Which war was more horrific? WWI vs WWII?

So OT which in your opinion was the more horrific war?

I suspect most of you will say WWII as it had greater causalties, especially civilian causalties, and Im sure some will bring up the atomic bombings and fire bombings which are fair arguments. But I'm going to have to go with The Great War WWI.

Why?

Simple. It was so damn pointless. The war started for practically no reason other than countries not liking each other. There was no clear goal for either side during the fighting, and absolutely nothing was accomplished other than laying the ground work for another War.

Atleast in WWII there were terrible people in power that were seeking to conquer Europe that needed to be stopped.

World War II needed to be fought, but World War I.....why?

WWI's battles were absolutely awful as well. Essentially rot in a trench hoping to not get gassed or hit by artillery and wait for your CO to blow the whistle. When he did....you die. No tactics at all, just charge straight into machine gun fire. The Battle of the Somme was so brutal that the ground was more blood and bodies than it was earth.

WWII battles were no picnic by any means, but if I was forced to fight in either World War II's Eastern front or World War I's Western front I think I'd choose WWII Eastern.

Thoughts?

I'm going to have to go with WWII because of D-Day and the Russian Winter War(s) lonewolf604

World War II's Eastern front was brutal. I don't know what I would prefer, but I think WWII was more horrific.

Also in WW2 was the Holocaust, Japanese treatment Camps, and Nuclear bombs.

Hang out with the Canadians in WWI and be a stormtrooper :). Use real tactics.

The conditions were undoubtedly bad in WWI, but I'm sure there were definitely battles in WW2 just as bloody (and way larger in scope). Especially if you factor in the Pacific theatre and the Eastern front.

WW2 no contest....millions and millions died, tortured behind what we can ever imagine

I'd rather fight in World War II due to the better medical care and lack of trench warfare, but I'd say it was more horrific overall, especially when you consider civilian lives and what they did to some of the prisoners of war.Zariano

In the battlefield: WW1. Worse medical tech + horribly outdated tactics colliding with new tech + poison gas= hell.

-Men were ordered by the tens of thousands at times to march through barb wirded fields, raining down artilarly shells, the air often toxic, the ground a quagmire laced with bodies spilling forth with disease, and the enemy sending an endless supply of machine gun bulliets on you. All that for a 1% chance to gain a few hundred yards at best.

Including non-battlefield actions:WW2. Not just because of the Holocaust, but German actions in Russia and Japan in china are the peak of human cruelty.

In short: WW1= hell for soldiers, WW2= hell for everyone

WW II, they burned alive thousand and thousand of woman, children and civilians in a matter of seconds.

War, what is it good for?

I'm definitely going to have to go with World War I if we are just talking about the actual war part because the tactics were too outdated for the new weaponry they had which created the bloodbath that it was. Treanch warfare is a horrible thing, having to charge trenches with bayonets while taking machine gun fire, poisonous gas exploding around you. The only thing worse was actually living in the disease-infested trenches.

All wars are horrific. LJS9502_basic

Some more than other though.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]All wars are horrific. JustMe64

Some more than other though.

Based on what I know (which is little as to WW1) I would have to say WW2.

Haulocaust, the Bomb, massive world wide fighting.

WWII. The Holocaust gives WWII the edge in horror. People, civilians, being by taken their own government and killed horrifically for an arbitrary reason is sick.Agent-Zero

WWII because of the trenches :?themajormayor

God bless the anzacs at Galipoli! (Not suggesting they were the only ones that suffered of course)

WWII because of the trenches :?themajormayor

[QUOTE="themajormayor"]WWII because of the trenches :?LJS9502_basic

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="themajormayor"]WWII because of the trenches :?Philokalia

[QUOTE="Philokalia"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] What????LJS9502_basic

Ah, that just goes to show how little I know in this regard.

[QUOTE="Philokalia"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] What????LJS9502_basic

[QUOTE="JustMe64"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]All wars are horrific. LJS9502_basic

Some more than other though.

Some cause it on a bigger level than others which I would consider more horrific.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="JustMe64"]

Some more than other though.

JustMe64

Some cause it on a bigger level than others which I would consider more horrific.

[QUOTE="JustMe64"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] Really? Which war doesn't cause death and destruction? Which war doesn't mutilate bodies nor cause mental problems?LJS9502_basic

Some cause it on a bigger level than others which I would consider more horrific.

You're going into a different issue here of morality. Any amount of deaths by soldiers is okay if the war is for a just cause, but that's beside the point. I never said anything about war being okay, I just said some are more horrific than others. I would consider WWII more horrific than the Kosovo War because there was many more deaths, body mutilation, and mental problems than the Kosovo War.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="JustMe64"]

Some cause it on a bigger level than others which I would consider more horrific.

JustMe64

You're going into a different issue here of morality. Any amount of deaths by soldiers is okay if the war is for a just cause, but that's beside the point. I never said anything about war being okay, I just said some are more horrific than others. I would consider WWII more horrific than the Kosovo War because there was many more deaths, body mutilation, and mental problems than the Kosovo War.

[QUOTE="JustMe64"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] So how many deaths do you consider okay?LJS9502_basic

You're going into a different issue here of morality. Any amount of deaths by soldiers is okay if the war is for a just cause, but that's beside the point. I never said anything about war being okay, I just said some are more horrific than others. I would consider WWII more horrific than the Kosovo War because there was many more deaths, body mutilation, and mental problems than the Kosovo War.

Oh, I guess I didn't understand your original question. Yes, I am using that as the barometer.

They were both horrible. I wouldn't want to be apart of either.

Obviously WW2, the genocide and the atomic bomb speak for themselves.

WWII cause Pearl Harbor and Holocaust.

WWI = trench warfare = not pretty

WWII = HOLOCAUST + all other manner of hellish things = horrific

World War II's Eastern front was brutal. I don't know what I would prefer, but I think WWII was more horrific.

Vari3ty

Britain underestimated the length of the war, saying that the Great War would be over by Christmas.

Largest loss of life in a war at the time.

The mass loss of life in the Somme.

With the Great War being the first war to be een as extremely horrific, I'll have to go with the Great War as my vote.

World War II

The Axis Powers were responsible for the genocide of the Jews (Nazi Germany) and the Chinese (Imperial Japan). In addition, Nazi Germany killed millions of Slavic people, Roma people, homosexuals, disabled people, and bombed the crap out of several European cities, including London, Rotterdam, and Warsaw. Imperial Japan conducted the Rape of Nanjing, in which 300,000 Chinese civilians were brutally massacred by Japanese soldiers. Japan invaded Korea and other Asian countries. Civilian casualties outnumbered combatant deaths at least three-to-one, I believe. Around 60-80 million people were killed. To scale that number of deaths, the population of present-day France and Britain are both about 60-65 million people and Germany's population is 80 million. Conclusion: A crap load of people died.

WW2 was the deadliest military conflict in the world.

World War II overall, but trench warfare was also extremely bad.

In the battlefield: WW1. Worse medical tech + horribly outdated tactics colliding with new tech + poison gas= hell.

-Men were ordered by the tens of thousands at times to march through barb wirded fields, raining down artilarly shells, the air often toxic, the ground a quagmire laced with bodies spilling forth with disease, and the enemy sending an endless supply of machine gun bulliets on you. All that for a 1% chance to gain a few hundred yards at best.

Including non-battlefield actions:WW2. Not just because of the Holocaust, but German actions in Russia and Japan in china are the peak of human cruelty.

In short: WW1= hell for soldiers, WW2= hell for everyone

dercoo