I miss john green's crash course history videos, it'd be nice if he made another series at some point, it's been way too long since crash course European history ended
@livvyisawsum9 жыл бұрын
Lebensraum = living space You said 'Liebensraum' and I know mispronouncing words is your thing but I am laughing at what should be a very serious concept because. Liebensraum = loving room. :)
@TOFKAS019 жыл бұрын
Well, the "Lebensraum" would have been a "Liebesraum" for the arians........
@disasterial6 жыл бұрын
Lol, yeah, it's "Lebensraum" not "Liebensraum"
@danielolvera39446 жыл бұрын
Livvy P he meant it, it was the scoodilypooping room
@sjlee34385 жыл бұрын
Because all you need is loving space
@darrianweathington19235 жыл бұрын
he says what he means and he means what he says
@thomasphifer30549 жыл бұрын
Lol John, you pronounced Lebensraum "Liebensraum," which means "loving space"
@jbkjbk19998 жыл бұрын
+Thomas Phifer Who wouldn't want some more loving space ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡° )
@aelianaevergreen89558 жыл бұрын
Mispronunciation is his THING
@nickcrownshaw90348 жыл бұрын
+Thomas Phifer and he threw in a cheeky "Hejenomy" rather than hegemony
@kevinmcd76808 жыл бұрын
+Thomas Phifer Turns out Hitler just wanted land to build brothels and cheap motels for more sexy time
@kerryl74556 жыл бұрын
pronunciation depends on where you're from, who your family is, and who you learn the language from in an L2 case.
@BazzBrother9 жыл бұрын
I like how dense the commenters are concerning his reference to "good vs evil". The ENTIRE point of the comment was to juxtapose the common view vs the reality, which most of you seem to have glossed over in order to be offended.
@daest079 жыл бұрын
THE TRUTH HAS BEEN SPOKEN! xD
@Nonsense0106889 жыл бұрын
Well let's be honest: the reason that most missed the point is not as much lack of intelligence (happens too), but having a certain mind set/agenda own they own.
@daest079 жыл бұрын
Si Wi true...
@kanklez9 жыл бұрын
I'm pretty sure the fact he says "and it is" at about 0:45 might have something to do with it too.
@G4r0s9 жыл бұрын
What I miss even more is the discussion he stipulates at the end of video. How are we to act in a world of finite resources? What we have learned from WWII is that fighting over them makes everyone lose.
@colleengorman48788 жыл бұрын
This was very eye opening. Told my students this was a different view I haven't heard before because of the focus on personalities and the story of good versus evil.
@franciscog40718 жыл бұрын
Steps to world dominatiom 1.become mongols 2.invade russia in winter 3.SKIP JAPAN 4.good 2 go
@Hartono252778 жыл бұрын
8 hours ago.
@reddeimon4758 жыл бұрын
you can defeat Japan by blocking its trade route, they dont have natural resources which mostly imported (US provide 40% of oil n iron) so you can exhaust them pretty quickly
@reddeimon4758 жыл бұрын
n Japan never defeat the Mongols, it just happen to be storms in both of Mongols ocean invasion
@gaiusjiau8 жыл бұрын
+Red Deimon Mongol invasion of Japan had a hidden motive to kill the numerous surrendered soldiers from Jin and Song.
@FaaduProductions8 жыл бұрын
5. Disintegrate real quick due to being shitty at administration. 6.??? 7. Profit? 8. Not really
@tobywilson9 жыл бұрын
It's very interesting to see a different point of view on such a well discussed topic. We're all taught about WW2, but rarely was it discussed in a way other than militaristic "good v evil". This is why I love crash course!
@lostintashkent5 жыл бұрын
Dear John, thanks for broadening my perspectives about WW2. We Brits tend to neglect the negative aspects of our colonial history during school history lessons. Famine in East India is not something we mention, and never the fact that we might have been partly responsible.
@kelvinlaihaocherng12588 жыл бұрын
Love how John always relates world history to its valuable learning outcome for the betterment of our future.
@TheyCallMeGawd9 жыл бұрын
Wait, so who won the war? I hate it when stories have vague endings...
@victor7gomez9 жыл бұрын
pretty sure those German guys they look tough
@zoeburgess92649 жыл бұрын
Okay so I'm pretty sure you'r a troll, but still for anyone else who may read this. No war is not a story, it's horrible thing that happened. It matters less who won and more for the effect overall that it had.
@brittanyperkins22089 жыл бұрын
America....duh
@zoeburgess92649 жыл бұрын
brittany perkins -.- the Allies.... duh
@cOmAtOrAn9 жыл бұрын
Mongolia won. In early 1945 vast Mongol armies swept over China and the USSR, quickly defeating all of the major powers apart from Great Britain and the USA. However, they did get all of Britain's major colonies, so when the war ended Mongolia and the USA were the only ones with any negotiating power. (And the Mongols only left the western hemisphere alone because the US had developed nuclear weapons.)
@joeychiappetta9 жыл бұрын
graveyard of the fireflies showed the japanese starvation pretty well
@joeychiappetta9 жыл бұрын
Some chap called Paul still a good movie though
@BumblingFool9129 жыл бұрын
Joseph Chiappetta Most definitely; but there are better Ghibli works imo.
@joeychiappetta9 жыл бұрын
Some chap called Paul well obviously lol. Miyazaki (again spelling lol) has created so many great ones that come down to opinion as to which one is the best
@BumblingFool9129 жыл бұрын
Joseph Chiappetta they are the best in their own right to be honest; and you got the spelling right this time, not to worry :P However, there are better /animes/ out there like Cowboy Bebop or even No Game No Life both of which I highly recommend if you haven't already.
@joeychiappetta9 жыл бұрын
Some chap called Paul I would put them in a different category of anime honestly but again good. Love the Bebop soundtracks too
@Lily-mm7dq4 жыл бұрын
John Green: I hope you guys discuss this in the comments The comments: WhO eLsE iS wAtChInG tHiS tHe NiGhT bEfOrE aN eXaM
@mallorysmith32734 жыл бұрын
Lily more like during an online final essay😂
@Lily-mm7dq4 жыл бұрын
@@mallorysmith3273 Yeah there's so much going on rn with essays and tests
@EmperorBeef9 жыл бұрын
I think you're wrong about WWII being about resources. As you said, Japan and Germany desired autarky not because they were facing a crisis, not because their people were starving or deprived, but because autarky would allow them to pursue even further conquest. It was conquest for the sake of conquest. Resources were the means by which the war was fought, but not the goal.
@victor7gomez9 жыл бұрын
I agree on Germany but no Japan would have ran out of a lot of things if they didn't start an invading different countries or other countries actually start trading with them
@RoScFan9 жыл бұрын
JACKPOT!!! DING DING DING! That is EXACLTY right. I'm glad I'm not the only one that sees that.
