What was the fucking point?

Stopping a German empire(threat to British therefore Rothschild capitalist interests) America joined because we became a lapdog of the Brits and Jews.

The hubris of kings knows no bounds.

WWI is the reason monarchists need to think long and hard about their ideology.

Those that would have opposed the creation of or Fed died in the Titanic. Then a bunch of aboos and convicts BTFO the Ottoman "Empire" so they could give Jeruselum to the kikee

Attached: aus2.jpg (640x640, 59K)

Let us not forget the men and WOMEN who gave their lives for ours.

Attached: dd.jpg (750x500, 38K)

>Implying any of the major powers in WWI was an absolute monarchy

Even Russia had the Duma by 1905, this wasn't some case of monarchs unilaterally declaring war on a whim.

Attached: bb.jpg (240x240, 24K)

Attached: aa.jpg (890x710, 73K)

The point isn't that they had to come up with a silly reason to go to war, anyone can do that, the point is that their silly reason wasn't for resources or strategic land or anything important that you could at least make a case for.

It was for AEIOU.

King George the V, Wilhelm II, and Tsar Nicholas II were all blood cousins too. I would say that is suspicious, even though they were all German, but maybe they were all just stupid. It was a very senseless war. The German royals should have just shared the planet and made Germany the capital of the world. But Jewish influence in Britain was strong and they sucked in America too, Serbia started the war with Austro-Hungary but Germany got the blame because Allies are evil and want to destroy the Holy German volk.

Attached: Hiccup and Astrid.jpg (1280x1280, 330K)

It was for the Rothschilds, cunt

Attached: rrr.jpg (1280x720, 688K)

King George V*

Ok kids, get out of the way
History nigger here

WW1 was, if you're going to reduce it down, a joke that went too far.
In the 19th century, war was pretty much a gentleman's agreement. If shit went too far, we'd both stop. And shake hands.
Like, between France and Britain, if a ship was captured, the minute the loser ship stuck their flag, the superior ship would invite all the officers on board and treat them like honoured guests.
War was not brutal.
It was a game between nations. And considering the causality rate between officers, it really didn't mean much.

The American Civil War should have been a preview but everyone ignored it.
WW1 was everyone trying to do the 19th century shit over again.
A gentleman's duel between nations.
But then it collapsed the fuck apart.
It started out as a slap
Then a punch
Then everyone got their nigger knives out.

More money and power for mostly Jews.

Canada is a joke that went too far

Attached: metoo.jpg (807x514, 31K)

>Crown prince is assasinated by an agent of a foreign power.
>What a pointless casus belli for Austria

We are a joke
But don't disregard posts based on how our retard government asks

Also memeflag acts like he's superior

>list of demands agreed to on all points
>declares war anyway

>at first it was just about swanky uniforms, but then shit got real

Master race

Attached: aus.jpg (679x960, 95K)

Hey history chink, didn't you cunts fund both sides in the US civil war?

Attached: gh.jpg (480x360, 12K)

>The American Civil War should have been a preview but everyone ignored it.

The Russo-Japanese War was a much closer preview of what WW1 would be than the American Civil War

Europeans are unironically nigger-tier and have been killing each other non-stop for all of history.
WWI was no different, the only distinguishing thing that makes it so horrible is that they had fully industrialized and turned their machines towards the purposes of death and destruction.

Pretty much
Look at the French uniform from the start to the finish of the Great War.
It went from traditional blue to practical grey.

Then Germany antagonizing France just because France is allied with Russia which was allied with Serbia, even before France had made any moves whatsoever. I mean come on this whole thing was a deliberate setup for war.

you are daring to say what?
listen close my friend you are insult the country i come to and live and love Canada great country on planet #1 number one forsure yes you know you stop talking poorly about Canada or if not reveal your flag and I will discover your location precisely to come teach you the meaning of pain my friend

please stop insult canada

Precisely my point, there was no need for war, they just simply were looking for a fight.

Are you retarded? Canada joined the war right after Britain did.

