Compared with World War I and World War II, was World War I more tragic than World War II?

World War I Introduction:

Date: July 1914 - November 1918.

Location: Europe, Africa, Pacific, Atlantic, Indian Ocean, Middle East.

Result: the Entente won.

Number of participants: 65 million.

Injured: 20 million.

Death (approximately).

Soldiers: 9 million.

Civilians: 7 million.

Total: 16 million.

Major Participating Countries:

Entente: Kingdom of Serbia, Russian Empire, France, Belgium, British Empire and its colonies, Japan, Montenegro, Kingdom of Italy (in May 1915, Italy withdrew from the Triple Alliance and joined the Entente), Romania, Greece, the United States, China, etc.

Central Powers: German Empire, Austria-Hungary, Ottoman Empire, Bulgaria.

Compared with previous wars), new types of ** appeared: aircraft, tanks, dreadnoughts, submarines, airships.

Compared with the previous wars), the largest wars: the Battle of Jutland, the Battle of the Somme.

Introduction to World War II: Date: July 7, 1937 - August 15, 1945.

Scale: Europe, Asia, Oceania, Africa, Pacific, Atlantic, Indian, Arctic Ocean; More than 60 countries and regions have participated in the war; More than 2 billion people are affected.

Result: Allied victory.

Number of participants (mobilized): 100 million.

Deaths: 60 million.

Losses: trillion dollars (direct war costs of $1,352 billion); property damage 4 trillion dollars).

New ** that appeared: aircraft carriers, atomic bombs, rocket artillery, radar.

New types of warfare and tactics in history: blitzkrieg, British air battles, strategic bombing, surprise attack on Pearl Harbor, Mariana naval and air battles, Normandy landings, nuclear attack on Japan.

Comparison: The scale of World War II far exceeded that of World War I, and there were more new tactics in World War II than World War I, whether it was the number of dead or wounded, the number of people who participated in the war, the country, the losses, and the area affected by the war, World War II was much larger than World War I.

The nature of the two wars is different, and there is no comparison!

The First World War was small in scale and short-lived, while the Second World War was even more tragic and long-lasting.

World War I was more tragic than World War II, because the ** at that time was not as advanced as World War II, and the lethality was not so great, but the death toll of local wars was very large, and the scene was very bloody.

It is well known that the most brutal battle of the First World War was called the Battle of Verdun, which was known as a meat grinder-style battle.

Judging from the numbers alone, it cannot be compared with the Battle of Stalingrad in World War II, which had a whopping 2 million. But a careful comparison shows that regardless of the number of participants, the scope of the battle, or the mode of operation, especially the use of chemistry, the Battle of Verdun is still much more brutal than the Battle of Stalingrad.

World War I could not be more tragic than World War II, in terms of the scale of the war and the number of people, World War II was much more tragic than World War I. The mode of war in World War I was basically trench warfare, while World War II was mechanized warfare, tactically blitzkrieg, especially the large-scale use of air forces and tanks. These all determined that World War II was much more tragic than World War I in terms of the scale of the campaign and the number of people on both sides.

World War II was even more tragic, because a lot of new ** was invested, so the tragedy and destruction of Chengdu was more severe than that of World War I.

What is even more tragic is World War II, whether it is the situation on the battlefield or the situation of prisoners after the war, the damage caused to various countries is incomparable to that of a world war.

No, World War II is obviously more tragic than World War I, because the number of people in World War II is much greater than the number of people in World War I, and the scale of World War II is larger than World War I, the countries involved are significant, and the intensity of the war is more obvious.

No, World War II was more tragic and painful than World War I, and its impact on the world was greater, whether it was the number of people, the loss of materials, or the power and destructive power of World War I.

The German Empire, Austria-Hungary, the Ottoman Empire, and the Kingdom of Bulgaria were part of the Central Powers of World War I, while the British Empire, the French Third Republic, the Russian Empire, the Kingdom of Italy, and the United States of America were part of the Entente camp. The war was one of the most devastating in European history.

World War II ended with the victory of China, the United States, the Soviet Union and other anti-fascist countries and the people of the world over the fascist aggressors and the victory of world peace. World War II was provoked by the aggressive expansion and hegemony of fascist countries such as Germany, Japan, and Italy.

And in terms of the situation and economic losses, World War II is indeed harsher than World War I.

Of course not, on the contrary, World War II was more tragic than World War I in every aspect, including the number of countries participating in the war, the number of deaths, and modernization**, World War I was far less than World War II.