@ValorPhoenix9 жыл бұрын
geth117 Yeah, Japan definitely needed resources. It wasn't food that was the initial driver, but their lack of industrial resources. Taking Indonesia and the Phillipines was mostly about oil and rubber, which was so vital they risked Pearl Harbor in the hopes they could hold out versus the US Pacific Navy. Manchuria however was primarily about food, but they already had that before Pearl Harbor. Japan needed more than just food, they needed industrial resources. Germany as well needed industrial resources, otherwise they wouldn't have tried to hold north Africa, not to mention the diversion during Barbarossa to capture the Russian oil fields instead of the capitol. It was more critical for Japan. The US blockade was crushing Japan, the atomic bombs only made the surrender more immediate due to Russian advances. Japan didn't even have a hope for breaking the blockade as they couldn't fuel their ships.
@FELONIOUSBOLUSS9 жыл бұрын
I think what John said makes sense as the two main objectives for the invasion of the USSR were the oil fields of the Caucasus and Ukraine for the grain.Also,I HEARD(dunno if its true)that every german soldier was promised with a deed for a piece of russian land upon the end of the war.
@someguysomeguy58749 жыл бұрын
he is wrong for America and Britain it was freedom and democracy
@albusdu80697 жыл бұрын
Or was it the british fear for running out of TEA!!!
@zahidul67236 жыл бұрын
You know that tea is grown in Asia
@nicholasr-m16314 жыл бұрын
@@zahidul6723 you just ruined the joke. give yourself a pat on the back.
@ForeverRepublic8 жыл бұрын
This war was truly the darkest years of human existence.
@kieranmolloy76878 жыл бұрын
What about WW1?
@Burkutace278 жыл бұрын
+Mr Kiem3 Those two plus the years between = 31 years and 100 million + dead, Europe shattered forever and the world changed in ways we won't fully comprehend for centuries. Historians of the far future will view these wars in the same way we view the punic wars.
@fuadsiregar8 жыл бұрын
how about ice age?
@ForeverRepublic8 жыл бұрын
Rafuad Siregar That was the coldest.
@fuadsiregar8 жыл бұрын
ForeverRepublic what a suprise
@Vrankxs7 жыл бұрын
I like how CrashCourse always try to look differently at history and gives the viewer a new or different perspective about events that happend in our history.
@Alsterwasser9 жыл бұрын
German "food shortages" after WWI is kind of a euphemism. Due to the food blockade AFTER the armstice, hundreds of thousands of German civilians (children, women, elderly) were starved to death. - Therefore, the idea of gaining agricultural autarkie was reasonable enough. And still is.
@erikjohansson42759 жыл бұрын
Swan Maiden No, the blockade was during the war. However, things like the great depression combined with the french army forcing Germany to pay france by simply going into to Germany and directly taking/stealing german industrial output did contribute to some small scale food shortages.
@Alsterwasser9 жыл бұрын
Eric Johansson No, you're uninformed. The blockade was also AFTER the armstice in order to force Germany sign the "Versailles Treaty". Look, it's even in Wikipedia: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blockade_of_Germany#Blockade_after_armistice Even the allied-written schoolbooks in FRG admitted ca. 800,000 civilians starved to death, mostly elderly, women and children. More detailed elucidation: www.wintersonnenwende.com/scriptorium/english/archives/articles/starvation1919.html What you are writing about are the 1920s, my remark referred to 1919.
@erikjohansson42759 жыл бұрын
Swan Maiden Okay.
@michaeltariga52859 жыл бұрын
Swan Maiden Nice, they didnt teach this in school.
@Alsterwasser9 жыл бұрын
Mighty Roogna "History is written by the victors."
@Enlightened-218 жыл бұрын
in india we do not read ww2 as war between good and evil but a war between newly industrialized nations looking for colonies and markets and old empires not allowing them in their traditional sphere.
@kalibos8 жыл бұрын
+omegasavant it's important to remember that ideologies based on racial and national superiority were very popular all over the world at the time, among both fascists and democracies.
@teargass18498 жыл бұрын
The Germans killed the Jews, the Japanese the Chinese, the Americans nuked japan and the U.K. and U.S. firebombed entire German cities of civilians into nothing the soviets (Who where on the "Good Guys Team") killed more than anyone else, with stalin killing pretty much everyone. no side was good.
@bletwort29208 жыл бұрын
India doesn't concern itself with the Nazi Germany, Imperial Japan, Britain and the allies. At the time, India was struggling to gain independence while suffering under the British occupation which pushed millions upon millions into starvation and death, it was a time when nationalism rose in India and efforts were made to take India back after a millennium of foreign rule and oppression.
@lewisparrin34678 жыл бұрын
And Soviets also stood by as Poles were massacred in Warsaw. Literally watched from across the river as it happened.
@BifronsCandle8 жыл бұрын
+kalibos Except the racial ideologies NEVER reached the same heights as the Axis.
@CONJOPI9 жыл бұрын
Could someone get me some water? I'm dying of first.
@avamundar96149 жыл бұрын
This would be funnier if you actually were
@EatinCookiesAllDay9 жыл бұрын
Stop. That pun....
@SmokeyEdits9 жыл бұрын
JUST TAKE IT! TAKE MY LIKE, YOU JERK.
@GrantWitherspoon9 жыл бұрын
oh wow
@SpazzyMcGee13379 жыл бұрын
I'm missing a key reference.
@Vespasiaan8 жыл бұрын
WE'RE NOT A COUNTRY, WE'RE 4 SEPERATE COUNTRIES!
@andrewpaul27168 жыл бұрын
+Mastah Playah Too bad you are now a whole country.
@timtjtim8 жыл бұрын
+Andrew Paul Hu?
@joegriffin28878 жыл бұрын
+Mastah Playah Hahahahahaha
@timtjtim8 жыл бұрын
Hugh Jenas Also don't forget the channel islands, and the overseas territories... :) CGP Grey has a great video about it.
@imperialcrusader26478 жыл бұрын
+Mastah Playah Three technically Northern Ireland is not a country it is a territory of the UK England, Scotland, and Wales are Northern Ireland is not.
@Wolksvagen-nr1lb4 жыл бұрын
When you realize that Japanese, not Soviet, was the one without food. "Them Hollywood lie to me!"
@jbhazard4 жыл бұрын
The Mongols running joke always gets me 😂
@DLWormwood9 жыл бұрын
I am surprised you didn’t mention that Germany was, in part, in dire need of resources due to the reparation situation of WWI and the economic damage caused by the fall of Weimar. Those were mostly how the Nazis came to power, after all, regardless of your moral opinion of that party.
@antwan13575 жыл бұрын
So wait more people died because of food shortages then by the actual fighting. Man that is so real.
