Talk:World War II

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Good article World War II has been listed as one of the History good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

When did it become a world war?[edit]

Was it a world war from the very beginning? (Jdkd44 (talk) 19:17, 6 September 2016 (UTC))

Opinions differ. DMorpheus2 (talk) 19:25, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
In the beginning, it was the Second Sino-Japanese War. TimothyJosephWood 19:26, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
A war between China and Japan was not in itself a world war. 3 September 1939 could be when it became a global conflict as the British Empire declared war, or 23 August 1939 as that was when the Soviet Union agreed to invade Poland in conjunction with Germany. (Jdkd44 (talk) 19:34, 6 September 2016 (UTC))
Well, SJW II was the earliest (AFAIK) full-on conflict where the theater and belligerents flowed directly and uninterrupted into WWII. TimothyJosephWood 19:38, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
@Timothyjosephwood:@Jdkd44:Actually when I read one of the most important scholarly work- The Cambridge History of the Second World War, Volume I [1]. It really claims "the war began in 1937 in China" in its General Introduction part. See the link[2] and read the location 383 in open preview of good read.(Miracle dream (talk) 15:38, 14 September 2016‎ (UTC))
The questions "When did WWII start?" and "When did WWII become a world war?" are different.
There some definite well-sourced opinions on the first, all stated in the article.
The second question doesn't get much coverage. The problem is there's no agreement on what defines a "world war". Some say only WWI and WWII are world wars, but others include different lists of other wars, based on number of continents, theaters, campaigns, death toll, or some combination, or even have a variable definition based on the size of the "known world" at the time. Based on those conflicting definitions, WWII might be a "world war" starting with the attack on China, or Poland, or Russia, or America, or sometime between these, or sometime after. No one sees much point in trying to pin this down. --A D Monroe III (talk) 17:01, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
no other war gets confused with WWI or WWII. The dates can vary slightly as major players entered & left. Rjensen (talk) 17:51, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
I think what they mean is "when did it cease being a series of regional conflicts and start being a world war". Also, the Seven Years' War is also fairly widely regarded as a world war. TimothyJosephWood 17:57, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
I think AJP Taylor had some thoughtful things to say about this in his "Origins of the Second World War" DMorpheus2 (talk) 18:03, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
Taylor essentially says that a set of separate, regional conflicts eventually expanded and merged to some extent into WW2. He considers it to have become a "world war" when most/all of the world's major powers became involved. DMorpheus2 (talk) 17:36, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
It was a world war from 3 September 1939 when the British Empire declared war on Germany. This meant every continent in the world was at war. The 23 August 1939 date should be added to the lede, as without the pact with the USSR Hitler would not have been able to invade western Poland. (213.122.144.54 (talk) 11:11, 17 September 2016 (UTC))
I think it would probably be a good idea to beef up the footnote on the start date a bit, and actually give examples of variations in the start date and why. Basically a rehash of this conversation but with ample sourcing. The current footnote is pretty lacking in nuance, and doesn't really give an in depth rationale for why this date is used, or why it should be the most frequent date used by scholars. TimothyJosephWood 13:42, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
The fact that the British empire included every continent means nothing. They weren't all free to choose. DMorpheus2 (talk) 20:49, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
That is when they joined the conflict, whoever made the decision that they would. Britmax (talk) 21:00, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Historians define a "World War" as one involving all the great powers of the day. There is some debate about which wars qualify, but the usual candidates include the Thirty Years War, the War of the Spanish Succession, the Seven Years War, the Napoleonic Wars, World War I and World War II. They are considered to start when the great powers begin going to war with each other. Under this definition, World War II became a world war in September 1939, when Britain, France, Germany and the Soviet Union joined the war. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:38, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Plus the United States sided with the British Empire from the very beginning, as it had in World War I. (JebDilbert (talk) 15:54, 3 October 2016 (UTC))
Then why do we not say WW2 began in 1937, when China (with US aid) and Japan went to war? I'm not seriously arguing for that date but 'great powers' is undefined above. I'd say Japan probably qualifies, though, given how much attention they got in arms treaties in the interwar period.
DMorpheus2 (talk) 18:30, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
For the same reason that (under this definition) the Great War is considered to end in 1918. It's not enough to have two great powers at war with each other; you have to have multiple great powers at war. Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:02, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
It only became a global conflict when the UK declared war on Germany. China was not a great power in 1937. (JebDilbert (talk) 18:45, 3 October 2016 (UTC))
But why? What is special about the UK? How can we claim a conflict is 'worldwide' if neither the USSR nor the US is involved? There are plenty of ways to look at this. DMorpheus2 (talk) 19:54, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
When the UK declared war it meant that every country in the Empire was at war with Germany. The USSR was involved - it had already agreed to invade Poland on 23 August 1939. (JebDilbert (talk) 20:01, 3 October 2016 (UTC))
No, that is not correct. The self-governing dominions of the British Empire each issued their own declarations of war on Germany (and later on the other axis powers) Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:25, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
They were the countries of the Commonwealth, not the Empire. (JebDilbert (talk) 06:31, 4 October 2016 (UTC))

