Why is WWII taught so extensively in most countries yet WWI is just glossed over?

[NickCaligo42]

I understand how WWII is more recent, however, WWI was the lead up to WWII as without it Germany wouldn't have been crippled.
Is it due to the grey and gray morality surrounding the events with no country truly being in the right?
Is it simply because most of the western front was bogged down in trenches?

Pretty much. It's hard for a lot of folks to even wrap their heads around what issues were even being fought over in World War I. Everybody was at war with everybody. It's a lot easier to talk about how it ended than how it began, and to discuss how modern weapons like the machine gun and mustard gas changed warfare conditions for the discernibly worse.

In highschool maybe, simply because all of the intricacies that were involved in WWI would take about half a regular school year to cover, and they teach a good bit to you in history. WWII also had the advantage of having a clearly defined bad guy/good guy thing going for it, and there've been movies made about that, so it grabs the attention of the students more.

In college though, you learn quite a bit more about WWI and WWII.

Then there's this. Yeah, it really bares some clarifying what level of education we're discussing and where. In Europe I imagine World War I is treated with a lot of gravity at the high school level. Here in the United States it's all about World War II, because, well...

well... in the U.S. I would assume WWI wouldn't have ben taught as much because, in fact "the best country in the world" was barely in it, and if they were, they were on the sidelines like pussies

Pretty much this. We got involved with World War I only insomuch as we could make money off of it. Not kidding, the wartime economy was responsible for the boom in the 1920's that we were having while all the other countries were picking up the broken pieces of their homelands. It's kind of hard for us not to look like jackasses after a dick move like that, I've got to admit, so I don't blame people like Purtabo when they talk about us like that.

 

[Ogargd]

Because the Jews still exist... I'm not against Jewish people or anything I'm just saying were they all killed out there wouldn't be as much talk over it.

Also Americans still exist and like to think they did a good thing by nuking Japan the second time... when they didn't.

 

[Thaluikhain]

Because the Jews still exist... I'm not against Jewish people or anything I'm just saying were they all killed out there wouldn't be as much talk over it.

That's...actually true, I guess. It'd be just another genocide nobody much cares about.

Also Americans still exist and like to think they did a good thing by nuking Japan the second time... when they didn't.

Compared to a ground invasion which was the other option, using nuclear devices was a good thing.

Interesting bit of trivia, the US created half a million Purple Heart medals in preparation for the casualties they'd take during an invasion and conquest of Japan. They haven't needed to make any since, there's still about a quarter of that left. Military units take spares with them to award as neccesary in the battlezones.

Also, early on in that war, it became seen as preferable to kill thousands of enemy citizens rather than endanger any of your own military personnel, hence carpet bombing at night and so on.

 

[Burs]

It's a long running joke in my history set that I'm obsessed with military history. I probably am. It's just I've taken the time to learn about what I believe to be very important aspects of history, rather than just accept the bullshit the exam boards believe is important.

You know you could turn that On your head as most Curriculum writers believe students have more interest in war than anything else, I would've really wanted to have studied your GCSE and A-level subjects rather then two wars which yes were damn Important but just as important as the Great Game or the Crimean War Or the Reign of Edward I.

 

[Jonabob87]

Define "most countries".

When I was at school, WW1 was taught as extensively (if not more) than WW2.

We learnt about WW1 in detail, briefly touched on the Great Depression, but concentrated mostly on post-WW1 reparations and the League of Nations, then went on to WW2. In fact, the first half of the 20th Century was really taught as one subject, since WW1 influenced everything else.

I even remember WW1 being taught more extensively than WW2 at primary school, with great importance being placed on "The Great War" and what we remember on Armistice Day, the sacrifices, the horrors and the "Lions Led By Donkeys".

+1

When I was at school we did the lead up to WW2 but not the actual war. We were taught A LOT about WW1.

 

[Jimmybobjr]

In Australia, WW1 is much more important that WW2. We base one of our most important holidays -ANZAC Day- Soley on what happened during WW1. Only recently has WW2 become more prevalent thoughout our ceremonys.

In addition, WW1 shaped, and still is shaping, Australian society. Without WW1, Australia would be a much different place- we might have closer ties to britan, for example. World War 2 simply doesnt have that effect- and while there are major battles Australia participated in- In particular the pacific theatre and the middle east- Gallipoli and the Western Front are often haled as Australias "True Birth", in which Australia, who was only recently federated at this point, finaly took up a National Image- that of the Digger. World war two had a more immediate and far reaching effect- for example, it introduced American culture to Australia- World War one came first, and for that simple reason, had a larger effect.

WW1 in australia is actiualy more prevalent than WW2- Especialy when it comes to Australia.

In WW2, the battles were all American- Every battle Australians were in were either aided by Americans or British Empire forces, except for (Comparativley) small battles Such as the raids on Darwin, Or the (Comparativley- To the Americans that is) Uninteresting battles Such as Kokoda, Tobruk, Greece and Singapore, not to mention the many skirmishes that took place in the pacific without American aid.