@Vkashu139 жыл бұрын
Hey, I just want to say that this channel is pure gold. Your videos are so so funny and at the same time very informative. For last 5 hours I have been watching random stuff from you guys, and it does not happen to me very often that I get so interested in something, so I just had to say thanks for the awesome content. So, well, thanks!
@TheDavidLiou9 жыл бұрын
2:52 where's his basic gun safety training?
@gardener689 жыл бұрын
Liou David I thought that looked a little dangerous.
@Trazyn_the_Infinite_40K9 жыл бұрын
In the Marines, your DI will do the same thing, the purpose is to ensure that the recruit has not just handed the DI a loaded weapon. Same principle there with the Japanese trainer.
@TheDavidLiou9 жыл бұрын
Alex Warnke Isn't it like, dangerous to look into the barrel?
@harrygrant41229 жыл бұрын
Liou David the gun is unbolted, it would not be able to fire even if you pulled the trigger. i should know, i own a bolt action rifle.
@TheDavidLiou9 жыл бұрын
Oh. Didn't know that it is unbolted.
@DiggingForFacts9 жыл бұрын
Good to see a youtube clip that actually highlights to some extent just how important resources were to the warring nations. Reading Adam Tooze's The Wages of Destruction will give an illuminating but harrowing look at how the German economy functioned during WWII. His conclusion: Germany started WWII because it was just no longer economically possible to postpone it.
@Xlonian9 жыл бұрын
K, not trying to be butt hurt but I genuinely am becoming more and more convinced that Jon dislikes Britain to a particular level. He goes into great deal about the British colonial deaths (which were good awful) but brushes over the deaths of Manchurian peasants under this Japanese. Hell the Nazis are given a much more brief account of their war crimes than the British Empire. I love the series and I that the empire was bad but in this episode and others it just seems that Jon is particularly disposed against Brits.
@BumblingFool9129 жыл бұрын
meh. if that's his view then so be it...I'm learning more than I ever did at school thanks to Jon and Hank...so...sure it's biased in a sense that he has a distaste if not a straight up disliking of us brits he's still presenting a good brief overview of an aspect of the second world war, which ultimately is what I came for.
@boredboy19939 жыл бұрын
Its kind of left out as well, I mean at school no one mentioned the millions of dead indians.
@Democlis9 жыл бұрын
I believe he does that because the war crimes of the axis are all well known and documented but on the other hand the ones committed by the allies (specially GB in this case, since at the beginning of the 20th century they were THE major colonial power in the world) are usually ignored by our revisionist kind of history, specially in the decades AFTER a major war or historical event. As we distance ourselves from these more and more by the passage of time we can actually take a better look at them from a more neutral ground and actually see that this "good vs evil" mentality is just "too simplistic" to justify wars and such and that most of the times BOTH sides commit atrocities. Or are you gonna tell me that GB letting it's Indian and Sub-Saharan subjects die of starvation just out of fear it wouldn't be able to maintain the war going wasn't a nasty decision and an actual crime against those people? The thing is up to this day ppl around the world are still imbued with a lot of nationalism when it comes to their history and if you go on and touch on a sensitive subject to them they tend to feel offended even if you a more objective approach to it. In the end history was written by the victorious and when even centuries latter we try to take another look at it and see something different from what we learned we tend to get defensive and that can be said about pretty much EVERY country in the world.
@RazlerofEsthar9 жыл бұрын
I thought he stressed the British colonial deaths to really show that WWII effected areas that didn't see any fighting, mainly because of resources(which was the entire point of the video) Asia and Europe were active warzones,(he did mention millions dead in concentration camps? Or the deaths attributed to Stalin) but India? Sub-Saharan Africa saw little fighting at all. Lets be honest here the Brits were horrendous people in the past with their colonialism even the most sugar coated versions of history still point to that.
@TheBespectacledN00b9 жыл бұрын
Lamaking65 Compared to the competition, like the Spanish or Leopold of Belgium, or even Whilhelmine Germany, who wiped out an African ethnic group in reprisals. A lot of the administrators of the Holocaust were ex-colonial civil service. Does it excuse it, no. I understand John mentioning it, but again, from the POV of the Indians a Japanese or German victory would have been worse. There is a quote by Hitler somewhere about how "....one day, the Indians will look back on the good old days of British rule". Yes, some racism was involved. But also, you have to factor in the decision was probably made late at night, on not enough sleep and with dozens of other calls that needed taking. It's complicated.
@GEdwardsPhilosophy9 жыл бұрын
This is excellent. May I recommend doing a history of the middle-east in terms of the availability of water.
@coolest_in_the_jung1e3908 жыл бұрын
It seems the Mongols are everywhere in Eurasian history.
@tadhalpin15958 жыл бұрын
THE MONGOLS!!!
@torquesuburb1788 жыл бұрын
They're the exception.
@YoHoOMirster7 жыл бұрын
Everywhere in World History. >:)
@chaywen92407 жыл бұрын
derpy man kirby hmmm I wonder why.........maybe because their country covered the entire continent
@tadhalpin15957 жыл бұрын
Chaylen Tejeda *Continents
@RamdomView7 жыл бұрын
3:17 It was an agronomist named Herbert Backe who developed the hunger plan.
@Stardweller19 жыл бұрын
Now I'm hungry.
@loomhigh5 жыл бұрын
so were the Western Australians after the Great Depression fuelled the Emu War
@ishanpandey23288 жыл бұрын
"We are the Exception" - Mongols Absolutely love it. Go John Green!!!
@history91159 жыл бұрын
John Green you should make a video about the history of Ireland.
@SoljaChild6 жыл бұрын
I cannot lie, the way you explain things, is extremely hilarious and amazing. These are absolutely funfacts!!!!
@superchacho7778 жыл бұрын
HOI4 IS OUT Also happy D-day
@nikipetrov6359 жыл бұрын
Hey, CrashCourse! I must say i absolutly love your show. Especially the History courses. You do such a great job in explaining the events without entering in complicated dates and furthermore you're not just going trough the history, you're tackling questions about the real importance of it all. I love that. It would be great if u mention my country Bulgaria more often(but I'm not suprised it has went back on your priorities xD).I was thinking that maybe a Balkan wars themed episode would work out, afterall it setted the stage in the Balkans for years to come. Nevertheless, even if you don''t turn to a similar topic I'm sure I'll continue to watch your show for years to come. Continue the awesome job Crash course ;)
@kenstr3219 жыл бұрын
"you can not invade Russia, unless you're the Mongols." And that's why Moscow has burned more times then Henry VIII was married? You can not "successfully" invade Russia... you know cause it has been invaded several times, but only conquered once. (by a foreign power)
@NZCrypT8 жыл бұрын
As a historian you should know that no truly 'Good vs Evil' war will ever exist in human history
@whoevencaresbrawecb11397 жыл бұрын
Actually the war between me and acne is XD idk just like countering what everyone says
@amanda400357 жыл бұрын
then again, he's not a historian (fortunately)
@BifronsCandle6 жыл бұрын
As a historian, you should know that oversimplistic maxims like this don't apply to human history.
