Is this a historically accurate fact?
>Fact is, for most enlisted men, WW1 was fun as fuck. The reason liberals are so hellbent on having it portrayed as a literal killing field is because it was a war that was fought purely for nationalism - every man, fighting for the honour and glory of his respective Empire. That's why they hate it so much.
No, but neither is the hellish 24/7 bombardment eat shit live in shit breathe shit drown in shit & run into machineguns and die all day erryday portrayal.
However it is true that "popular" history and art and media and the like have done a number on WW1. It's quite probably the worst victim in terms of combining the sheer importance and scope of the event - and its awfully twisted and incorrect popular perception.
Any sentence that starts with "The fact is" most likely isn't fact. It's like searching porn which has the tag "REAL INCEST" or "REAL TEENS" you can be sure it is 2 famous pornstarts moaning in their usual voice and 30+ washed up pornstars with pigtails to make them look young.
Wars aren't fun, at least not for the soldiers.
>The concentration of so much fighting in such a small area devastated the land, resulting in miserable conditions for troops on both sides. Rain combined with the constant tearing up of the ground turned the clay of the area to a wasteland of mud full of human remains. Shell craters became filled with a liquid ooze, becoming so slippery that troops who fell into them or took cover in them could drown. Forests were reduced to tangled piles of wood by constant artillery-fire and eventually obliterated. The effect on soldiers in the battle was devastating, many broke down with shell-shock.
>A French lieutenant at Verdun who was later killed by a shell, wrote in his diary on 23 May 1916, "Humanity is mad. It must be mad to do what it is doing. What a massacre! What scenes of horror and carnage! I cannot find words to translate my impressions. Hell cannot be so terrible. Men are mad!"[112
Very fun indeed
>Wars aren't fun, at least not for the soldiers.
For some they are. Well maybe not explicitly "fun", but far from awful and terrible and wannagetoutofhere at all costs, see "In Stahlgewittern".
You can make anything fun. ww1 pilots easilly could have, but infantry not so much. You swim around in dirt waiting to get shelled. Your bullets miss the enemy at 300 metres. it's raining.
Meanwhile your friends back home are getting drunk at a swing bar trying to pick up girls.
WW1 was the most bloody conflict in history(10% of drafted soldiers got killed, in comparison to WW2's 5,4%) and right after it ended, asylums were full of insane veterans who got fucked up in their brains there.
Of course if you were fighting on Eastern front or in the Middle East, the conditions were different, but as long as we're talking about Western front it was very shitty.
Are you for real? I've been in the military and the field excercises they make you do are sht, sleep 1 hour a day in a packed, later dirty tent, little time to eat, little to eat. I can only imagine WW1 being real hell on earth.
Then for explosions going off 5 meters away. I've been lying on my stomach, head to a giant sandbox, fingers in my ears while the officers blew up kilos of dynamite in the middle of the box. you only hear FIRE and then for an unpredictable amount of time the dynamite expolodes. I hated that. It's unnerving as hell and when it goes off it kicks the air out of your lungs, it spooks you up like someone slaps your ears, electrocutes you at 4AM in bed. Makes your heart beat like a jaguar and you can physically feel your bones being moved sligthly out of place. It's misery and torture.
You have time to kill and you're plretty close to your men, so, naturally they have fun moments once in a while.
The only people who really enjoy war are borderline psychopathic, or didn't actually get in the grit and experience the fighting (like Churchill for example).
That said, WWI was certainly NOT fun if you cared about your friends and not getting trench foot.
For some, the war was fun. If you managed to avoid the major engagements and were regularly rotated in/out of a quiet sector.
For most though, it was pretty horrific. See Hohenzollern Redoubt (13th October 1915) as an example.
It's a distorted version of real life scholarship.
It is true that this shit
Was an outlying experience.
In oral histories, most veterans described their experiences as positive and believed their fight was just and meaningful.
So it wasn't "fun as fuck" unless that's how you'd describe say, Iraq.
The whole nationalism/ patriotism thing though...
Adolf Hitler participated in WWI, sustained two major injuries, and still wished to return to the frontline, obviously there was something that drove him.
It wasnt sociopathy, because he was very caring for his people in later life (invasion of Poland because of genocide)
So, obviously it must have been fun, or at least rewarding to help your nation.