WW1 had major Australian-Fought conflicts though, Such as defence of the middle east and The Dardanelles Campaign, in which Australia first truly actiualy did something that united the country.

For Australia, the first time every single state and territory united was World War one. The second time was World War two.

For Americans, theyre history streches hundreds of years, from Revolutions to Civil Wars. For the English (And UK in general) Theyve had thousands of years of history.

Australia had about 150. Not to forget that Australia had been a commonwealth for about 13 years.

For these reasons, World War one takes a more prevalent role in Australian society than any other major conflict, as it not only United and newly-Formed country, but it also gave Australia its national image, a seat in international affairs, and its first major step in History since Federation.

 

[ThisIsSnake]

Because the Jews still exist... I'm not against Jewish people or anything I'm just saying were they all killed out there wouldn't be as much talk over it.

That's...actually true, I guess. It'd be just another genocide nobody much cares about.

Also Americans still exist and like to think they did a good thing by nuking Japan the second time... when they didn't.

Compared to a ground invasion which was the other option, using nuclear devices was a good thing.

Interesting bit of trivia, the US created half a million Purple Heart medals in preparation for the casualties they'd take during an invasion and conquest of Japan. They haven't needed to make any since, there's still about a quarter of that left. Military units take spares with them to award as neccesary in the battlezones.

Also, early on in that war, it became seen as preferable to kill thousands of enemy citizens rather than endanger any of your own military personnel, hence carpet bombing at night and so on.

Actually the 'ground invasion was the only other option' thing is a misconception. The bombs were dropped because the president (can't remember if it's Truman or Roosevelt at this point) wanted an unconditional surrender. Memos surfaced that show Japan wanted to surrender on the condition that Emperor Hirohito would be unharmed (because traditionally the emperor was viewed as a physical God). The US rejected this and killed 250,000 or so non combatents to get an unconditional surrender. The most horrific thing to me is, the US didn't even do anything to the emperor afterwards other than make him give a speech declaring himself human.

There has never and likely will never be any situation where Nuclear weaponry is the good thing to use, they are a deterrent not a weapon.

 

[Dexiro]

I understand how WWII is more recent, however, WWI was the lead up to WWII as without it Germany wouldn't have been crippled.
Is it due to the grey and gray morality surrounding the events with no country truly being in the right?
Is it simply because most of the western front was bogged down in trenches?

From my experience of schools in England we seem to learn mostly about WW1, and touch on the subject of Nazi Germany. But very rarely go beyond that into WW2.

Really, I am English and we went in depth of the second war, the build up, the effects, economies during the war and stuff like that.
However, WWI only gave us people's opinions on Haig and asked whether or not we agreed with them.

Well I guess it's based on the school then, from the sounds of it they're both on the syllabus in a good amount of detail - neither are glossed over.

I don't remember a great deal about the morality of the war but it didn't seem as though we had a problem discussing things like that. Their was no end to the talk about England having issues and blah blah, but we did seem to rant about France the most ;D

 

[Blow_Pop]

Define "most countries".

When I was at school, WW1 was taught as extensively (if not more) than WW2.

We learnt about WW1 in detail, briefly touched on the Great Depression, but concentrated mostly on post-WW1 reparations and the League of Nations, then went on to WW2. In fact, the first half of the 20th Century was really taught as one subject, since WW1 influenced everything else.

I even remember WW1 being taught more extensively than WW2 at primary school, with great importance being placed on "The Great War" and what we remember on Armistice Day, the sacrifices, the horrors and the "Lions Led By Donkeys".

I wish I had gone to school where you had. We got taught more about WWII. We briefly touched on WW1 and went into detail on the Great Depression and the League of Nations. I think its because Americans are just too full of themselves. Sadly, most of what I know I taught myself.

 

[Pyro Paul]

If your in a US School...
3 Reasons basically-

1.) Because World War I was less reported on. In world War II, you had the advent of recorded video and audio. News reels would often report on the events occuring in the war back at home in theaters and over the radio. Although some technology of this type did exists during the WWI time, it wasn't widely used.

2.) Because the US wasn't attacked directly. what involved the US in World War I was the sinking of a cruise ship that had americans on it. Even while fighting in world war I, the doughboys very much thought of that war as "Some one Else's fight".

3.) The war was confusing, Even to its end. Who started what, what started when, and even who won is all up to debate depending on your perspective. The war started because of an assassination? or was the assassination the responce to hostilies already seen through out the area? The germans felt they where winning the war, but all of a sudden german high command up and surrenders?

 

[Thaluikhain]

Actually the 'ground invasion was the only other option' thing is a misconception. The bombs were dropped because the president (can't remember if it's Truman or Roosevelt at this point) wanted an unconditional surrender. Memos surfaced that show Japan wanted to surrender on the condition that Emperor Hirohito would be unharmed (because traditionally the emperor was viewed as a physical God). The US rejected this and killed 250,000 or so non combatents to get an unconditional surrender. The most horrific thing to me is, the US didn't even do anything to the emperor afterwards other than make him give a speech declaring himself human.