@keating_tyler22436 жыл бұрын
+NZCrypT I agree. No matter what caused the war, no side is truly good. The Allies also committed atrocities against the Axis peoples, and even though the results were nowhere near as horrendous, a greater evil does not erase a smaller one.
@blownspeakersss6 жыл бұрын
Millions and millions of innocent people were murdered by Germany and by USSR. That is evil. Any honest and sophisticated read of history will show that the Allied powers are clearly on the right side of history.
@thelegendaryt8 жыл бұрын
"Aw Turkey" 😂😂😂😂😂
@discountconsulting9 жыл бұрын
I'm surprised growing demand for tires and conflicts over the global markets for Brazilian rubber weren't mentioned. Model T Fords had reached a price level affordable to the masses and German automakers were gearing up to mass-produce VWs for the 'volk,' Industrialization and the growth of cities had already begun drawing people away from agriculture and the promise of greater food production and distribution with the help of motorized tractors and trucks was another factor. Ultimately, the New Deal was an effort to re-invigorate capitalism for the sake of structuring a new global society where agriculture and food-distribution would be more mechanized and industrialized, and the question is how this new vision for mass-societies evolved into WWII.
@erikjohansson42759 жыл бұрын
discountconsulting Are you proposing that Roosevelt's actions led to the second world war?
@non_toxicgreen19679 жыл бұрын
I wanted to clap at the end of this video ! Thankyou John green for being more education than a school could ever be.
@DavidAkhter9 жыл бұрын
Awesome video and awesome explanation. This is an interesting new perspective to the war and sheds a lot of light on the motivations behind it.
@mininonja9179 жыл бұрын
The most interesting thing about this video is not the fallacy about being unable to invade Russia (Polish-Soviet War of 1919-1921), or even lumping all the countries of Great Britain together, but rather the fact that for the first time (At least as far as I am aware), there is finally some citation. History is open to many different interpretations, and the only way to make a valid claim is to defend it with cited evidence, something this show had failed to do in the past. However, there are still a few ways to make the historical analysis even more solid. First: Quantity of sources. I'm only in high school, but if I turned in a history paper with only one source (Both citations here are from the same book), it wouldn't even get graded. If anything, I could get expelled for plagiarism. And secondly: The counterclaim. One of the most effective ways to argue your point is to demonstrate that you understand the other side too, by presenting the opposing argument with its own valid evidence. This show has yet to do that without treating the counterclaim in an almost condescending manner. These are most prevalent in the Episodes on the American Civil War (Different series, yes, but also Crash Course History). John made a contentious claim, that the Civil War was fought over slavery, but then doesn't provide any evidence, or mention the fact that many people, both now and then, do not at all agree, and point to states rights and lack of representation, such as when Lincoln was elected without winning any Southern States. That is just not good historical practice, and raises serious questions about the validity of the show. To conclude, the inclusion of sources is an exciting step towards increased credibility, but their is still a lot of progress to be made to make the show even more credible. Because without credibility, what is really the point of discussing history?
@lolpauve9 жыл бұрын
mininonja917 Explain to me how you get expelled for plagiarizing by just using one source. Not that I disagree with the overall idea but I just don't get the logic behind that part.
@mininonja9179 жыл бұрын
lolpauve I am in the IB program, and an expectation there is constant and thorough use of sources. Every single point you make, or fact you use has to be cited. Additionally, you have to use a variety of sources. While there is no specific rule about the amount of sources that must be present, it is generally a good idea to have about 4 per claim, seeing as each claim should have around 4 pieces of evidence.
@tootz19509 жыл бұрын
mininonja917 That's not plagiarism. They're actually going to give you a degree?
@lolpauve9 жыл бұрын
mininonja917 I get that, I don't get that whole plagiarism part. P.S. I don't think this show would work if there were that many citations for everything.
@mininonja9179 жыл бұрын
tootz1950 Yes, it is. I quote from IB definitions of malpractice. "Plagiarism: this is defined as the representation of the ideas or work of another person as the candidate’s own". Not citing a source is presenting the work of someone else as your own. That definition can be found here: www.fcps.edu/RobinsonSS/ib-program/pdf/IB%20definition%20of%20malpractice.pdf
@kemiyoshida9 жыл бұрын
The last minute of this lecture speaks volumes. Awesome stuff!
@theoneilovemost4 жыл бұрын
" I later calculated that all of the destruction and wasted resources spent on that war could have easily accounted for every human need on the plane." ~Jacque Fresco 1916 to 2017
@SGMJ929 жыл бұрын
Crash Course World History episode on the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth?
@liannapfister82557 жыл бұрын
Seriously though...what video/movie is that Mongols clip from?
@timj94667 жыл бұрын
Lianna Pfister I think it's from some John Wayne movie where he was for some reason Kahn
@tensequel78187 жыл бұрын
no joke 'the Mongols' or is it just"mongols", can't remember
@robertwhitfield93608 жыл бұрын
you should do something on the Falklands
@kevinmcd76808 жыл бұрын
+Robert Whitfield go falk yourself
@PenguinODoom8 жыл бұрын
+Kevin McD Tbh it would be intresting to hear about it, I wanna hear the argentianian side.
@robertwhitfield93608 жыл бұрын
maddad333 what we got our arses kicked:)
@Bird_Dog008 жыл бұрын
+maddad333 The argentinian side is rather simple: Argentina always claimed "las malvinas" for itself (even though as far as I can tell, they have little to substantiate that claim other than proximity) and going for it by force was thought by the regime to be a good way to spurr nationalistic sentiments in order to take the pepoles' minds off the domestic problems the country faced. Essentialy, Argentina tried to do what Britain has ben doing for a long time: "We hold it now, so it's ours."
@makosan98 жыл бұрын
+Robert Whitfield You army didn't look its best either, btw. Had all the bombs in San Carlos exploded, it would have been a fucking disaster for the jingos instead. :/
@tomdrowry8 жыл бұрын
No mention of uncle Joe Stalin's starvation of Ukranian peasants in 1930s,, that always gets airbrushed out of history in the West.
@arnav91928 жыл бұрын
1930's was quite far away from the war. He is strictly talking about the war.
@anonkni88 жыл бұрын
Early 1930 wasn't 'during WW2'.
@josuphin1827 жыл бұрын
To the two fucktards (not Thomas Drowry)....The point is still valid, no real mention of the Ukrainian genocide in American history lessons...and no lessons of Stalins hatred of the jews or the gulag and and and....
@anonkni87 жыл бұрын
joey ballwash Well, dipshit, I'm not aware of courses taught in american history classes. And this comment is irrelevant at best as it is about WW2 and not inter-war period.
