Was WWII worse than WWII? For nations, people, or anyone?

Asked by: Westhofen1
  • No responses have been submitted.
  • If you thought World War II was bad, wait till you see World War II

    I think WWII was way worse than WWII. It was like, when you eat one apple and it's rotten, then you eat another and it's rotten too! The point is, it's all rotten! WWII was just as bad as WWII was. In fact, I would say they were exactly equal in badness. If you could measure the badness of WWII and the badness of WWII they would be exactly the same.

    Let's say the unit of badness in war is measured in Kill-o-fights...Well, they would both be exactly....Let's see, yes, mmkkay, carry the four, yes, and, and, and, huzzah! Exatcly 5.788572 Kill-o-fights each. Weird that they would be the very same...

  • WWII..... WWII was worse. But WWII was even worse than that.

    War is bad for the human race, however it does have it's results. In time the time of a major war their is a demand of technological advancements. We have heard of the one's in WWII like the German prototype for an assault rifle completed at the end of the war. Others like the Jet engine, turbo chargers, Tanks, Bombers, flamethrower, napalm, nuclear weapons and reactors. These technologies benefit society as a whole even though they can be used to more efficiently kill people. They led to other advancements like commercial airlines, diesel trucks, AK-47, rockets, computers and radar. Most of these technologies are central to what other tech we have developed over the years. WWII was equally as worse to WWII. This was bad because businesses in the countries at war were trading internationally. They either gained business or lost it. This especially affected Japan when the U.S. placed sanctions against them. Provoking them to attack Pearl Harbor when most of the U.S. naval fleet was in one place.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.