>Central Powers start WW1Lose>Axis start WW2Lose>NK starts Korean WarInconclusive>US starts Vietnam WarLoses>Arabs start Yom Kippur WarLose>USSR starts Soviet-Afghan WarLoses>Iraq starts Iran-Iraq WarInconclusive>Iraq starts Gulf WarLoses>Serbia starts Yugoslav WarsLoses>US starts War in IraqInconclusive>US starts War in IraqLoses
>>18765546The US did not start the Vietnam War thoughbeit
>>18765550There's no consensus on when the war started. But the US entry was very special military operation-ish
>>18765554The fuck are you talking about? It was a Civil War and the US just backed one side of it
>>18765546It was in Germany's case. And it was a terrible investment, from the get go. Germany was already on its way to recovery but fucked it all up in 1933 when it started incurring massive debts because of rearmament.They could have just created an anti-USSR coalition with Poland, France and the UK, but instead decided to alienate everyone by chimping out at Poland.
>>18765555Refuted by Wikipedia award
>>18765557This isn't how the war is taught in Vietnam itself though
>>18765557>didn't read the article award
>>18765546>central powers start ww1but that was russia? they turned a conflict between a-h and serbia into the clusterfuck it became by getting directly involved every decision everyone else made after that was in direct response to it, one way or another>axis start ww2britain and france declared war on germany despite the conflict being entirely between germany and polandhow curious that they didn't also declare war on the soviets, who invaded poland two weeks later, for no reason other than grabbing as much land as possible
>>18765546>Central Powers start WW1Who started mobilizing first? And which country's king was agitating everyone against Germany? >Axis start WW2I'm sure that the UK giving everyone security guarantees like candy was a genuine attempt at maintaining peace.
>>18765558Who gives a fuck what chingchong monkeys think?
>>18765771>britain and france declared war on germanyBecause? You duplicitous little rat.
>>18765779>Actually it's the one offering to protect smaller weaker countries from attack who are the bad guysWhat level of cope is this?
unless you are significantly superior in numbers, logistics and technology, then yes. Defending your turf is way easier than invading and holding someone else's turf
Posted about this before but the short-lived Sui dynasty is the most insane example of this. They started a special military operation in Korea (four successive invasions in fact) and got quagmired so hard the dynasty collapsed.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goguryeo%E2%80%93Sui_War
>>18765789>What level of cope is this?Now tell me how the US managed to protect Ukraine from Russian invasion, by arming them year after year, and signalling that they're free to join NATO - a country on Russia's border. Don't be naive, anon.
>>18765917UK actually declared war on Germany and then won
>>18765965>UK actually declared war on GermanyYes, that's the point. They desperatly wanted to fight the Germans, so they set traps for them, in the form of those security guarantees. Shame that Germany fell for it, but that was the purpose. >and then wonYeah, food rations for a decade after the war, non-white immigration and the dismantlement of the empire are great spoils of WWII for the UK.
>>18766079>NOOOOO THEY MADE ME INVADE AND GENOCIDE OTHERS IT WAS A TRAP I DIDU NUFFIN
>>18765771>how curious that they didn't also declare war on the soviets, who invaded poland two weeks laterthat would have been militarily retarded though
>>18765561>>18765557Wikipedia is gay and lame.editor, autopetrol etc. are turbo faggot
>>18765965>than get bankruptcy, import third worldEnjoy your Pakis gang lol
>>18765917>They're joining a defensive alliance! That means they're about to attack me!
>>18765546>>US starts Vietnam War>LosesNorth Vietnam was the aggressor>>US starts War in IraqIraq was the aggressor against Kuwait, though admittedly this backs up your original point>>US starts War in IraqThe US very quickly toppled Saddam, the insurgency was snuffed out and Iraq now has reasonably fair elections.I think you meant>>US starts War in Afghanistanbut the Taliban was the aggressor supporting Osama bin Laden and they won
I declare war on this thread!
>>18765546
>>18766188>Dancing clown saying retarded thingAmazing.
>>18766170>North VietnamNope stupid zoomie, US was aggressor during gulf incident
>>18765546>>US starts War in Iraq>Inconclusive>>US starts War in Iraq>LosesI only just noticed, meant to say War in Afghanistan for the second one
>>18765546China's coming out on top while the US and Russia are getting bogged down in Ukraine and Iran.
Stalin was a manlet who was shorter than Joseph Goebbels. Cope.
>>18765546Woah . . le bad guys always lose?
>>18766081That's a separate issue. Britain's actions were obviously provocative. Germany never expressed any hostile intentions towards the Bongs.
>>18766307they provoked germany into invading smaller countries and ethnicaly cleansing them
In the Finnish War Russia invaded Swedish Finland and subsequently annexed it.
>>18766079UK was over 95% white in 1981, the increased immigration in the past four decades is not because of ww2
>>18766206the* aggressor, saar (and you're still wrong lol)
>>18766412>Saar, it aggressive sarr I am rightYou're brown...
>the* aggressor, saar (and you're still wrong lol)
>>18765546France started WW1
>>18765556France was allied with the Soviet Union retard
>>18765556Never would have happened. France and Poland held a genocidal hatred for Germany. Germany was only interested in alliances with England and Italy. A German-British-Italian alliance against France, Poland and Russia would have been possible
>>18766450>France was allied with the Soviet Union... in 1935, retard.
>>18766456>France and Poland held a genocidal hatred for Germany.Make shit up hours.
>>18766725The alliance was official until 1939 when Molotov Ribbentrop negated it
>>18766728Not my point, moron. France needed the alliance after Hitler made it perfectly clear that he's going to rearm and chimp out. That was Hitler's 'mistake'.
>>18765556Both the French and the Poles were as hostile to Germany as the Russians were. What would Germany even gain in a war against Russia when they're surrounded on both sides by France and Poland? It would simply amount to German men dying to establish French-Polish hegemony over Europe.
>>18766738The alliance is proof France prioritized relations with Russia over relations with Germany.
>>18766738>France needed the alliance France was already allied with England, America, Poland, Belgium, Yugoslavia, Romania, and Czechoslovakia. They "needed" the alliance with the USSR because they formed anti-German pacts with anyone in the entire world, and that was the only principle which guided their foreign policy.
>>18766079>Shame that Germany fell for itIf only it were possible for a german to not invade his neighbours.
germutts always get raped and genocided by Polish gods
>>18766738>France NEEDED to ally with the Russians against Germany, since that was the only way to maintain the failing French hegemony.I notice you seem to be holding different nations to different standards. In any case, you yourself have provided an answer to your original question. Germany could not ally with France against Russia since that was not what the French desired. They desired French hegemony which meant a pact with the Slavic powers (both Poland and Russia) against Germany.
