Current Events > Two thirds of millennials don't know which side won WW2

(+) Yeah! (+)

You know, if we're including long term consequences it's getting fuzzier all the time who actually won.

Pogo_Marimo posted...

Not really how wars work but okay.

That's how wars typically work. Capture the enemy's capital city, you win. Whatever is left of the enemy's forces is no longer strong enough to oppose you and is forced to lay down their weapons.

TyVulpine posted...

That's how wars typically work. Capture the enemy's capital city, you win. Whatever is left of the enemy's forces is no longer strong enough to oppose you and is forced to lay down their weapons.

I can point to any number of wars where that wasn't the case. Hell, in your own example, the US wouldn't have won the Pacific war by that logic because they never captured Tokyo.

Drumiester posted...

There are no winners in war.

says america

TyVulpine posted...

That's how wars typically work. Capture the enemy's capital city, you win. Whatever is left of the enemy's forces is no longer strong enough to oppose you and is forced to lay down their weapons.

you been playing advance wars?

UnholyMudcrab posted...

I can point to any number of wars where that wasn't the case. Hell, in your own example, the US wouldn't have won the Pacific war by that logic because they never captured Tokyo.

And the Allies never crossed the Rhine in 1918 until after Germany begged for a ceasefire and the guns went quiet.

There is no way that is true with the way they call everyone nazis

Without reading any of the posts in this topic, the title specifies "millennials" and the OP says people between the ages of 18-34. Does TC think millennials were born in the 2000s?

thronedfire2 posted...

it's been about 20 years since I looked at a high school history textbook but I don't remember WW2 being covered much. I'm pretty sure we just spent like the 2nd to last week of class rushing through it senior year before finals.

Yep, my US history classes in Middle and High School always focused more on the 1800s than 1900s

Justin2Krelian posted...

Yep, my US history classes in Middle and High School always focused more on the 1800s than 1900s

Eh. When I was in school, WWII was covered extensively throughout Middle and High School. The big wars that were usually covered in U.S. History were the American Revolution, The Civil War, WWII, and The Cold War (Vietnam primarily). If anything, WWI was the one that we kind of consistently skimmed through.

Tbh I slept through history classes.

Justin2Krelian posted...

Yep, my US history classes in Middle and High School always focused more on the 1800s than 1900s

For me I feel it was the opposite. US History focused a lot on 1700s/1900s but other than Lincoln and the Civil War the 1800s were mostly glossed over

I mean I know Hitler lost. Germany, Italy, Russia, and Japan? Everyone else on their side but idk who the axis was

The actual article title is "two-thirds don't know which countries were victorious" which sounds like what they are really saying that two-thirds couldn't name every major country on the winning side, which is different from saying you don't know which side one.

thronedfire2 posted...

you been playing advance wars?

Germany captured Paris, France fell.
Soviet Union captured Berlin, Germany fell.
North Vietnam captured Saigon, South Vietnam fell.
Castro's forces captured Havana, Cuba fell.

See how it works? Capture the capital, you win. That's how wars have always been decided. Please take a history course.

UnholyMudcrab posted...

I can point to any number of wars where that wasn't the case. Hell, in your own example, the US wouldn't have won the Pacific war by that logic because they never captured Tokyo.

There was a planned invasion of the Japanese mainland for Spring 1946, but Hirohito overruled his military brass (who wanted to keep fighting) and ordered them to lay down their weapons to save his people. Japan had already lost Okinawa and many other islands surrounding the homeland, and an invasion would have been inevitable.

TyVulpine posted...

See how it works? Capture the capital, you win. That's how wars have always been decided. Please take a history course.

Also helps if you paint your face red/blue and wear a cheesy viking helmet
:P

Why are 18 year olds called millennials? The youngest millennial is 27.

alfred_ashford posted...

Germany, Italy, Russia, and Japan?

alfred_ashford posted...

Everyone else on their side but idk who the axis was

You just listed the axis. That was them. Except Russia later switched sides

TyVulpine posted...

Germany captured Paris, France fell.
Soviet Union captured Berlin, Germany fell.
North Vietnam captured Saigon, South Vietnam fell.
Castro's forces captured Havana, Cuba fell.

See how it works? Capture the capital, you win. That's how wars have always been decided. Please take a history course.

I suppose that's also why the French lost the Hundred Years' War after the English and the Burgundians captured and held Paris for sixteen years. Or why the US surrendered after the British captured Washington in 1814. Or why China surrendered to Japan after Nanjing was captured in 1937.