@catherine85487 жыл бұрын
If I recall correctly he talked about that in his 37th video of his first world history series. The one about communism.
@ethanparke1387 жыл бұрын
Thanks using these to study for my A.P. Euro exam.😁😁😁😁
@Pedro662608 жыл бұрын
It was a war about evil vs evil where inocent people died and the winners claimed themselves has the good ones only because they won.
@kevinmcd76808 жыл бұрын
+Pedro Pablo The Winners write the history books
@kylejohns26858 жыл бұрын
+Pedro Pablo here here
@tanmayshukla74798 жыл бұрын
+KingKJ Gaming there there
@walkingdeath158 жыл бұрын
thegreeenbeast I seem to remember what he's saying as a quote from mw2 or 3 so I think he's just quoting that. Maybe he's serious though he could be a hardcore communist
@connorsteffey58988 жыл бұрын
+Pedro Pablo nope
@timlamiam9 жыл бұрын
British food is fine. I dunno why Americans love saying that it's bad. Just because it's more varied, and if you looked, there is some whack shit out there, does not mean it's bad. In fact, I've enjoyed dining out here in England waaaaaaay more than anywhere in America.
@stormbringer21899 жыл бұрын
+timlamiam that is your opinion but you do not have to be so regal about it its just food nothing more
@sparklepawz11858 жыл бұрын
+timlamiam it's mainly because the U.S (I'm guessing you mean U.S citizens not the Americas) over sweetens and over salts a lot of the food. I'm not saying that Americans (U.S.) are flawed or wrong when it comes to food but when food costs less because more high fructose corn syrup is in it, you have to realize that the amount of sugar a person is used to compared to the little amount Britain uses...well it'll taste bland at the least.
@stormbringer21898 жыл бұрын
Sparkle Pawz America has cut down on Corn syrup
@sabafapbing27628 жыл бұрын
+timlamiam I thought it was other Europeans that were saying it was crap. And to be fair, food with names like 'Bubble and Squeak' don't sound too appetizing.
@salame4628 жыл бұрын
+timlamiam I love meat pies, shepherd's pie, and empire cookies. British/Scottish food is delicious.
@knightfire17868 жыл бұрын
I LOVE the thought bubble animations!!! they are ABSOLUTELY amazing!!!
@joshuayough55148 жыл бұрын
I know right Also TF2 SPHEE CREEPIN AROUND HERE
@carn9418 жыл бұрын
Oil, clothing, spare parts and manpower were also huge parts of the war.
@loomhigh5 жыл бұрын
and so was wheat and its byproducts (he said to someone probably not getting the reference)
@silverdarlin8 жыл бұрын
If you were in nazi Germany's during WWII then you would of said you were the good guys and the allies were the bad guys and vice-versa
@duwak33598 жыл бұрын
take the L
@kevinmcd76808 жыл бұрын
+silverdarlin Tried to sympathize with Nazis, gets immediate L
@ChestOfDoom8 жыл бұрын
+Kevin McD I dont even know what the L is but i feel like he needs one
@blewskidoo21108 жыл бұрын
+silverdarlin according to my family members, you were trying not to get bombed.
@ShinkF8 жыл бұрын
+TheRealAskic What about american civilians with Japanese ancestry? It's not always black and white..
@HistoryHustle6 жыл бұрын
I am really impressed by this episode. Never looked at it this way. Thanks!
@James--Parker9 жыл бұрын
Germany successfully invaded Russia in WW1. Germany would have also beat Russia in WW2 if it wasn't for all those weapons they "borrowed" from America.
@ethanbarr32699 жыл бұрын
With that Logic, Britain has invaded Russia, France has invaded Russia, and other belligerents of the Anglo-Russo Crimean wars.
@James--Parker9 жыл бұрын
Ethan Barr Hardly, Germany took over all a majority of Russia's remotely densely populated regions.
@Gogofam1239 жыл бұрын
russia do not has natural bAriers , therefore enemy's can be deep in its territory , but in the end they always go back , these buffer zones were created by russians as part of a plan because there are no natural bariers... john green was talking about this in previous video... russia is easy to invade but, very hard or impossible to win ...
@BroSparkles9 жыл бұрын
Being in Russia does not equal defeating Russia. Invading is easy, surviving inside is the hard part.
@jchammer33389 жыл бұрын
The reason Germany got defeated in Russia was launching an all out attack in winter
@katie88818 жыл бұрын
In my Experience of War class in college, we read the book "Fires on the Plain" about a Japanese soldier stationed in the Philippines during WWII. His unit has no provisions but he ends up getting ejected in any case. He wanders through the jungle, starving, and is forced to break one of humanity's biggest taboos- eating his fallen brethren. This is actually a true story, told by the man who lived through this nightmare, and you can tell that recounting the events is tormenting him. He even seems to dissociate at points and calls the human flesh "monkey meat" at times. The lesson of the unit was: war can make you do a lot of unthinkable things- how do you live with yourself after you've done what it takes to survive? Shohei Ooka (the author) was traumatized by this experience for the rest of his life.
@VolvagiasBlaze9 жыл бұрын
you know what crash course, i applaud you for always trying to get the comments to be more thought provoking, but its a lost cause, like teaching someone without limbs to play a guitar.
@OfficialManGo7 жыл бұрын
"Liebensraum" = Loveroom
@theunknowncorps229 жыл бұрын
In my view 'good' and 'evil' are still valid concepts. It is important that while rejecting the traditional black and white definitions of those terms it is also important to use them to distinguish between right and (extreme) wrong. People are shades of gray but they can commit blatantly evil actions (usually) because they think they are doing the right thing. Especially if ideology (politics, religion) is involved. Such as in the case of Hitler. And yes the Allies were not entirely 'clean' in their conduct of the war... But please let us not reject the terms altogether and adopt pseudo-profound moral relativism (as I see some doing below) because moral relativism is a fact of history, *not* a basis for ethics/morals. It also falls to the 'tolerance-intolerance' contradiction and completely refutes itself as a political agenda. On top of that it also leaves us with nothing, only 'tolerance' but no direction morally.
@joshschilmeister19345 жыл бұрын
Yeah I mean the Allies weren't 'good guys'. Britain were still imperial bastards, the US was locking away the Japanese, and the don't get me started on the USSR. But doing horrible things in wartime, while never excusable, is a long way from the Japanese or the Germans. 2 things can be completely unacceptable and one can still be much worse than the other. The stance that 'Both were evil and so they're equal' is just as much nonsense as 'The Allies were angels fighting for freedom'
@dactarik26154 жыл бұрын
Everything is relative, assigning right or wrong, is an incorrect way to see the issue, as you deny the reason why did it happen, and become blind to to the pitfall that is in the other extreme; one that we foolishly call good
@dextera-tx10994 жыл бұрын
Yes, as an outsider i see the Nazis just wanted to colonize the allies or make the allies feel what is like to be colonized / invaded. I mean because of that, thanks to Nazis... I mean the event, we become a nation now. Sorry if I'm wrong.
