What do you consider "the beginning of the war?"

I agree with the idea that it was indeed the Treaty of Versailles that brought on the Second World War. If it were not for the heartless greed, and lust for power by the central bankers that completely dominated England and France, Hitler would have never been. There's a story about an American businessman that visited Germany during this time, and was appalled, and disgusted at the conditions imposed on the German people by the treaty. When Hitler became Chancellor, his first action was to walk into Deutsche Bank, and halt all speculative banking, and easy loans! This is how he took a broken Germany and conquered Europe within 8 years...

 

so, I wonder if the book mentioned by von poop, Paul Kennedy's 'The Rise & Fall of the Great Powers' refutes the idea that "there are no winners in war" except the bankers who provide the funds to both sides...

 

Or, not so much the threat of a German navy, but when the ideas within the American constitution were sweeping the globe, ideas such as developing the land within a nations' borders with railroads, and the "creativity of an individual" as having more value than the resources of a given area(free trade) this is what threatened the British Admiralty's domination of the planet. This is what prompted the political manipulation by the British bankers to subvert and ultimately destroy the idea of free men,(and sound money) under a global American style constitution...

Assassinate any president against the fractional reserve system, and secure the Federal Reserve act of 1913. And because Bismarck recognized the possibilities of developing infrastructure within a nation's borders as the solution to global prosperity, and freedom, he was actively convincing the Czar of Russia of such. With the British political retaliation, he warned of a "seven years war"

 

in effect, the British Admiralty was losing control of the planet, so they kicked over the chess board with "The Great War" (WW1)

 

I am going to offend a few people with this but it did not become a true World War until the Japanese attacks of Dec.7th-8th.

Intriguing point of nomenclature - does a "world war" have to involve literally every great power? Was there no "World War" I until April 6, 1917?

 

But when I say the British Admiralty, I mean the Luciferian/Khazarian banker family MASQUERADING as Jews, who controlled the most powerful seagoing nation in history, and, I'm sure, anything less simply wouldn't do. The founder being none other than old Mayer Amschel Rothschild, himself, who attained the keys to his massive wealth, immediately following the Battle of Waterloo. And, with John D. Rockefeller highjacking the American education system in 1902, it's not surprising that so few people know the secret history of money, for which all wars are fought...

 

To answer the question, the beginning of the second world war, I think, was when Chamberlain, declared a state of war between the British Commonwealth, and, Germany, following the invasion of Poland. The Treaty of Versailles was a fraudulently engineered document...

 

I've seen some that say that in the future historians will not seperate WWI and WWII.
I've also seen some say that "World" WarII was started by the Japanese - not at Pearl Harbor but in China.

 

I've also seen some say that "World" WarII was started by the Japanese - not at Pearl Harbor but in China.

You could certainly make a case for that - members of what would become the Allies and Axis were at war continuously from 1937 through 1945.

From September 1939 to December 1941 there were basically two independent wars with no belligerents in common until the Japanese decided to merge them.

 

I think you got the gist of Martins response quite adequately..Not that I'd speak for Martin.

 

That cannot be taken too seriously, since China itself was involved in their own civil war and a very "tenuous" member of the global community. I know this may sound too Americentric, but until Germany, Italy, the Japanese and the other Axis "allies" had all had declared war on the US, what was to become known as WW2 was in essence two separate wars being fought on opposite sides of the globe. One in Europe, and one in the far east. But after Dec. 11th of 1941 the shape, and direction of the war had been unified and the opponents had been defined.

 

I disagree. The fact that China was involved in a civil war is irrelevant to the topic at hand. As for it being a "tenuous" member of the global community that's hardly the case either.

One of the problems is what is meant by the phrase "the beginning of the war". Is it the first shots exchanged by beligerants in the conflict or is it when the war became truly global? If the latter how do we define "truly global"? One reason I tend to go with the 1937 date is the the first defintion is cleaner.

 

Actually there was no "World War I" until "World War II", prior to that it was known as "The Great War", in fact I believe in most of Europe it is still known as "The Great War".

