Poll: When did WW2 begin?

[TheIronRuler]

When Poland was invaded.

Germany broke the treaty of versaille and thus the allies and Axis were at it again. Okay, Germany had violated the treaty many times within that year but it was Poland to call help from the English and French.

.
If going by that logic, I think that the abandonment of Czechoslovakia in Munich was the beginning of the war.

I'm gonna have to agree with that. Although it didn't end in an armed conflict, it was supposed to be one. Bunkers were built on the borders and soldiers were ready to fire, but then they just had to let them germans pass through

.
It was similar to the anschluss with Austria - they were ready to fight, but Austria's leader came to Hitler and surrendered to avoid bloodshed. Did not stop Austrian troops from marching under the flag of Nazi Germany and getting killed.

 

[TheIronRuler]

I've had a chat with some of my buddies about the beginning of WW2 - specifically, when did it begin? We all knew that September 1st, 1939 was the 'official' beginning of the war, since this is the date most historians agree upon, but I was still not convinced.

Here are the number of options for you to choose from, and my explanations:
1.1931, September 18. Mukden Incident. Japan invades Manchuria and establishes a puppet state there [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mukden_Incident], Manchukuo [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manchukuo]. This may seem harmless, but this is the beginning of Japanese meddling in the Chinese remains of the Qing dynasty.
2. 1937, July 7-9. Marco Polo Bridge Incident [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marco_Polo_Bridge_Incident], which sparked the incursion of Japan into Chinese soil and the Sino-Japanese war which only ended in '45.
3. 1938, March 11 [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anschluss#1938], Annexation of Austria.
4. 1935, October [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Italo-Abyssinian_War], Italian-Ethiopian war.
5. Invasion of Poland by Germany, 1939, September 1. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasion_of_Poland]
6. Pearl Harbor bombing. 1941, 7-8 December. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attack_on_Pearl_Harbor] 8th of December had the USA officially enter the war.
7. 1938, 30 September. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Munich_Agreement] The betrayal at Munich, where Czechoslovakia was royally screwed by its allies.

We had three dates in mind, but because I didn't want the thread to be about our discussion I also added 4 more dates to the mix. They may seem like the stepping stones towards WW2... you're probably right. Still, aggression can also be manifested in diplomacy.

here is a book that might interest you:

1939 - The War That Had Many Fathers

.
mind=blown.

I read a review on a site that summarized the book.

I had not even thought of the events in that narrative. The facts do line up.

Dude. This is... Dude.

Marry me.

You're awesome.

 

[Major_Tom]

In my country the National Liberation War, as we call it, started in July 1941. The Kingdom of Yugoslavia was overrun by the Axis forces in April and the first Partisan squad was formed on 22.6. (same day the Soviet Union was invaded) but the actual fighting didn't start until July.

 

[RicoADF]

I'm going to be 'that guy' and say that 'WWII' is a misnomer... the first 'world war' was the Seven Years' War (which lasted nine years... -_- 1754-1763).

Anyway, I'm... conflicted on this if we're just talking about my background. I'm Chinese... so it started in 1938... but I'm also a Brit... so it started in 1939... but as far as it becoming a 'world war' it started in 1941.

So, there are arguments for the core conflict from which WWII stemmed, but it can be argued as to the degree to which each local conflict contributed to the global impact of the war at large. *shrug*

As a world war 39 would be the start as most of the world was involved with the allies/axis fight. 41 just added 2 countries that were already involved officially into the mix. technically the us and Japan were fighting earlier than 41 as the US sent aircrew to help China.

 

[teebeeohh]

18th of January 1871, the German states declare themselves a united empire in fucking Versailles while laying siege to Paris. that is serious diplomatic teabagging which was one of the major reason why the French were so much more vindictive after WW1, resulting in the treaty of Versailles which gimped the new German nation and resulted in the rise of Hitler.

but really, i stand by the September 1939 date, for starters i am German and we have been hard-wired to accept the guilt of having started that thing and none of the other axis powers actually had ambitions to take over the world, Italy and Japan were cool being local Hegemonies(northern africa and the pacific) but Hitler was actually on a campaign to wipe out Jews and Communist EVERYWHERE. all the other military conflicts that factored into WW2 (people like to forget the Italians steam-rolling over Ethiopia) that started earlier were not designed to start a global war, the invasion of Poland was

 

[New Frontiersman]

I'm going to say it began in October of 1935 when Italy invaded Ethiopia, the African front of the war tends to be often ignored when discussing WWII, including Italy's invasion and occupation of Ethiopia.

