- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: 101 years ago today: America officially enters World War I
Posted on 4/6/18 at 3:35 pm to ChewyDante
Posted on 4/6/18 at 3:35 pm to ChewyDante
quote:
I'd love for him to do something on the Napoleonic Wars because I'm about as ignorant as can be on that period.
Oh man. If he gave the Napoleonic Wars the same treatment he gave WWI I’d be in heaven.
0
Posted on 4/6/18 at 3:45 pm to Darth_Vader
quote:
These troops I beleive are from the 93rd Infantry Division which was made up of black troops and fought attached to he French Army due to the fact white American soldiers refused to serve along side them. This division never fought as a whole unit. Instead it’s regiments we’re spread out in different French divisions. One of the 93rd’s regiments is famiously known as the “Harlem Hellfighters”.
Many of which were awarded the Croix de Guerre and Croix de Legion D'Honneur for their service to France. Its sad some people still think skin color determines bravey.
Posted on 4/6/18 at 3:47 pm to Darth_Vader
quote:
If they’d have stayed out, the war would not have lasted more then a few months and and the world would have been spared the aftershocks we’re still seeing to this very day. I’m fact, I’d say British involvement in the war is perhaps the greatest catastrophe in the modern era.
To be fair, the Germans should have stormed Paris towards the start of the war.
If I had a time machine to go back and kill someone to save the world, I’d kill Gavrilo Princip. People who say Hitler aren’t thinking it through. But I’d kill Princip at a very specific time, since I don’t want to risk interfering with the plan where the assassination attempt is successful regardless. I’d just patiently in Schiller's Café, and then shoot him when he walks in.
A few other contenders I’d kill:
Genghis Khan
Julius Caesar
Karl Marx
Muhammad
Posted on 4/6/18 at 3:48 pm to ChewyDante
quote:
I'd love for him to do something on the Napoleonic Wars because I'm about as ignorant as can be on that period.
Get this on Audible.com. Almost as good as Dan Carlin. Its like 33 hours long. I just finished it and felt like I just finished a college course on it
. 
Author was very fair to him, and you quickly realize he was almost as good to France as he was foolish (mostly invading Russia and losing at Trafalgar, then botching Leipzig and Waterloo).
This post was edited on 4/6/18 at 4:15 pm
Posted on 4/6/18 at 3:53 pm to jchamil
quote:
Do you think both World Wars would have been avoided had Britain stayed out of WWI? Or would things in Europe still have eventually escalated to a world war?
World War I was an absolute worst case scenario when it comes to a war for both sides. It was and really still is incomprehensible. The Second World War (save for the Pacific Front) is totally tied with how horrible the First World War was. The fact that there was a Second World War is one of humanity’s biggest failures.
Posted on 4/6/18 at 3:57 pm to ChewyDante
It is quite challenging to find in the English language very much on Napoleon that is fair and unbiased towards him. Quite challenging. In fact, I'll go so far as to say that none of the popular history books dealing with the subject are fair and unbiased towards Napoleon.
This post was edited on 4/6/18 at 3:58 pm
Posted on 4/6/18 at 4:10 pm to Champagne
quote:
Duped by British lies and propaganda about the Lusitania
Nope. Wilson was able to get the Germans to stop unrestricted submarine warfare after the Lusitania incident. That was 1915. US didnt enter war until April 1917, a couple months after Germany resumes unrestricted sub warfare and sunk a good amount of US merchant ships.
The Lusitania is only relevant insomuch as it engendered an anti-German attitude in American populace (I know it was a legit target). And the Zimmerman telegram was real per most WWI historians.
The US was on the side of other representative governments that had also had some semblance of individual liberties, ie the right side. Plenty of blame to go around for beginning WWI, but the Germans epitomized autocracy and militarism.
Germany's gamble was that they could get the UK to cry uncle before the US could effectively mobilize. It was a bad gamble.
Posted on 4/6/18 at 4:25 pm to tigahbruh
quote:exactly
The US was on the side of other representative governments that had also had some semblance of individual liberties, ie the right side. Plenty of blame to go around for beginning WWI, but the Germans epitomized autocracy and militarism.
america absolutely chose the right side to back even if it was lied to by the french and the british about the war debts being paid. germany was the epitome of an autocratic militaristic empire that was definitely not feeling super great about the growth of personal civil liberties. we were never, nor should we ever, going to support that
This post was edited on 4/6/18 at 4:29 pm
Posted on 4/6/18 at 4:26 pm to terd ferguson
There were very few black combat troops in WWI. Two regiments, I think. They didn't perform very well. Most were in support MOS.