Thats where I learn much about Hitler's role, yes, but I've been looking into WWI for a little bit now, since I realized in highschool, they dont even teach about it.
However, I do believe that for Austrians, a lot of nationalism was contained in the soldiers. And because of that, they enjoyed the war, at least a little bit. Mind you, nobody enjoyed the western front, or the galipolli campaign, but I still believe there was some excitement to it.
Depends on the front, but WW1 is often described by serious people as a war of boredom. Often soldiers would sit for huge periods of time doing nothing when they were at their posts. Some fronts were incredibly quiet to the point where things got laxed and it wasn't uncommon or soldiers on those fronts to not even bother shooting exposed enemies.
WW1 was boring for most soldiers, because contrary to the idea that WW1 soldiers sat in trenches dying all day most of them spent a huge amount of time simply doing nothing of any interest.
However like any war, there are hot spots. Verdun is notable for this for example or the opening battles of the Somme. These are the areas that people think of when they think "WW1" not the vast majority of the fronts.
WW1 was more than anything boring for soldiers, not fun. Some fronts were horrific like any other war but that's about normal really.
It wasn't as bad as most people make it out to be and it really depended on where you were and which country you were with.
A good book about WW1 is "Myths and Legends about World War One." It'll tell you what was really up.
About that, it's notorious how one of the few books written by a soldier that actually fought in the front describes it as amazing, while most books that the depicts the whole "war is hell", such as "All Quiet in the Western Front", were written by people that never actually fought at all.
Yeah nah, my grandfather told stories of his uncles and there was a series of interviews made with WW1 veterans in the 80s I watched, in short while it wasn't constant hell and suffering it was definately not fun - soldiers had banter times quite often but not during actual combat.
>"All Quiet in the Western Front", were written by people that never actually fought at all.
The main difference is "All Quiet" isn't a direct retelling of experiences of the war, but a fictionalization to deliver the experience of the war as Remarque saw it as opposed to Junger's direct recollection of his personal experience.
My great grandfather fought at the Battle of The Lys. My grandfather used to tell his stories, they were mostly about how miserable the conditions were, little food, dysentery, being shelled and gassed. The only uplifting stories he had were anecdotes about the Scottish regiments and that he found weird they wore skirts yet were tough as nails.
You think it's weird that people who were raised in a country were they were indoctrinated to love the Emperor and to be willing to die for him in war think that WW1 was good?
Everyone literally thought the war would be over in 6 months and gleefully ran to it to defend their empires.
If you are in that frame of mind, it's not surprising that people think it's worth it.
the first year of WW1 might have been the bloodiest year of fighting in the 20th century. for example, the first battle of the marne resulted in over 500,000 casualties in just one week.
For some reason WW1 saddens me the most. So many millions of men, just dead. And for what? We barely remember what they died for and we still tend to remember WW2 as the important one. I can't find words thinking about the poor lads on each side dying in vain, only for their death to be ridiculed and forgotten in this "multicultural" hellhole we find ourselves in.
Lest we forget.
"Bent double, like old beggars under sacks,
Knock-kneed, coughing like hags, we cursed through sludge,
Till on the haunting flares we turned our backs,
And towards our distant rest began to trudge.
Men marched asleep. Many had lost their boots,
But limped on, blood-shod. All went lame; all blind;
Drunk with fatigue; deaf even to the hoots
Of gas-shells dropping softly behind.
Gas! GAS! Quick, boys!—An ecstasy of fumbling
Fitting the clumsy helmets just in time,
But someone still was yelling out and stumbling
And flound’ring like a man in fire or lime.—
Dim through the misty panes and thick green light,
As under a green sea, I saw him drowning.
In all my dreams before my helpless sight,
He plunges at me, guttering, choking, drowning.
If in some smothering dreams, you too could pace
Behind the wagon that we flung him in,
And watch the white eyes writhing in his face,
His hanging face, like a devil’s sick of sin;
If you could hear, at every jolt, the blood
Come gargling from the froth-corrupted lungs,
Obscene as cancer, bitter as the cud
Of vile, incurable sores on innocent tongues,—
My friend, you would not tell with such high zest
To children ardent for some desperate glory,
The old Lie: Dulce et decorum est
Pro patria mori."
It was the Romantic War until people started to die in their tens of thousands.