Monarchs by that point had very little power. Wilhelm was a manlet who was only allowed to believe that he had power. Hindenburg was pulling Willy's strings the entire time. The war was about securing access to industrial markets, which at that time took the form of imperial possessions for dumping exports into and importing raw materials from. As for Russia, where the monarch did have absolute power, the war was indeed a defensive operation but very badly handled because Nicholas was also a brainlet as well as a manlet. Even Rasputin warned him that war would mean the end of Russia, and Rasputin was fucking nuts.

Business is business.
Also, je suis Canadien.

For naval battles, yes, but for ground troops, the Civil War should have been a bright signal.
Also, the Russian Navy was such a fucking joke in the Russo-Jap war. If anyone took a lesson from that, they should be embarrassed.

Everyone had a bunch of new shinny weapons they wanted to test out

Fucking abos...

Attached: abo.jpg (1920x1080, 462K)

>For naval battles, yes, but for ground troops, the Civil War should have been a bright signal.

I disagree, while the Russo-Japanese War was decided at Sea there it was still the closest glimpse into WW1 with trenches, machine guns, and more people dying due to combat rather than disease

Fuck off Island Canada; nice flag fag

Attached: F5346849-D5A1-4D2F-B2F9-0787692A1538.png (720x405, 509K)

I want to share a quote by Mustafa Kemal Ataturk that I think really captures the senseless tragedy of the war, specifically in the Middle Eastern Front.

>Those heroes that shed their blood and lost their lives ... You are now lying in the soil of a friendly country. Therefore rest in peace. There is no difference between the Johnnies and the Mehmets to us where they lie side by side here in this country of ours ... You, the mothers who sent their sons from faraway countries, wipe away your tears; your sons are now lying in our bosom and are in peace. After having lost their lives on this land they have become our sons as well.

Attached: Ataturk.jpg (464x599, 43K)

It seemed to me like the Germans hoping for a rerun of the Franco-Prussian war where they btfo France and get some land in return, and scare off Britain from complaining about the new german fleet. The modern weaponry made that impossible so everyone just got really invested in the war and just kept at it.

Fuck off, let's see your real flag. I'm going to assume you're Irish. Fenian scum.

>The modern weaponry made that impossible

Not really, while the fighting was much more costly a rerun of the Franco Prussian War was looking likely until Britain sent in troops after the invasion of Belgium .

I have to admit, I have little knowledge of the ground battles of the Jap/Ruskie war.
Wasn't the first use of a machine gun in the American Civil War?
Eager to learn more.

Bet that really russles your Galli's poli

Attached: rrrr.png (486x453, 278K)

Gallipoli was a Australian/British fuck up

Gatlings weren't real machine guns. WWI was the first real experience with them.

>Wasn't the first use of a machine gun in the American Civil War?

Yes but they weren't deployed en masse as they were in the Far Eastern front in the Russo-Jap War. Definitely a very strange and obscure conflict that is often overshadowed which is a shame because the Europeans would have done well to learn from the war. Could have avoided a lot of casualties had they known the nature of warfare completely changed as it did

Attached: 8032-lec18-1536x865.jpg (1536x865, 614K)

you lads wanna play some Galip-olopy?

Attached: Gallip-olopoly.jpg (512x384, 48K)

Jews, obviously, and putting the NWO into effect.

The TL;DR is North was endebted to the Bank of England for their rapid endustrialization, so they tried to force the south to pay up kinda like how bongs tried to get 13 colonies to pay up for French/ Indian war debt. You (England) funded Confederacy to destroy America, and when that failed Canada became a thing 2 years later

Attached: rfrr.jpg (938x1101, 174K)

>Jews, obviously

How so?

Shell shocked.

Does it really matter?
If you pull a crank rather than let the gas of a fired bullet charge the next round, does it really affect the efficacy?

Fuck off you

Attached: 66.jpg (220x294, 24K)

It's always about the Jews, amirite?

WW1 was all the alpha men of european nations slaughtering each other over a petty alliance dispute. WW2 was nationalism vs jewish communism

All the Canadians who fought and fell in WWI and WWII died for nothing.