Posted on 4/6/18 at 4:30 pm to Kcrad
quote:
There were very few black combat troops in WWI. Two regiments, I think. They didn't perform very well. Most were in support MOS.
The French and Germans would beg to differ about their performance. I suggest you read up on the Harlem Hellfighters.
This post was edited on 4/6/18 at 4:31 pm
Posted on 4/6/18 at 4:39 pm to Kcrad
quote:
There were very few black combat troops in WWI. Two regiments, I think. They didn't perform very well. Most were in support MOS.
Might want to look up how to get a Croix de Guerre, chief. This was of the 369th Infantry Regiment.
This post was edited on 4/6/18 at 4:40 pm
Posted on 4/6/18 at 4:45 pm to Kcrad
quote:
There were very few black combat troops in WWI. Two regiments, I think. They didn't perform very well. Most were in support MOS.
Trolling a history thread
Posted on 4/6/18 at 4:46 pm to NYNolaguy1
This reminded me to check my Audible app and I actually have The Age of Napoleon on there. I fricking forgot I bought a bunch of shite a couple years ago.
This post was edited on 4/6/18 at 4:47 pm
Posted on 4/6/18 at 4:48 pm to Tigeralum2008
quote:
History is my passion. And no other historic subject facanates me more than WWI. I consider it the most transformational event in human history since the discovery of the new world.
I feel the exact same way. WW1 and the Apollo space missions are the most amazing things in the history of our exiextence as far as I am concerned!
Posted on 4/6/18 at 4:50 pm to OMLandshark
quote:
A few other contenders I’d kill: Genghis Khan
Not trying to be a dick, it why would you want to kill Genghis Khan?
Posted on 4/6/18 at 7:48 pm to dale10
quote:
why would you want to kill Genghis Khan?
Yeah, considering the guy did so much fricking that 0.5% of the world, or 16 million people owe their existence to Genghis banging strange.
Posted on 4/6/18 at 8:13 pm to WestCoastAg
Hey, if that's what makes you sleep well at night, OK by me.
I'm not going to argue with over 100 years of British propaganda.
Consider the Black Tom Explosion. The USA was never really neutral. The USA was shipping war materials, such as high explosives, to the UK far before the Lusitania was sunk. And, of course, the Lusitania itself was carrying war munitions from the USA to Liverpool.
I'm not going to argue with over 100 years of British propaganda.
Consider the Black Tom Explosion. The USA was never really neutral. The USA was shipping war materials, such as high explosives, to the UK far before the Lusitania was sunk. And, of course, the Lusitania itself was carrying war munitions from the USA to Liverpool.
This post was edited on 4/6/18 at 8:18 pm
Posted on 4/6/18 at 8:18 pm to Champagne
quote:
The USA was shipping war materials, such as high explosives, to the UK far before the Lusitania was sunk.
And had it not been for the Royal Navy's blockade of German ports, we would have been trading with the German Empire as well. We continued peaceful trade with the Germans up until the British instituted their blockade, and kicked up a pretty big fuss about it after its implementation. The British merely pointed to our blockade of Southern ports during the Civil War and called us hypocrites.
This post was edited on 4/6/18 at 8:22 pm
Posted on 4/6/18 at 8:29 pm to Darth_Vader
quote:
due to the fact white American soldiers refused to serve along side them
I know I say some borderline racist stuff on here but this is really a stain on America’s history. Sad to see soldiers that were putting their lives on the line in that Hell on Earth and still we weren’t given the respect as equal men. Most of us couldn’t even shine the boots of men like that.
Posted on 4/6/18 at 8:31 pm to RollTide1987
Shipping war materials and explosives to Great Britain in early 1915 were not the activities of a neutral nation.
And in any event, why was it OK for the British Grand Fleet to sink US merchant ships headed to Imperial Germany BUT at the same time, the USA was OUTRAGED when German undersea boats sank merchant ships with war materials from the USA bound for Britain?
And in any event, why was it OK for the British Grand Fleet to sink US merchant ships headed to Imperial Germany BUT at the same time, the USA was OUTRAGED when German undersea boats sank merchant ships with war materials from the USA bound for Britain?
Page 3 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News