@bullrun27724 жыл бұрын
Common Sense1776 really gosh
@TheCarrShow6 жыл бұрын
Jesus... Rewriting history one aesthetically pleasing video at a time. Maybe Crash Course could recommend an accurate historical channel in its videos.
@LEOUSTET9 жыл бұрын
Polish also invaded Russia succesfully.
@АлександрНевельский-л2з5 жыл бұрын
Not more successfull, than the Germans did.
@dasarislavo9 жыл бұрын
This was great :)
@ARBBFamily9 жыл бұрын
Excellent.... Never gave much thought to the feeding of the world population during the war or how the lack of food caused such misery for both soldiers and civiliasn. Absolutely enjoy to learn and Crash Course does it so well
@jair72317 жыл бұрын
At least WW2 had some purpose. For the Axis powers, it was to gain more land and make the other countries pay for taxing them so heavily and severely weakening Germany's economy. For the Allies, it was simply to prevent Germany from getting world domination. World War One was far worse in my opinion. All the fighting was sort of meaningless. While it didn't have nearly as many casualties as World War Two, at least if you died in WW2 (in battle at least) you were either fighting for your homeland with extreme nationalism and pride racing through your heart (Axis) or defending your home country from the evil Germans (Allies). In WW1 soldiers suffered horrible deaths in the trenches and were subject to weapons like chlorine gas and machine guns. On top of that many died because of old-fashioned tactics which had soldiers rushing across no man's land - easy pickings for machine gun fire. And what could they say they were fighting for? Russia hated it so much they had 2 revolutions just to get out of the war!
@jacobtaylor99758 жыл бұрын
Britain is not a country. Britain is an area which encompasses one country (Republic of Ireland) and most of another (United Kingdom). Great Britain is just England, Scotland and Wales. England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland are not countries in their own right, just autonomous provinces of the UK.
@TirraOmilade9 жыл бұрын
Thank you! this is great! I use your videos to help my children learn in our homeschool.
@michaelhuynh519 жыл бұрын
When I look at WWII by the perspective of resources, I'd say that in the Pacific, where it's common knowledge that the US defeated Japan, the USSR actually defeated Japan. I backed this up with the Soviet invasion of Manchuria and the Korean Peninsula in 1945. When the two A-bombs dropped, the Japanese refused to surrender until the Russians took their Resources in Manchuria (agriculture) and in the Korean Peninsula (arms factories, ores, and rumors of a Japanese atomic bomb). Russians took these territories and Japan was left with no resources. Japan cannot fight without resources which led to the Japanese surrender.
@captainrex71756 жыл бұрын
michael huynh the USSR didn’t defeat japan. However, the threat of the USSR made japan more likely to surrender to the US. The Japanese knew that the US wouldn’t utterly destroy them if they surrendered like the USSR would have.
@mark-yn8po6 жыл бұрын
John Green you are my hero and I love your book.
@dafuqmr138 жыл бұрын
World War 2, Evil vs Evil, the one who won will be called Hero, thats very simple
@americansniper16418 жыл бұрын
you guys are too edgy will forever be looked at like the Weird guy
@josephjohnson87058 жыл бұрын
Yeah I feel like crash course is a little biased against fascism or nazis without even attempting to see it from there side and when he brings up nazis, Jews are also mentioned.
@attercops8 жыл бұрын
+joseph johnson biased against... nazis? wonder why...
@josephjohnson87058 жыл бұрын
Daniel Frederick nice
@Catclaw018 жыл бұрын
Yeah, most people tend to have a bias against those who commit systematic genocide, for the purpose of ethnic-cleansing.
@XFireUWSE9 жыл бұрын
Oil should be featured much more prominently in this video. Oil probably constituted the single greatest advantage that the Allies had over the Axis powers: WW2 was a war of mobility, and the underlying means of mobility was oil. Oil was a primary reason that the Japanese pushed southward to the Dutch East Indies instead of flanking Soviet forces for a decisive victory on the eastern front (and potentially delaying the USA's entry into the war). The lack of oil supplies to Japan decided the ultimate outcome in the Pacific theatre once the US severed Japan's oil supply line from the East Indies. The need for a dependable source of oil motivated Hitler to divert troops into the Caucasus to take Baku instead of focusing on taking Moscow. And Germany's investment in synthetic fuel doomed them to shortage because static, massive synthetic fuel plants are way more susceptible to bombing and disruption than many distinct supply convoys (what Britain relied on). The difference in available oil meant that, in the last years of the war, economics and not tactics were a key driver for the Axis' military decisions. Everyone should read The Prize by Yergin; it highlights the importance oil has played in almost all major events of the last 100 years.
@Amatsaru298 жыл бұрын
Wasn't the Treaty of Versailles, a cause for Ww2? The treaty of Versailles' unfair policies sent upon Germany from Great Britain and France wanting revenge on Germany?
@hufflepunk95626 жыл бұрын
Yes, it was a cause as it caused massive debt for Germany, which led to desperate people looking for a ANY solution and why so many German people bought into extreme ideologies.
@joshschilmeister19345 жыл бұрын
There were many causes of WW2. Many historians attribute at least part of Hitler's rise to power to the horrific devastation in the post WW1-Germany. And said devastation also fueled hyper-nationalism and xenophobia.
@helenjovel64375 жыл бұрын
I actually wrote an essay on how the Versailles Treaty of 1919 contributed to the start of WWII, my main point was that if they hadn’t messed up Germany so much, there really wouldn’t have been a WWII
@zexal42174 жыл бұрын
@@helenjovel6437 Most modern historians actually reject Versailles as causing WW2 and point out how it was actually relatively tame in terms of what it stipulated.
@driedpancake9 жыл бұрын
Isn't it awfully convenient how the "evil" people always lose wars? There is no good or evil there are just people.
@erikjohansson42759 жыл бұрын
swegg Nnnnnnnnnnnnnnno...
@legobros20209 жыл бұрын
Epicurus history is written by the victors
@j22089 жыл бұрын
Seppuku but come on guys nazis are pretty bad
@erikjohansson42759 жыл бұрын
AC1SPLIFF The nazis were evil. Now obviously no one is evil for the sake of being evil, but that wasn't why they got in power.
@driedpancake9 жыл бұрын
AC1SPLIFF "I'm no holocaust denier" Bro,fuck em you can be a "holocaust denier" if you want don't worry about them calling you names. Just worry about what is true.
@herbivorethecarnivore84479 жыл бұрын
Schools need to learn from people like John. In a usual school lesson, it's always strict and boring but with something like this, especially something so entertaining as The Thought Bubble (And I'm not being sarcastic), it keeps my attention throughout the video.