Yes because the rate of fire is much, much lower with civil war era gatlings. It changes the tactical use entirely.
I already told you to fuck off, what's the hold up?

>I'll fall straight onto four or five of their bayonets, you come up a pace or two behind me and blast 'em!

T Mauri nigger

youtube.com/watch?v=MDPSsWgz_uE

>what was the fucking point?
Cement the new banking (((cartel))). Begin weakening western power to prepare for the (((final))) totalitarian solution.

Attached: 1524290150190.jpg (640x549, 99K)

>After having lost their lives on this land they have become our sons as well
Becoming a roach is a fate worse than death. Remind to not ever die in turkey

>Yes because the rate of fire is much, much lower with civil war era gatlings. It changes the tactical use entirely.
I wouldn't say so.
A Gatling gun had 200 RPM, higher depending on the round.
A Browning was 400.

Yes, that's double but that's a drop in the pond compared to the 2 shots a minute for the Model 1861 that was used in the Civil War.
A Gatling gun was 100 times that.
Compared to the Springfield of WW!, a Browning was only 40 times that.

A Gatling had far more effect than a Browning.

I forget what we're arguing about, but the Gatling had a shitload more of an effect in the 1860s than the Browning in the 1910s.
Or at least it would have if Europe gave a shit about America

You cant ask what was the purpose of the war, you are thinking in modern terms. Before WW1 all nations understood war as a natural party of diplomacy. You didnt stumble into wars, you planned for them and declared them when it appeared the time was ripe to attack. If you want to understand the origin of WW1, you have to look at France, who was the maestro of the Triple Entente. From the 1890s to 1914, Frqnce pumped massive amounts of money into Russia to alienate Russia from Germany, which was hastened by Kaiser Wilhelm's diplomatic incompetence and he incompatibility of Russia and Austria as allies. France also played on British concerns to devekop the entente cordiale. Neither of these relations were defensive in the sense that they were promises of mutal aid in event of attack, but they were measures to limit German diplomatic influence on the continent. So when france gives military and to russia that, in turn, uses it to fund serbian terrorists in bosnia, this is not a defensive relationship, its a relationship to provoke a war. But why provoke a war? For france the opportunity presented by ww1 was to become the the continental power and replace Germany, which on paper it did for about 15 years post war. Then the country was fractured by that kike blum and the popular front. Britain wanted toend the threat of German sea power, which they did. Russia wanted to make all the slavs in the Balkans into puppet states, which they failed. Austria wanted to end the Serbian menace once and for all, by deposing the current serbian usurper and replacing him with their candidate. Germany wanted to alienate France and, ideally, by showing France a poor aly undermine their diplomatic credibility in Russia and Britain.

>New Zealand
>Relivant

Attached: gs.jpg (640x360, 7K)

> What was the point?

Ask the jews. Only they know why they started it.

>they know why they started it.
"money"

Attached: spacejew.jpg (1024x768, 101K)

>A Gatling gun had 200 RPM
That's higher than I realised, I'll have to check on this. How common were they though, on the field?

Truth be told, I don't know.
I'm not American and I'm just starting my learning about that period.
And by all regards it was fucked up.

I think to this day the American Civil War had the highest causalities in a battle. Something like 60%+
Not even D-Day had that.
By percentage like

Fun

Yeah, Minie balls will push your shit in and just keep on pushing.

Totally pointless. Real Nation vs Nation warfare finally died with the Iraq war.

it was meant to be the last big shit fight between major powers
and also a chance to test out new technology
ya same with the punic wars and Franco-Prussian War

The absolute state of "history niggers" these days.

The one fucking nation in the entire non-African world that gets to talk shit.
America is not them

They only made to the frontlines in the last few months of the war if i recall, so not very common, but when they did holy hell did they get shit done.

ded whypipo

Closer to Ohio

Attached: ohio_flag_totally_looks_like_puerto_rico_flag_by_buddyboy600-dbdf72u.png (677x477, 48K)