TyVulpine posted...

Germany captured Paris, France fell.

Pretty sure there were free French forces fighting with the Allies the entire duration of the war, including after Paris fell. Hell, there was a quarter million free Polish men fighting with the British all the way up to VE Day. For damn sure the Russians wouldn't have simply given up had the Germans taken Moscow in 41-42.

willythemailboy posted...

Pretty sure there were free French forces fighting with the Allies the entire duration of the war, including after Paris fell. Hell, there was a quarter million free Polish men fighting with the British all the way up to VE Day. For damn sure the Russians wouldn't have simply given up had the Germans taken Moscow in 41-42.

That is true about the French. I always hate that people mock the Frech when

1. Under Napoleon they almost conquered a large chunk of Europe

2. There were French people fighting non stop for the entire ww2. Just cause the government gave up doesn't mean the people did. French freedom Fighters played a large role in taking back France from Hitler

Zikten posted...

You just listed the axis.

A tad worrying to find out that the USSR was in the Axis too!

Minor Axis partners were Bulgaria, Hungary, Romania, Croatia, and Slovakia.

willythemailboy posted...

Pretty sure there were free French forces fighting with the Allies the entire duration of the war, including after Paris fell. Hell, there was a quarter million free Polish men fighting with the British all the way up to VE Day. For damn sure the Russians wouldn't have simply given up had the Germans taken Moscow in 41-42.

During the Second Boer War the British captured Pretoria, the capital of the South African Republic, in June 1900. The war dragged on for two years after Pretoria fell.

Plus, y'know, the other examples that @UnholyMudcrab listed in post #121.

Zikten posted...

That is true about the French. I always hate that people mock the Frech when

1. Under Napoleon they almost conquered a large chunk of Europe

2. There were French people fighting non stop for the entire ww2. Just cause the government gave up doesn't mean the people did. French freedom Fighters played a large role in taking back France from Hitler

The whole French always surrender thing is bullshit. It was even a general ignorance question on QI. (If I recall their win/loss/draw record over the past 1000 years is pretty much on par with other countries like Spain and England)

I get the feeling GWBs infamous cheese eating surrender monkeys line is what revitalised the meme.

Nah France has always been looked at as cowardly as long as Ive been alive. In the UK at least. Eddie Izard was doing parts in his stand up on it decades ago.

https://youtu.be/hxQYE3E8dEY

SHRlKE posted...

Nah France has always been looked at as cowardly as long as Ive been alive. In the UK at least. Eddie Izard was doing parts in his stand up on it decades ago.

https://youtu.be/hxQYE3E8dEY

Sure, but European nations ragging on each other have centuries of history backing it up.

America wouldn't exist without France so always baffled me they indulged in our mocking of them.

Exactly. The reality doesnt match the rhetoric.

Funkydog posted...

Sure, but European nations ragging on each other have centuries of history backing it up.

America wouldn't exist without France so always baffled me they indulged in our mocking of them.

The people who laugh at France probably don't even know the historical connection between France and the American Revolution

SHRlKE posted...

Nah France has always been looked at as cowardly as long as Ive been alive.

There used to be similar memes about the Italians and yes, yet again, the memes were firm favourites with generations who were still locked into a 1940s mental timebubble. It's what decades of crap war films on a Sunday afternoon will probably do for you when they get stirred into a poison cocktail with anti-EU politics.

TyVulpine posted...

That's how wars typically work. Capture the enemy's capital city, you win. Whatever is left of the enemy's forces is no longer strong enough to oppose you and is forced to lay down their weapons.

"Typically" is not a useful consideration when we are looking for a specific, causal relationship. All "typically" describes is correlation.

Wars are won through the destruction of your opponent's capacity to fight, typically, within several different facets of warfare at once--Materiel, manpower, morale, air supremacy, destruction of logistics, political will, industrial base, deprivation of civil supplies, destruction of leadership, disruption of military organization, naval supremacy, ect. Something like a capital can be vaguely related to one or more of these ends, but more specifically they tend to be coincidental as the result of success in the previously mentioned fields. This is extremely apparent when we look at border capitals in war, such as the Korean War and 2nd Sino-Japanese War. Sometimes a country is even entirely occupied and still wins the war--The Afghanistan War against the Taliban is a brutal reminder that land is not what war is truly fought over. For all of America's supremacy in nearly every single facet of the war, they never broke the Taliban's will to fight, which proved to be the decisive factor.