Did not the Germans lose both world wars because they were stupid?
454355
National zeal had a lot to do with it. Plus, never under-estimate the stupidity of our leaders....all you need is one crackpot with a chip on his shoulder to drag everyone else into a war......now where else have I seen that done recently?
203993
Because perhaps they do, at least for now. Console yourself with the historical perspective. Every superpower from the dawn of time has made the same mistake, stumbled, collapsed and succumbed to some other superpower. The Chineese Dynasties, the Greeks, The Romans, The British, the Germans, next the Americans. Too bad arrogance gets in the way of intelligence, but such is the fault of man.
844131
As much as, I disagree with American policy they alone were responsible for the winning of WW II.  German had already whipped every Army in the European theater and if their generals had done what they wanted, England would have fallen at Dunkirk.  The British land forces affectively ended there as in North Africa if not for Americans opening a second front Erwin Rommel would have finished them.  The only contribution they made to the war effort was their bombings and providing a staging area.  Don’t misunderstand me their bravery and desire to provide contributions are unquestionable.  The Russians were effectively finished Stalin begged and DEMANDED we open a second front and without our material, they would be speaking German.  No for once, the American actually did what they say they did and they alone were more responsible for winning the war. \n\nGod Bless You and The Southern People
364828
How about they lost 26 million people which is why they were so harsh in dealing with Germany after the war.\n\nOne of the more interesting but little known facts about the war was how the Russians dealt with the insurgency problem that existed in East and West Germany after the war.  \n\nNewly elected Mayors were being assassinated in East Germany by what were called German wolf packs.  The Soviets response to the same problem we are facing in Iraq today was to gather 200 randomly picked citizens from each town which had had its mayor assassinated and publicly execute them.  \n\nTheir belief, which apparently was correct, was that an insurgency can not exist without the aid of at least a few locals who in turn must be known to others living in the area.  \n\nThe thought of you yourself or your wife or your kids being summarily executed motivated people to assist in the eradication of the insurgents\n\nWhile the practice sounds horrendously brutal, in actuality it saved thousands of lives because it worked almost immediately. \n\nBecause we chose then to be more "humane," the problem persisted in West Germany at the cost of many lives for several years and prevented them from having a stable government for 10 years.  No doubt it will have the same result in Iraq.
690471
No it was not.  It singled out Germany for punitive measures and not the Austro-Hungarian Empire for such measures.  It so financially was hard for Germany and led to WWII.
447517
WWII, basically the same thing. Germany was blamed the  most for everything.
7913
Well, as you said little earlyer about how the war (WWII) wasnt fought, it sounded like you thought it was for no reason... well, because of the war, millions of people died and only 42 percent of those who died were soldiers. But, because of the war, we have learned priceless technolegys in war fighting and also in fixing injuries. The war created many new injuries that the docters back then didnt face before. Also, the communism in germany and spreading was stopped before Adolf Hitler tried to take over Europe and probably more. (although he did control 78 percent of europe at his best)There is a chinese proverb that saids "war is the evil brother of peace" what that means is that although peace might be in the presence, there is always war that comes right around the corner.\nPeace cannot be made without the presence of war.\nThat is all...