@Lucy-ng7cw9 жыл бұрын
Wow...lots of stuff missing. I feel like there should be a second part or something
@loomhigh5 жыл бұрын
there are about four videos on WWII in Crash Course where Australia still gets 2 sentences and every single ANZAC victory in the Pacific was called an American one.
@tuxedopig79408 жыл бұрын
Damn your making me hungry.
@rishabh.malviya4 жыл бұрын
As long as we live in a world of finite resources, there will be potential for conflict. Knowing that, hopefully, will help us avoid it.
@docgalen9 жыл бұрын
It's pronounced "LAY-bens-raum" Not "LEE-bens-raum". Lieben is 'to love' (v.) or 'love' (n.) :P
@melonlord40559 жыл бұрын
Oooooooh, "loving"-room. Sounds VERY German....
@Tarik3609 жыл бұрын
Melon Lord I can just imagine some German Brothel or something having such a thing: "Wilkommen zum die liebesraum" or something along those lines... Wouldn't surprise me that such a structured people would have such a thing.
@jferny968 жыл бұрын
0:08 what kind of obsession do you have with number Seven? (the books) great videos btw Un saludo desde España
@amandaruzylo67369 жыл бұрын
Great perspective! Shows that there were so many variables to the 2nd world war... not just the fighting. The war affected everyone.
@cdg13609 жыл бұрын
You said it affected everybody. But you forgot to mention the civilians in German accupied areas. Let me focus on winter of 44/45 after Americans failed to liberate Holland. Thousands died, because the Germans left very little resources (oil/coal/food/clothes) To be fair, the Allies attempted airdrops. But still the Dutch were forced to eat tulips, which were the value of a house 300 years earlier.
@SinisterBlackheart6 жыл бұрын
Canada did send food drops to the Netherlands and ended up liberating them as well :)
@freddieblake75457 жыл бұрын
Wales is a principality, not a country
@lvl5Vaporeon7 жыл бұрын
Freddie Blake It's also a mammal.
@Braddowski7 жыл бұрын
Freddie Blake Wales actually became acknowledged as a country in the 1990s
@BiddaBiddaCherryPie7 жыл бұрын
It's not a real country though is it. I'm pretty sure any region of England is as culturally distinct as Wales is, especially when less than a quarter of Welsh people even know Welsh.
@aLukepop6 жыл бұрын
Jon Wales may not " be a country" but it is certainly the most culturally distinctive part of England.
@KhaoticPhoenix9 жыл бұрын
6:18 - From the perspective of a british person: according to CGP grey we are a country of countries which makes confusing sense when each part of the country of countries has its own nationalism and sometimes parts within a country.
@isaackim89767 жыл бұрын
"i wanted a brain transplant but then i changed my mind"
@madwarman13477 жыл бұрын
KingIZAK ha lol
@Robstar1009 жыл бұрын
england isn't 4 separate countries it's 1 big one!...well unless Scotland wants to be free
@Datroflshopper9 жыл бұрын
Scotland does want to be free! IPSOS MORI did a poll just like last year at the referendum, and it showed support for independence out in front. Plus the Scottish Parliament election in 2016 may well be fought once again on the issue of independence and the SNP are almost guaranteed victory in 2016
@xzliam9 жыл бұрын
+Datroflshopper Scotland vote no only 35 percent of Scottish voters voted Snp and polls aren't accurate mostly because it takes a small group of people not a large group also most people who voted no really don't care that much to fill out a poll that proves nothing. Also the UK isn't called England England is part of the country called the United kingdom
@MephLeo8 жыл бұрын
One of the best episodes of the series.
@toadarebeast19 жыл бұрын
So many people sympathising with Hitler in these comments...
@whoevencaresbrawecb11397 жыл бұрын
Mainly they are saying America was worse not that he was good so
@blazebluebass9 жыл бұрын
I don't like how "Russia" and "USSR" is used interchangeably.
@ananyav18964 жыл бұрын
I liked this new take on the Second World War. It's one of my favourite topics in History and I always strive to know about different perspectives. Thanks for this video, Mr Green!
@88pie888 жыл бұрын
"Germans were well feed during the war" jeez Green, gotta take it easy on the jokes.
@loomhigh5 жыл бұрын
"America saved Australia" yeah I agree he needs to chill on the WWII humour
@economath81649 жыл бұрын
Thumbs up it you cringed every time John mispronounced Lebensraum (lay-bens-raum).
@creatinerd6 жыл бұрын
J.D. Montgomery lee-bens-raum
@Derna18047 жыл бұрын
A very articulately put, if myopic point. The desire to become to become self-sufficient through the acquisition of territory wasn't driven by a lack of resources, but by the political climate. Furthermore, the same desire has been pursued through control of trade relations and diplomatic hegemony throughout history, and we're seeing it today with EU expansionism.
@alexericson40469 жыл бұрын
I'm offensive and I find this british
@ParthSharma19969 жыл бұрын
British imperialism had long justified itself with the pretense that it was conducted for the benefit of the governed. Churchill's conduct in the summer and fall of 1943 gave the lie to this myth. "I hate Indians," he told the Secretary of State for India, Leopold Amery. "They are a beastly people with a beastly religion." The famine was their own fault, he declared at a war-cabinet meeting, for "breeding like rabbits." Some of India's grain was also exported to Ceylon (now Sri Lanka) to meet needs there, even though the island wasn't experiencing the same hardship; Australian wheat sailed past Indian cities (where the bodies of those who had died of starvation littered the streets) to depots in the Mediterranean and the Balkans; and offers of American and Canadian food aid were turned down. India was not permitted to use its own sterling reserves, or indeed its own ships, to import food. And because the British government paid inflated prices in the open market to ensure supplies, grain became unaffordable for ordinary Indians. Lord Wavell, appointed Viceroy of India that fateful year, considered the Churchill government's attitude to India "negligent, hostile and contemptuous."
@calebthemoneymaker5879 жыл бұрын
II live in Canada, so my country was a little bit neutral until the allies invited us, but the only think we did was send like 400K troops to Netherlands and Poland for D-Day. World War II in my opinion is the best war ever! Here is a quick summary of it. World War II (WWII or WW2), also known as the Second World War (after the recent Great War), was a global war that lasted from 1939 to 1945, though related conflicts began earlier. It involved the vast majority of the world's nations-including all of the great powers-eventually forming two opposing military alliances: the Allies and the Axis. It was the most widespread war in history, and directly involved more than 100 million people from over 30 countries. In a state of "total war", the major participants threw their entire economic, industrial and scientific capabilities behind the war effort, erasing the distinction between civilian and military resources. Marked by mass deaths of civilians, including the Holocaust (during which approximately 11 million people were killed and the strategic bombing of industrial and population centres (during which approximately one million people were killed, including the use of two nuclear weapons in combat), it resulted in an estimated 50 million to 85 million fatalities. These made World War II the deadliest conflict in human history. Ok, it's a little bit long. :d John, I bet you $400 that the Mongols can't beat the Russians. Ok, Mongolia used to own East Europe and some of Asia (I think) until the 16th century (I think that too loL.) Like I said, besides United States or USSR (Soviet Union) or Canada maybe, no country can beat Russia. Russia is plain domination.