 

[TheIronRuler]

18th of January 1871, the German states declare themselves a united empire in fucking Versailles while laying siege to Paris. that is serious diplomatic teabagging which was one of the major reason why the French were so much more vindictive after WW1, resulting in the treaty of Versailles which gimped the new German nation and resulted in the rise of Hitler.

but really, i stand by the September 1939 date, for starters i am German and we have been hard-wired to accept the guilt of having started that thing and none of the other axis powers actually had ambitions to take over the world, Italy and Japan were cool being local Hegemonies(northern africa and the pacific) but Hitler was actually on a campaign to wipe out Jews and Communist EVERYWHERE. all the other military conflicts that factored into WW2 (people like to forget the Italians steam-rolling over Ethiopia) that started earlier were not designed to start a global war, the invasion of Poland was

.
Dude. The Japanese were just as bad as the Germans when it comes down to dealing with local populations. No, wait, scratch that - Worse. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanking_Massacre]
.

I'm going to say it began in October of 1935 when Italy invaded Ethiopia, the African front of the war tends to be often ignored when discussing WWII, including Italy's invasion and occupation of Ethiopia.

.
Woo, I think you're the only poster who chose that option and gave a comment. Congrats!

 

[Shock and Awe]

While the conflict began in 1931 with the invasion of Manchuria I would tag the beginning of the war with the textbook answer September 1939. I say this because that is when it truly became a World War. Before that it was simply Japan's wars of expansion. When Germany invaded Poland however it became a World Conflict as it suddenly involved not just Easy Asia, but Europe, Africa, and Australia as well. It became a global conflict.

However, if you really want to be an ass about it you could say that it was simply a continuation of the first World War seeing as it had almost all the same players on mostly the same sides. But thats a harder argument to make.

.
...How? Japan was on the side of the Americans in WW1. The Ottomans that helped the Germans were a tiny player in WW2 (as the Turks). The reason why the same players were involved were because of god-damned France not building its fortifications in the Belgian borders, where Germany crossed and went to Paris... TWICE.

I said almost for a reason. That really isn't what I believe about the war, its just an interesting thought.

 

[TheIronRuler]

While the conflict began in 1931 with the invasion of Manchuria I would tag the beginning of the war with the textbook answer September 1939. I say this because that is when it truly became a World War. Before that it was simply Japan's wars of expansion. When Germany invaded Poland however it became a World Conflict as it suddenly involved not just Easy Asia, but Europe, Africa, and Australia as well. It became a global conflict.

However, if you really want to be an ass about it you could say that it was simply a continuation of the first World War seeing as it had almost all the same players on mostly the same sides. But thats a harder argument to make.

.
...How? Japan was on the side of the Americans in WW1. The Ottomans that helped the Germans were a tiny player in WW2 (as the Turks). The reason why the same players were involved were because of god-damned France not building its fortifications in the Belgian borders, where Germany crossed and went to Paris... TWICE.

I said almost for a reason. That really isn't what I believe about the war, its just an interesting thought.

.
You had an interesting observation, but unfortunately it held no water.

 

[teebeeohh]

Dude. The Japanese were just as bad as the Germans when it comes down to dealing with local populations. No, wait, scratch that - Worse. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanking_Massacre]

i didn't actually mean how bad they treated civilians, just the scope of how many they were going to brutally kill and i believe (i may be wrong, not an expert on the pacific front) that the main goal for the Japanese was to dominate the pacific and specifically to control china and the Philippines, while Hitlers goal was literally to not have anyone oppose Germany ever after the war, everybody was either supposed to be dead or have joined them, how very borg of him

 

[TheIronRuler]

Dude. The Japanese were just as bad as the Germans when it comes down to dealing with local populations. No, wait, scratch that - Worse. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanking_Massacre]

i didn't actually mean how bad they treated civilians, just the scope of how many they were going to brutally kill and i believe (i may be wrong, not an expert on the pacific front) that the main goal for the Japanese was to dominate the pacific and specifically to control china and the Philippines, while Hitlers goal was literally to not have anyone oppose Germany ever after the war, everybody was either supposed to be dead or have joined them, how very borg of him

.
Nah man... one of the points of Nazi Germany was 'living space'. You conquer Poland, Ukraine, the Baltics, Yugoslavia... You starve the locals, turn them into idiots, kill all of the educated and trained people, then make them into slaves. Slowly but surely you start resettling areas with German population.