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Everyone has their own idea when WWII started (some sources then and some scholars today point to Sept. 18, 1931--look in the archives for the reliable sources that cite that date) and the material on when it really became a World War is even more confusing.

"But why? What is special about the UK? How can we claim a conflict is 'worldwide' if neither the USSR nor the US is involved?"
The British Empire Anachronous.png
Because when Britain and France declared war on September 3rd 1939 all THESE (or most of them) pink parts of the world were then at war with Germany. They are situated over the WHOLE GLOBE. That means geographically across the WHOLE WORLD - including the oceans, because Britain had both the world's largest navy, but also the world's largest merchant shipping fleet, ~12,000 ships. It became then A WORLD WAR. See the connection. I've left out the French bits, but they include Morocco, Algeria, and French Indo-China. France also had a navy of considerable size.
Alternatively, it became a World War when everyone at the time started calling it and referring to it as a "WORLD WAR". Which was September the 3rd 1939. Note: This was before either the USSR or US became involved. It was already a WORLD WAR by the time they got involved.
Prior to Sept 3rd 1939 all the other contretemps were mere "regional conflicts" affecting no-one else but the people directly involved. They had no effect on any one else. From Sept 3rd 1939 that all changed.
And BTW, it wasn't the "UK", it was the British Empire. Its armies contributed over 4,000,000 ground troops to the war, and its ships transported the vast majority of the cargoes both from and to the US and USSR. They also transported most of the troops and materiel to the beaches on D-Day. Their airmen dropped a heavier tonnage of bombs on Germany - around a million tons - than all the other air forces dropped on Germany and Japan combined. Their seamen and airmen sank more U-boats and other submarines in "the longest battle of the Second World War" than were sunk by all the other world's navies and air forces combined.
So THAT is what was "special" about the UK and the Empire.
That and going into the war, alongside France, voluntarily. Hardly a trivial thing. Most of the other "allies" waited until they were attacked. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.150.18.150 (talk) 11:32, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Adding countries to infobox?[edit]

I've seen no other article on wars/conflicts on Wikipedia list only one participant on the infobox for each side. I think it is time to discuss adding a list of the major countries that were part of the Allies and Axis alliances so the readers can get a more informative infobox on the participants of the war. Bokmanrocks01 (talk) 20:40, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

We have big bold links to the huge pages with that info. No need to fill the box with 100s of countries. As per Talk:World War II/Archive 51#Request for comment: WWII infobox--Moxy (talk) 21:37, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
I agree with Moxy. We discussed this in great depth in 2014, and the resultant infobox has worked well. Nick-D (talk) 22:10, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

The Day Japan Invaded Manchuria[edit]

Under the section labeled "Chronology", it states that the Japanese invasion of Manchuria began on September 19, 1931. But in reality the invasion began on September 18, 1931. Therefore, where it says "the Japanese invasion of Manchuria on 19 September 1931.[13][14]", the site should instead state "the Japanese invasion of Manchuria on 18 September 1931.[13][14]". There is a newsreel film that was made in 1942 which was posted on youtube that proves my claim to be true. The link to the video is down below. Start watching it at 38:19 (38 minutes and 19 seconds) and you could stop at 39:53 (39 minutes and 53 seconds). I would appreciate it if this were fixed. Have a great day!