This is why they tried their best to hide the death tolls from the public, so the demand for high moral and new recruits would be easily achieved.
excuse me but the "Napoleonic wars" was actually World War 1, and the first world war was the second, and world war 2 was actually ww3
If you go that way, there are way more than just three wws
Talked to a veteran from a really fucked up third world ethnic war. It used mostly ww1 tactics (lots of reliance on trenches and very little actual movement), he says it was on the one hand really brutal and like hell but there were times he remembers as the best times of his life. You did your best to make it fun even though most of the fun they had would seem morbid to us. Same with WW1.
My great grandfather was in WW1 from 1914 to 1919 (occupied Germany for a while). He was gassed dozens of times and spent months in the Somme in the front lines.
He refused to talk about it, and would only ever say "it was really bad". He refused to speak about the war except in such terms for his entire life.
It was not fun at all.
War is a drug.
One of the likely causes of PTSD is that there's no way to duplicate the sensation of combat in civilian life. Nothing comes close to it. That doesn't mean it's fun.
If you want to get a glimpse of what combat was like from the perspective of someone who was self-aware enough to understand this effect and grow from it, check out the book Storm of Steel by Ernst Junger.
From an objective standpoint this is the funnest war since nobody died and people shot birds with a bunch of Lewis guns.
>Everyone literally thought the war would be over in 6 months and gleefully ran to it to defend their empires.
That's not true. Governments and general staff around Europe expected it to be a prolonged affair. E.g. the British who fully expected the war to go on for at least... two years, was it? And planned accordingly - the calling up of their manpower reserves (which wouldn't be ready until halfway through 15) and the blockade.
Hitler thoroughly enjoyed the war but he was a crazy asshole. For any normal person the first world war would have been shit. The camaraderie would have been the only redeeming quality but that hardly makes up for trench-foot, cold shitty food, bad sleeping arrangements, cold weather, injury, death, and the futility of it all.
Troops were rotated off the line more than when they were on the line. As in they spent more days in reserve than they would at the front.
If you weren't in a major operation it wasnt too bad.
Mortars here and there, few midnight trench raids.
It only got horrible in the big battles, but holy fucking shit was it horrible in the big battles.
An absolute meat grinder. I recommend reading some of Wilfred Owens poems such as Dulce et Decorum Est
Also the Germans got rotated to the same spots as they were before so they took much better care of their trenches than the British did.
>little to eat during training
What kind of shitty military were you in? Having spent half a year in the finnish army, one of the few things I couldn't complain about was the food, and certainly not the lack of it. It would probably be quite different during actual war, of course.
I don't play very many fps games but if I understand my /v/ terminology right if WW1 was a vidya it would be a war where everyone was a combination of a noob that runs around like a chicken with its head cut off spraying and praying until they get shot in the back without even seeing it somehow combined with literally EVERYONE on the server being a camper. Also everyone suffers from severe lag spikes that kill people just as much as the "fighting" if not more.
If that's your idea of fun then... I don't know what to tell you.
Actually the French have a term for people like you it's "têtes brulées" or burnheads. It's people that, before ww1 saw war as healthy, regenerating, fun and something that brings out the best of humanity. They of course changed their minds after most of their platton was kill, they hadn't slept for 10 days and were forced into relentless offensives that everyone knew would fail.
To quote onr of them (I'll find the name, just let me get my book): "We, who advocated for war in 1914 deserve everything we got. The blood, the everpresent and omnious specter of death."
WWI was absolutely boring. Either it was the first half of the war and you'd go all happy to fight for your country and honor but then sit your ass for weeks on end while your commander would yell at you, or you'd go knowing it won't end anytime soon anyway (propaganda wasn't going to work forever) and you'd be even less happy about it.
Then either way, battle would begin and you'd be in horrible situations you couldn't begin to imagine. Killed by invisible enemies, surrounded by shit and corpses constantly, jumping into a whole new kind of warfare. It's not a surprise that a lot of people came back shellshocked - the battles were basically sending people to die in horrible situations because they didn't really know how else to do it, and the enemy was doing the same thing anyway.
WWI's actual battles were some of the most awful in human history, but wartime itself was mostly boredom. So, no, it was not "fun" at all, at least not for your regular infantry guy.
True for pilots actually, especially earlier ones (WW1 and 2 rather than modern), since those who got shot down were far more likely to die instead of survive as invalids. Those who lived through it would have had a far more enjoyable time than a lot of ground soldiers.