There were more lives lost in Australia, Belgium, France, Italy and Great Britain during WWI than WWII.

 

What we call WW1 was called The Great War in some circles, but in America it was officially named The World War for American definition by Wilson after its conclusion. The period known now as WW2 in the west wasn't officially named that until after it concluded as well, when Truman did the honor here in America. I'll see if I can find the note/memo to Truman from one of his administration officials suggesting that he do this.

I believe that Time magazine first used the term the Second World War in the issue following the invasion of Poland in Sept. of '39, but that wasn't an "official" name really, just the term which was widely used from then on.

The conflict that erupted in August 1914, and that ended at the 11th hour of the 11th day of the 11th month of 1918, was known at the time simply as the Great War. In the United States, it was officially designated The World War. On October 7, 1919, War Department General Orders No. 115 directed: "The war against the Central Powers of Europe, in which the United States has taken part, will hereafter be designated in all official communications and publications as 'The World War.'"

…It seems that World Wars I & II were named together for the first time by Time magazine on 11 September 1939.

On 27 April 1942 a Gallup Poll indicated that people preferred the term World War II for the ongoing global war. During the war, many Americans also called it as "The War in Europe," or simply, "The War." Noting that the term "World War II" had been used in at least seven public laws to designate this period of hostilities, and that analysis of publications and radio programs indicates that this term had been accepted by common usage, President Truman officially named the war in September 1945.

Goto:

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/world_war_4-name.htm

 

I didn't read many things past the first page on this thread, however it seemed that we were linking the first world war to the second. This is indeed correct, but then you will have to link the first world war to all the wars in the Balkans that lead to Austria dreaming up a plan for colonies in Europe because she was a bit to late to colonize the world. Which is because of many things that would then in theory, be considered part of the leading up to the second world war, however the second world war was what lead to the cold war and everything past it yes? It's all relative (for those of us who have taken, or are in physics) and thus, very complicated.

The second world war I'd say shouldn't be considered to have started around late 1941 when Hitler declared war on America, if we want to say this then we'd have to say the first world war wasn't "world" until America declared war on Germany in 1917 yes? What about the millions of men who had already perished by that time in the first and second world wars? What about all the cities destroyed by bombs? Those who found themselves in German concentration camps? Are they not considered part of the second world war until late 1941? Many think it would be considered when Germany set into action "Case White" or "Fall Weiss" the German invasion of Poland which seems to be the time when the first world western nations decided that they needed to get their military boots on. What about Czechoslovakia, Austria, Manchuria, and Japanese occupation of China though? This is just like the first world war, things were already happening. The Austrian Empire already had its quasi protectorates of German villages in Serbia and wanted to take over the whole country. We must remember, history is decided by the winners; the western powers (and also the Russians however they decided to call the second world war "The Great Patriotic War" and we know that Operation Barbarossa didn't start until June 22nd 1941, which is when their war "started") and the western powers joined in the war on September 1st 1939 (excluding America however we also must remember all American aid heading to the western powers, and Russia later on)

Could it be the "Tripartite Pact"? signed on September 17th 1940 forming the Axis powers? Perhaps, but what about the Pact of Steel signed on May 22nd 1939 between Germany and Italy? Or what about the Anti-Comintern Pact signed in late 1936? It had all of the Axis key players, also many minor ones, as well Nationalist Spain.

All of these answers are correct and incorrect, you can't really put an exact date on any of this because of all the things that lead up to war, embargo, political disputes, minor "wars" that happen before hand (such as in Finland and the Spanish Civil War) however some historians consider these wars as part of the major war. A perfect example would be of the Ottoman Empire in the first world war, her people considered the first world war as just another war that would loose them ground (She hadn't known peace for eight years due to all the wars in the Balkans)

Answering a question like this is even harder when it is a "Major" war, because as stated before all the "minor" wars happen before hand that link it all together to form the major war.

Another example would be "When did the first world war start?" When Austria declared war on Serbia? When Russia declared war on Austria? When Germany declared war on Russia? When France declared war on Germany? When England declared war on Germany? When the alliances were formed? When America declared war on Germany? It's all just a mess really.