387780
The US did not win World War II. The Allies did.  The US depended heavily on nations like Briton in it's war efforts during world war II. For example if not for the bombing of a heavy water factory which the British were responsible for finding the Germans may well have had nuclear weapons in time to actually affect the outcome of the war. \n\nThough to the spirit of the question. Germany made a few critical mistakes during the war. A big one was rounding up so many potential soldiers and sending them to concentration camps. Jews, Gypsies, Christians, intellectuals and so on. Germany executed what may have been at least 100,000 of it's best soldiers. People eager to prove how German they were and willing to fight twice as hard to be accepted. People who may have helped build or stratigize. Germany also wasted quite a bit of resrouces transporting and guarding people as well as other military resources dealing with revolts, executing undesirable peoples for example. The genocide also provided the Allies with many excellent spies. What would have otherwise loyal Germans instead supported the Allies. \n\nRussia was a debacle. If the Germans had treated the Russians like people they may well have not found any real resistance at all. Stalin was a blood stained tyrant and even Hitler looked good initially. Hitler could have played up ethnic and nationality issues to gain Russian support. \n\nEven after those huge mistakes, Germany instead of retreating for the Winter basically executed a huge chunk of it's own army attempting to fight the Russians in Winter on Russian soil. \n\nIn Asia a united China might have been a dangerous winner. Even with a common cause like kicking the Japanese out the Chinese still kept at a cival war that had allowed the Japanese into China in the first place. Loyalists to the emporer, those fighting for Democracy and Comuninists were slugging it out and sniping at the Japanese between bouts. \n\nJapan of course made the biggest mistake of all by attacking the US. The American people wanted nothing to do with another European war after so many died in World War I. There was a dedicated and active pacifist cause that sided with the isolationists on this subject. Germany should have volenteered to fight Japan for us rather than let us get into the war on that pretext. \n\nSo in answer it depends on what changed. If the US had not entered the war I think Germany  would have prevailed against Russia eventually. England was another matter. I think Germany would have given up on England for a time and moved into Spain instead. There they would have had their hands full with people like the Basques. Already gurillas in other areas were becoming a serious problem. Once inertia died Germany was doomed to lose many of thier gains without intervention from anybody else. \n\nSo for Germany to realistically have won the war the Military would have had to have pulled a coup on the Nazis. The same political group which spurred the powerful military build up was busy destroying it after about 1942. Executions alone were decimating morale and robbing Germany of some of it's finest. Any time a political group gains power over a military branch like the SS had or what the USSR inflicted on it's armies, it will damage the ability of that army to function. The Nazis had done an effective job of sabataging the German military machine by 42. Enough so that Briton I think could have held out without US military intervention. \n\nJapan was in no way capable of beating US industry. Japan lacked the technology, raw resources and industrial base to compete with the US. Even the pacifists of that day changed stripes because of Pearl Harbour. So for Japan to survive the US had to stay out of the war. With China busy in cival war and Briton busy with Germany Japan could have quietly swallowed up much of Asia if they left US and US ally territory alone. Relations between the US and China was poor at the time. Nobody
654469
Just read this:  http://www.firstworldwar.com/origins/causes.htm\n\nThe war started out as a dispute between Austria-Hungary and Serbia over the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand, but escalated as other countries entered the melee.\n\nHistory can fault Germany because they lost.
744768
There is a real sign of intelligence writing you to tell you they don't know or giving you a stupid answer.  The Japanese culture was made up of honor, heritage and rituals. The helmets of that time did little more then hold your hair and ear pieces in place. They wore their helmets as they did their short swords because it was part of their uniforms.\n\nNote: Are you aware the Russians, Germans and even the US to an extent had a Kamikaze group? The Russians used to use their props to cut into the tails of German fighters. \n\nThanks for the chance to help. God Bless You and the Southern People.
1061421
i dont think war is stupid. i think this war is sort of ridicuious, but most wars have a point and a reason.\ni think this war's 'point' is to finish what daddy started.
1134650
The fault lies mostly with Adolf Hitler, although the German people willingly followed where he led.  The Treaty of Versailles in retrospect was too harsh, but that is hindsight, which is always 20/20.  The Allies at the end of WWI did the best they could to get the various countries to come up with a workable treaty.
908476
not true. germany fought for supremacy, the allies fought for survival.
295537
I believe the best weapon of WW2 was a well-trained American infantryman. It doesn't matter how sophisticated the weapon, it is useless unless in the hands of a well-trained individual. America's importance on proper training won the war, not just the weaponry.
1003599
Both world wars were in the 20th century. Also the wars in Korea, Vietnam, Iran, Iraq, etc. I think that most wars start as someones freedom of religion is denied.
57331
After WWI, the Allies decided that they were going to punish Germany for causing WWI.  The fact that Germany was no more at fault than France or England was not an issue.  Germany was severely punished, and the result was the rise of Hitler, which consequently lead to WWII.\n\nAfter WWII, the US wanted to avoid another war, and they had learned the hard way that keeping the loser down was not a good idea.  Rebuilding Japan (and Germany) was the best way to ensure future security and hopefully cooperation between the two nations.
1170844
No.......wars dont make countries poor,  just the poor people poorer and poor living people dead....