Wasn't that needed to prevent a bloody occupation? The Japanese military had to be destroyed spiritually as well as physically, to ensure the conflict would end...similar to the mucking around to destroy the Hitler cult in Europe, though with more success.

There has never and likely will never be any situation where Nuclear weaponry is the good thing to use, they are a deterrent not a weapon.

Well, that may be true nowdays, but you needed them to be used before people fear them enough for them to deter people.

In addition, WW1 shaped, and still is shaping, Australian society. Without WW1, Australia would be a much different place- we might have closer ties to britan, for example. World War 2 simply doesnt have that effect-

Er...alot of the move away from Britain was due to Curtin in WW2. With British forces far away dealing with their own issues, they couldn't devote much to the Pacific campagin, so attention shifted to the US.

WW1 had major Australian-Fought conflicts though, Such as defence of the middle east and The Dardanelles Campaign, in which Australia first truly actiualy did something that united the country.

Hey? Yes, those campaigns were the first fought by Australian infantry as Australians, but they were still part of a larger group of Allied forces, same as in WW2.

Though, the first battle fought by Australians as Australians didn't have any other Allied forces in it at all, that was the sinking of the German warship Emden by the HMAS Sydney (though it was almost a Japanese ship that did it instead), but everyone tends to forget that.

 

[silversnake4133]

What is this "school" you are talking about? You mean that wallet and savings account puncture that temporarily houses the future generations of tomorrow and the aging people of yesteryear who think they know it all? Well then in that case I'd say it would depend on the country. American schools are only focused on their victories while their heavy losses and other embarrassments are left surprisingly undocumented in their textbooks. I can't really voucher for other countries' schools, but I wouldn't be surprised if it's the same kind of thing, or has propaganda dripping from every crevice.

In all fairness though, WWII is the most talked about probably because it involved most of the world's countries and there are still people alive today to yammer on about it. Pretty much everyone who was alive for WWI is dead now or dying so there isn't much to go on as far as first-hand education. And there are tons of people who were alive for the Korean and Vietnam wars, but since the US didn't exactly "win" those, they aren't really talked about too much.

 

[ZombieGenesis]

I could tell you pretty much anything you want to know about WWI...
It's just that WWII has much more recorded history, especially considering the rather interesting elements of life under an extreme regime. People just like those kind of stories.

 

[Spygon]

I was taught extensively about both ww1 and ww2 as both wars were covered equally in the uk.

 

[orangeban]

I think that WW1 is more complex than WW2, even if it just comes down to a lack of "bad guy" (as opposed to WW2 which had the Nazis who are really the definition of "bad guy").

 

[ThisIsSnake]

Actually the 'ground invasion was the only other option' thing is a misconception. The bombs were dropped because the president (can't remember if it's Truman or Roosevelt at this point) wanted an unconditional surrender. Memos surfaced that show Japan wanted to surrender on the condition that Emperor Hirohito would be unharmed (because traditionally the emperor was viewed as a physical God). The US rejected this and killed 250,000 or so non combatents to get an unconditional surrender. The most horrific thing to me is, the US didn't even do anything to the emperor afterwards other than make him give a speech declaring himself human.

Wasn't that needed to prevent a bloody occupation? The Japanese military had to be destroyed spiritually as well as physically, to ensure the conflict would end...similar to the mucking around to destroy the Hitler cult in Europe, though with more success.

The point is, Japan was already trying to surrender before any bombs were dropped. Occupation wasn't necessary, or logical considering Japan had next to no military capability at this point. Japan just didn't want the emperor executed, which he wasn't even after fatman and littleboy were dropped. The US basically dropped the two greatest weapons on the planet to add two letters to the word conditional.

 

[DSK-]

I got taught World War 1. It was pretty damning in regards to the failiures of both sides, comitting massive amounts of men and sending them to their death, with particular venom for the Brits, and rightly so in my opinion. We fucked up a lot in that war.

 

[Ogargd]

Also Americans still exist and like to think they did a good thing by nuking Japan the second time... when they didn't.

Compared to a ground invasion which was the other option, using nuclear devices was a good thing.

Interesting bit of trivia, the US created half a million Purple Heart medals in preparation for the casualties they'd take during an invasion and conquest of Japan. They haven't needed to make any since, there's still about a quarter of that left. Military units take spares with them to award as neccesary in the battlezones.

Also, early on in that war, it became seen as preferable to kill thousands of enemy citizens rather than endanger any of your own military personnel, hence carpet bombing at night and so on.

I'm sorry I was fairly vague on that point, the direction of that attack was more aimed at the second less thought out bomb, from studying the war myself I know Japan was doubtful America had another bomb but I feel more precautions could have been taken before launching the second one so soon. I agree with the dropping of the first bomb.

 

[orangeapples]

THERE WAS A WORLD WAR I?

I can't speak for other countries, but at least in America, WWII was personal thanks to Japan.

That and it involves more parts of the world for a 'World War', not just countries around the Mediterranean Sea.