Same was done with Japan. Ever read about Japanese farmers immigrating to Japanese controlled Korea? Yeeeeeeep. The whole raping thing in china? Lets make some half-Japanese babies!
Sick... but effective.

I don't think you can compare the two by the same scale, but even as a german you can't disregard the shit done by the Japanese. They also worried about lacking living space and the food to support themselves. Y'Know, the whole Malthusian philosophy thingy.

 

[Torrasque]

I think September 1939 because thats when the conflict between 2 nations became a conflict that involved 2+ nations. All the other dates that you mentioned involve 2 nations directly in conflict, while the rest of the world sits on their hands and looks worried. The whole "World War" title means that it must involve the World.

 

[bificommander]

I'm voting with the mayority. I count the invasion of Poland as the start of the 'world' part of the world war, since that was the moment the war wasn't just between the invading and invaded nation, but also between allies of an invaded nation declaring war on the invaders despite not being invaded themselves (yet). Much as had happened at the start of WW1 with the treaty clusterfuck where Austria-Hungary declares war on Serbia, Russia on Austria-Hungary, Germany on Russia and its ally France, England on Germany, the Ottomans on the allies...

 

[Torrasque]

The Japanese were just as bad as the Germans when it comes down to dealing with local populations. No, wait, scratch that - Worse. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanking_Massacre]

I love Japanese culture and most things about Japan, but their behaviour in WW2 makes me sick and disappointed.

 

[CrazyDave DC]

The question could be phrased differently. I can see what you're asking, but we all know when WWII officially began. A better question would be "what event made WWII inevitable?"

To that I would answer the Treaty of Versailles signed on June 28th 1919. Germany was made to pay cruelly high reparations for the war, and its principal means of obtaining revenue, the coal mines, were occupied and appropriated by the French. Coupled with the Stock Market Crash in 1929, Germany was destined for a totalitarian government because of its fragile economic situation.

 

[teebeeohh]

Nah man... one of the points of Nazi Germany was 'living space'. You conquer Poland, Ukraine, the Baltics, Yugoslavia... You starve the locals, turn them into idiots, kill all of the educated and trained people, then make them into slaves. Slowly but surely you start resettling areas with German population.

Same was done with Japan. Ever read about Japanese farmers immigrating to Japanese controlled Korea? Yeeeeeeep. The whole raping thing in china? Lets make some half-Japanese babies!
Sick... but effective.

I don't think you can compare the two by the same scale, but even as a german you can't disregard the shit done by the Japanese. They also worried about lacking living space and the food to support themselves. Y'Know, the whole Malthusian philosophy thingy.

i actually know next to nothing about the pacific war and kinda always assumed the Japanese were acting more along the lines of traditional(if unusually violent) Imperialism, with the rape just being your standard way to break the population, and less well organised and documented (seriously, other people may be more efficient or clever at genocide than us but nobody has ever kept such good records about it) genocide of everyone who was not "Aryan". I really should read up on the war in the pacific.

oh and one thing: WW2 in Europe was just a continuation of WW1, just with major and minor power slightly rearranged around Germany/France and nobody being able to save the french from being overrun this time around. the military performance of french Armies after Napoleon is kinda embarrassing.

 

[Thaluikhain]

oh and one thing: WW2 in Europe was just a continuation of WW1, just with major and minor power slightly rearranged around Germany/France and nobody being able to save the french from being overrun this time around. the military performance of french Armies after Napoleon is kinda embarrassing.

What, because they got defeated by the same military that chased the British back across the channel and took large bites out of the USSR? That's raising the bar a little high.

Also, they were winning against the Italians even while they were being defeated by the Germans.