his Nazi Commanders were sent on trial at the Nuremberg Trials.
2) Most men did in fact get mowed down. WWI was the first days of the machine gun, so these infantry squads would run into thousands of bullets and just die. Then the opposing side would attempt the same thing. It was a game of do I run or hide?
3) Trench Warfare is in no way, shape or form the best kind of warfare out there. It was very stupid, as partially explained in my second response. Trench Warfare left soldiers digging and hiding in trenches and lead Germany's military out to the ocean when they planned on attacking France. The trenches were built from one side of the area out to the ocean and Germany had to go around through Belgium into France, where the war took place (Belgium and France). All they would do is sit in their trenches waiting to run out and attack yet fail and die. This was how most of the First World War took place.
Those are my responses. Also, ever hear of trench foot? Yeah, I wouldn't want to end up with that.
State your next argument please.
The_halo_master forfeited this round.
On another note, all World War One did was lead to the second World War which really didn't change much, in fact, it was darkest era of human history, tens of millions of people being purged, imprisoned and sent to war. Stalin's death toll at about 20 million and Hitler's at about 13 million. Either way you look at it not nice guys.
And let's not even say that WWI was the war that lasted 6 years when it was supposed to last 6 weeks. I find it disturbing how you find WWI to have been a necessary war. Franz Ferdinand was assassinated in June of 1914, and then Austria-Hungary sent an ultimatum on Serbia, yet if it wasn't for the allies system, the war would have just been between Serbia and A-H. But no! Germany, Russia, France, the US and the United Kingdom just had to get involved.
After WWI, Germany was in an even bigger mess and so was Japan because of things happening in "pacific world" during the First World War. After WWI, Manchuria was invaded by Japan which caused a whole big mess that would probably have been prevented if WWI hadn't existed. Imperialist Japan was a result of American trade embargoes placed on Japan by the League of Nations, perhaps if Japan hadn't stuck in their nose in the wrong war and gotten involved with the Central Powers they would have been fine.
And this time, try to actually state an argument sir.
The_halo_master forfeited this round.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Seeginomikata 2 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||7||0|
Reasons for voting decision: Ful Forfeit. 7 points to pro.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.