I'm sorry I didn't give you guys an exact answer which is what you probably wanted. However I don't personally believe there is an exact answer to this question, I once had a lengthy discussion with my A.P World History teacher last year about this and we reached the same conclusion, but to give an answer to this question:

"What do you consider 'the beginning of the war?'"

History does not have a start point, it does not have an end point. All the things that lead up to war, all the things that lead to the end, and what happens after. We might as well just call it "history" and get over arguing about the exact date, because there is none.

 

1917...It needs a listing then of what countries were at war at the date America came into that war in that case. Japan was part of the conflagrfation at this point as too were the British commonwealth nations of India, Australia, Canada, New Zealand etc. Fleets were fighting as far as the Falklands in this war. Are we seriously stating that war number one was not a world war until America came into it?

 

We really do need to define our terms a bit better. For instance I don't necessarily take the phrase "when did WWII begin" to mean the same as when did it "become WWII". Thus I favor when the date of when the fighting started that eventually became part of the world war. If we are to try and answer when did it become a world war then we should at least have some well defined meaning of the term. I suspect most of them will result in the first world war actually being the Napoleonic wars if not some earlier conflict.

 

I'm not sure we need to define this to far.

Granted all History is a chian of events, but WW1 and WW2 are not really counting World Wars (like the 7 years war, also fought around the globe). The similar names try to indicate that they are linked together. And they are different (or became different) from the times before them.

WW1 began in a more traditional manner when Germany tried to achieve domination over the continient of Europe (lots of controversy here, but I personally like Franz Fischer's work). There were many reasons for this that are not really relevant here. The important links are :
1. The brutal and prolonged slaugther of a generation
2. The making of Hitler, a product of that killing

When Hitler came to power he was determined, not to undo the Treaty of Versailles, but to continue the war to it's 'rightful' conclusion. He believed alot of things, among them that Germany had not been beaten but stabbed in the back by hateful politicians; Communists, Jews, Democrats, etc. and this fanned his basic prejudices into later tragedy. All that fighting had to be rewarded. He wanted to redo the war. He was going to get 'even'.

Side note: Oddly, American General Pershing sort of thought this might occur. When the war was is it's last hours the US kept fighting (and dying) while the other forces just sat back as much as possible (Germans too). When criticized in the US Congress over the needless loss of US boys he replied to the effect that if the Germans weren't convinced they'd lost we'd be back to it again.

WW2 saw some changes with Japan and Italy; two very dissatisfied participants of WW1. Perhaps with a change of sides things would get better. Hitler bullied and recruited much of the old Hapsburg lands to his side; Austria, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, Romania, Bulgaria, elements of Yugoslavia. Russia would be easy to take apart, just look at WW1. Japan's war just blended in well with events.(In WW1 they really just grabbed German territory in China, now they would just grab other European territory that was ripe for the taking.)

I would say that The Great War never really ended, it merely took a breather from exhaustion. The names changed, and some players were rearranged, new weapons were added, and this time there would be no 'softness' on the Axis part that would lose the war.

 

The First world war not only created Hitler, But Stalin (though Lenin) as well. Without it the Romanov's might have stggered on for a couple of generations or morphed into a constitutional monarchy.

 

Before the WW2 has actually begun, there were parallel unrelated military conflicts which turned into a compact global war when the British Empire was dragged into an armed confrontation with the 3rd Reich. Since then, a state of war existed among the 3[SUP]rd[/SUP] Reich and inhabitants of British Iles along with all citizens of British overseas territories. This has introduced a global dimension into a war. Now, this leaves us with just two options: either 1st or 3rd September 1939. Seemingly, the 3[SUP]rd[/SUP] is more accurate because the state of war existed since the deadline of the ultimatum imposed by Britain has expired. However, the 1st September is more appropriate because it directly implies Responsibility.

Continuity among the Great War and WW2 is yet another myth even though they have some related elements. Their character and scope are entirely different.