@juliannesunga35278 жыл бұрын
This guy is so stupid one mistake he dies by looking at a barrel of a gun at 2:51 so stupid Sergeant: *looks at barrel* Private:*press triggers* Private:That was a mistake Sergeant :*dead*
@juliannesunga35278 жыл бұрын
Yeah, but sometimes they could get torture too like a movie that they made but I don't remember the movie called and its from wwII and this guy get tortured by this Major.
@caIigula7 жыл бұрын
You what's even worse than stupid guys with guns? Pretentious ignorant comments from clueless idiots who think they know everything but can't even check a clip for longer than 10 secs before thinking they have it all figured out and then proceed straight to a conclusion, while failing to ask the simplest question about it. As if you have figured this out... NO, this is NOT "so stupid". In fact, the clue is even IN THE CLIP, damn it! AND EVEN if it wasn't, HOW ON EARTH do you think the guy can check the muzzle and the barrel's interior (btw it's not "at the barrel", I mean english isn't my first language but come on...) WHEN THE RIFLE WOULD BE LOADED AND READY TO FIRE?!? So if you haven't figured it out by yourself, you can see that the rifle the soldier holds which his NCO is checking, is on an empty, open chamber, the bolt handle is turned back and up as well, which is visible too if you can't make this out for whateer reason... This was very common in many armies of that time and before then, for the NCO to check the soldier's rifle and uniform for being clean and properly handled, INCLUDING that you don't show off the rifle with a closed chamber, not to mention with a closed AND LOADED chamber to your NCO! If you would've tried to do that, even before you got near him with the rifle's muzzle, he straight up would've taken that thing right out of your hands with you receiving severe punishment, because guess what, there may have been less safety regulations concerning weapons in armies in the past, but people who are so stupid to be unable to realize that a rifle should be on an open and empty chamber for a checkup, you know, people who make jokes about such things without having thought about it for even a second apparently, they need some punishment to eradicate such idiocy from the FACE of not only the earth, but also their NCO! Sorry but such stuff makes me angry, I mean yeah the cli seems weird for anyone unaware of the details, BUT this detail is not only explained through logic (no open and empty chamber = no light in the barrel for the NCO to see the interior), but also is clearly visible down in the same shot! Also even if it' weren't and one is failing to grasp the simple logic, no one is unable to type a question a little bit like this: "What and why is he doing that? Isn't it dangerous to do that/How do they assure his safety while he checks the inside of that barrel?", again, anyone who can type an ignorant joke like you did could've just posed a simple pair of questions and would've had his/her knowledge extended instead of showing his/her lack of said knowledge in a mixture of arrogant ignorance and a false sense of being all-knowing, instead of the more humble approach that maybe, just maybe history is full of stuff you don't understand at the first glance, and often even cannot simply be deciphered by a second one, like it luckily was here. If I learned one thing about history, that humans often think they have it figured out and then make dumb decisions, or more often cruel ones, when it comes to things that are foreign to us, ridiculing practices, like, oh I don't know, joking about them. But in the past this was possible because there were none that knew better, and no book or Wikipedia that described and explained the what's and if's. Not that you had considered consulting anything before stating you judgement, also ridiculing something you surely didn't understand, but also showed to fail to even pay attention to, otherwise you would've realized it's self-explanatory. But then again it shows off how easy human behaviour sinks to such a level, even today, if not halted by either a detailed look or pure knowledge or some history-loving guy on the internet, who writes too long and likes to apologize for this, also I didn't want to sound angry. Sorry fot that, but seriously, you may realize now why this upset me so much, nothing personal.
@juliannesunga35277 жыл бұрын
Okay Im not reading that nor if you were saying I was wrong well this is why He put the "His eye on the BARREL of the gun" and the soldier might accidently pulls the trigger he dies don't you even know what comes out of a gun? (if you assume I was being stupid nor ignorant)
@Sercotani7 жыл бұрын
He was saying, quite simply, that the gun in the video was NOT loaded. An empty chamber allows the NCO to inspect inside the gun to see if it's clean, and if the gun was loaded that particular soldier would get punished hard. Also berated you for making a joke about it when you could've just asked "Why did he do that, isn't that dangerous? He could die!". To be honest with you, I agree with him.
@juliannesunga35277 жыл бұрын
neet meep2 ITS STILL WRONG TO PUT YOUR EYE ON A BARREL IT MIGHT STILL HAVE A LIVE ROUND
@TommyLangzik8 жыл бұрын
Great end message and food for thought, but German people still did starve; my grandparents (who were there) for example had to steal crops and eat them straight from the ground with the dirt while being shot at because much of the food was allocated to the higher-ups and military. Food was also hard to come by as a result of the allied WW1 victory's effect on the currency (essentially making it worthless). There were other [Zionist] forces that sought to create an inhospitable environment in Germany to convince its large Jewish population to occupy what is now Isreal, after British powers partially followed through on their promise of giving Jews an area to settle peacefully (as a reward for getting Wall Street on board in WW1 when they were losing and their vastly stretched empire was starting to errode). I'm not sure how effective these Zionist forces were, but it definitely helped create a strong divide between Jews (who saw Zionists as an extreme faction of their faith whom they wanted to distance themselves from), and Germans (who were ignorant to the difference and ultimately blamed Jews in general, likely also because of the Nazi party's ignorance and desperation to unify the people for a common cause). It was very similar to the situation we see with Islam today, except Zionists used indirect white-collar approaches (business, media, entertainment, finance, & political relationships) to advance their goals through proxies rather than direct violence. My point is that it was a very toxic time in Germany with a huge complex range of tensions by not only internal, but also external forces. Regardless of what narrative one ultimately accepts, I think you're right in saying resources were in short supply for all but the ruling elite in every country (some more than others), and it's troubling to see that population increase is still running rampant despite the limited resources and opportunities for so many people. Most governments are fudging with numbers to make things look as rosy as possible, and to make the books communicate growth while the red flags couldn't be bigger. People are often considered economic units because of their potential, but the system doesn't seem to take into account that potential is worthless without the right conditions to liberate it from being only that. Sustainable balanced growth, health, and innovation are what happens when potential is being cultivated into something more, otherwise it's simply a waste (like any other tool in the hands of a senseless fool).
@HolyKingKong9 жыл бұрын
Mr. Green, I don't mean to rush you, but where is the next episode of World History? The Great African War looks super interesting, and I can't wait for your insight on the topic.