In terms of the scale of the war and the number of people, the tragedy of World War II is definitely greater than that of World War I. The main reason is the improvement of ** equipment, as well as the progress of tactics. World War I was basically trench warfare, while World War II was mechanized warfare, and the difference in lethality was very far.

Personally, I think that World War II was more tragic than World War I, because during World War II, the level and lethality of ** equipment were much higher than those of World War I, so it is obvious that World War II was more tragic than World War I.

World War I and World War II are still far from being as "tragic" as they are.

World War I, the Great War lasted 4 years, participated in more than 30 countries, 1.5 billion people were involved in the war, and 30 million people were involved;

In World War II, the war ranged from Europe to Asia, from the Atlantic to the Pacific, and more than 2 billion people in 60 countries and regions were involved in the war, and a total of about 70 million people died.

And the impact of World War II was even more profound than that of World War I.

That's not going to happen. In World War I, it was backward and had no mass destruction, but World War II was different, it was much more advanced, and the number and firing density of large-caliber artillery far exceeded the intensity of World War I, not to mention the tragedy of the atomic bombing of Japan.

No, not only were the soldiers of World War I lower than those of World War II, but more importantly, the damage to civilians in World War I was lower than that of World War II.

The loss of the First World War in the history of the world is far less tragic than the Second World War, because from the whole process of the war, the entire situation, including the number of people, the scope of the impact is more tragic in World War II.

World War II was worse than World War I. World War II was far more tragic than World War I, both in terms of the scale of the war and the number of deaths.

World War I is too cruel a war, because this is the first time that mankind has broken away from the era of cold weapons and used modern ** to fight, and the army's thinking is still on the parade charge in the era of cold weapons, and the First World War has become a modern ** life harvester, which is too cruel.

No, World War II was even more tragic. Compared with the ** of World War I and World War II, the ** is more sophisticated, and the devastation caused by ** is huge.

World War II was even more tragic than World War I.

World War I was trench warfare, World War II was mechanized warfare, and the participation of air forces and tanks greatly exacerbated the tragedy of World War II.

World War II was even more brutal. The intensity and breadth of World War I cannot be compared with World War II, and the Battle of Verdun cannot be compared with a series of giant battles in Germany and the Soviet Union, such as the famous Stalingrad offensive and defensive battles, Leningrad offensive and defensive battles, etc., and it should be pointed out especially that the killing and destruction of civilians in World War II reached an unprecedented scale.

The impact of the Second World War had a profound impact on the development of modern international law. In accordance with the London Agreement on the Denunciation and Punishment of the Major War Criminals of the European Axis Powers and the Charter of the International Military Tribunal for Europe, the Nuremberg International Military Tribunal conducted international trials of the main war criminals of fascist Germany from 1945 onwards.

According to the Charter of the International Military Tribunal for the Far East, the International Military Tribunal for the Far East, composed of representatives of 11 countries, including China, the Soviet Union, the United States, and the United Kingdom, began to try Japanese fascist war criminals in Tokyo, Japan, in 1946.

Because the impact of World War I on the world pattern was greater than that of World War II, and the technology and medical care of World War I were not as developed as World War II, in fact, the tragedy of World War I was no less than that of World War II.

Because the ** used in World War I was relatively backward, the lethality was not so great, and the scene was very bloody, which was more terrifying than World War II.

At the time of World War I, many ** had not been studied, and most of the soldiers were almost used in hand-to-hand combat, and many small countries disappeared during World War I.

<> "Both have promoted the development of the technology of preparation and merger, especially in the second one, which has led to the development of the field of deterrence. Our peace today is largely sustained by the strike capabilities of the "five permanent members", especially the United States and Russia, which is enough to destroy the world. Before the outbreak of the Great Patriotic War, although various countries were fighting for the survival of the nation, the nature of the second time was still that of repartitioning between countries.

The first time brought deep trauma to humanity, because the first time could have ended sooner, or even just a partial, ** far less severe. However, due to the coincidence and inevitability of European countries at that time, the First World War broke out, and countless lives became worthless and meaningless in front of the flames of Maxim's martyrdom.

As for the second time, Hitler annexed Czechoslovakia, Britain directly declared war on it, and if he sent troops, then Nazi Germany would be directly strangled in the cradle, but this was only hindsight. Bound by various countries, the Treaty of Versailles became a 20-year agreement. Out of some kind of revenge, Germany was willingly tied to the war machine by Hitler.

It should be said that the end of World War II was a real reflection. In just half a century, European civilization was reduced to ruins, and the Soviet Union, the United States, was at the forefront of the world.