[1] 69.127.41.16 (talk) 23:03, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

No, sorry. Youtube is not a relaible source. Per WP:RS You will need a reliable source to suport this claim. Mediatech492 (talk) 23:33, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. -- Dane2007 talk 06:12, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

Also note that US time zones differ from Japanese/USSR time zones (Tokyo-Washington 14 hrs). Early morning in the pacific on 19 September may thus be late evening in the US. The YouTube source may present US times, while the Wikipedia uses local times. Only a reliable source might be able to sort that out. Arnoutf (talk) 21:45, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

References

Adding "Phoney War" reference under "Main Articles" of "War breaks out in Europe (1939–40)"[edit]

The Phoney War article is highly relevant to the section World War II#War breaks out in Europe (1939–40) and should be added there. Bulkroosh (talk) 15:18, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

It's already linked, as part of the text reading "However, initially the alliance provided limited direct military support to Poland". Nick-D (talk) 22:23, 29 December 2016 (UTC)
That is true, but the suggestion was to add "Phoney War" to the "Main Articles" list so that the reference is more visible, given its centrality to the section. Bulkroosh (talk) 12:14, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

You forget the France in cattegorie allies[edit]

Men who checking this damn website, you forget to write FRANCE in category ALLIES at the top right of the page.

wtf France is an important country you must write the right ways. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.168.99.159 (talk) 03:29, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

France is fifth in the list to which you refer. Britmax (talk) 18:28, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Soviet invasion of Poland[edit]

Please ignore HarveyCarter sockpuppets Nick-D (talk) 08:01, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

The Soviet invasion should be mentioned in the lede, as the Germans could only invade Poland if the Soviets did as well. Otherwise they faced a two-front war in 1939, before they were ready. (2A00:23C4:638C:4500:EB:CB2F:FBE4:9C82 (talk) 16:49, 21 January 2017 (UTC))

that is speculation. The Soviet invasion of Poland was a relatively minor military event (Poland had already practically collapsed) and the Allies did NOT declare war on USSR. Rjensen (talk) 16:55, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
If Hitler had invaded Poland without the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact the Soviet Union would have declared war on him. (2A00:23C4:638C:4500:EB:CB2F:FBE4:9C82 (talk) 17:10, 21 January 2017 (UTC))
After the purges etc the Soviets might not have been ready either. See, both of us can speculate? Britmax (talk) 18:13, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
Stalin would have had no choice. If he had allowed Hitler to annex all of Poland he would have been removed from office. (2A00:23C4:638C:4500:EB:CB2F:FBE4:9C82 (talk) 18:20, 21 January 2017 (UTC))
the lede states Germany and the Soviet Union partitioned and annexed territories of their European neighbours, Poland.... but no RS includes the Russian invasion on a par (in terms of ww2) with the German invasion of Poland. Rjensen (talk) 18:21, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
Many sources give 23 August 1939 as the beginning of the war, as it made possible the joint German-Soviet invasion. (2A00:23C4:638C:4500:EB:CB2F:FBE4:9C82 (talk) 19:24, 21 January 2017 (UTC))
I've read hundreds of sources, but have never seen one that makes tha assertion. The Molotov-Ribbenntrop Pact was not a declaration of war, it was a non-agression agreement between the two powers. Mediatech492 (talk) 20:43, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
It wasn't a non-aggression pact at all - it was an agreement to start World War II by invading Poland. If Stalin had launched his invasion of Poland first Britain and France would have declared war on the USSR. (2A00:23C4:638C:4500:EB:CB2F:FBE4:9C82 (talk) 20:47, 21 January 2017 (UTC))
They agreed not to attack each other. It waas not a declaration of war. Mediatech492 (talk) 21:03, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
It was a pact to start a world war - in other words a pact of aggression. (2A00:23C4:638C:4500:EB:CB2F:FBE4:9C82 (talk) 21:28, 21 January 2017 (UTC))
That is your own POV and not supported by the facts. See the Article on the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact. Mediatech492 (talk) 23:03, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
Hitler needed the pact as otherwise he would not have had the resources to fight Britain and France. The Soviet Union supplied all the fuel the Germans used in 1940 and 1941. Stalin and Hitler both knew the pact would lead to war. (2A00:23C4:638C:4500:EB:CB2F:FBE4:9C82 (talk) 01:02, 22 January 2017 (UTC))
Again that your POV and it is irrelavant. Mediatech492 (talk) 01:14, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────To quote: "Stalin and Hitler both knew the pact would lead to war." While that may have been true, that in itself is not a declaration of war. In addition, what ever Stalin and Hitler knew in their mind really does not matter unless a reliable sources can be provided that reports these thoughts. Arnoutf (talk) 08:36, 22 January 2017 (UTC)