Which wars, if any, should Britain have been involved with in the 20th century?

[Ardemax]

Going for something different and if this flops then yeah, blame me :P

Which wars do you think were genuinely in our national interest and which weren't yet we still ended up getting involved with anyway?

Would you go as far as to say we should have stayed out of WW2 (was that in our national interest?) or should we have gotten involved in more conflicts?

Would be interested to hear your views :) (Obviously if you want to extend the time period to include Iraq/Afghanistan, feel free)

[oli]

okay I'd go as far to say that WW2 wasn't in our national interest but it was a necessary war to take part in, the only problem for us was that we didn't join soon enough. who knows maybe we'd still be the british empire if we joined in earlier.

another war would be the cold war, even though it was publicized as usa vs russia it was pretty much all western countries vs russia I think it was all of NATO not sure though. well the cold war was stupid and impractical even though it led to amazing technological advancements it led to much tension and a relentless amount of fear for everyone globally, should have stayed out!

gulf war another war we were pulled into because of the usa and us having our noses shoved firmly up their arse was unnecessary and in my opinion was only to strengthen bonds with the oil rich saudi arabia. i mean it was bush.........................

"Operation Desert Fox" was another one which was stupid considering it was purely to cripple the already crippled iraq and led to much hate and tension between the western world and iraq and possibly one of the main factors of the "war on terror".

[-:Undertaker:-]

In terms of modern post-imperial history, only the Falklands war in my eyes has been justified.

In terms of WWI and WWII when we were an imperial power - both were a disaster and failed in their objectives, indeed it was due to us getting involved in these wars that led to the demise of our Empire and us being overtaken as the world power by the United States.

[AgnesIO]

In terms of modern post-imperial history, only the Falklands war in my eyes has been justified.

In terms of WWI and WWII when we were an imperial power - both were a disaster and failed in their objectives, indeed it was due to us getting involved in these wars that led to the demise of our Empire and us being overtaken as the world power by the United States.

Well, yeah, I guess we could have just sat and watched as Germany demolished the entire worlds population of Jewish, disabled, black and whatever other sort of people they decided they didn't like lol

[peteyt]

While I'm no expert I feel the world wars where different as it could have directly affected us even if we hadn't done anything so you could argue that it was better to get involved earlier rather than when it was too late and you where doomed. Just think what the world would be like right now if we hadn't helped and the germans had won.

[lucaskf390]

No war, war doesnt solve anything.

[oli]

No war, war doesnt solve anything.

Of course they do, what a silly statement.

Most of all they usually solve the population issue.

[lucaskf390]

Of course they do, what a silly statement.

Most of all they usually solve the population issue.
How much a life worth?

[-:Undertaker:-]

Well, yeah, I guess we could have just sat and watched as Germany demolished the entire worlds population of Jewish, disabled, black and whatever other sort of people they decided they didn't like lol

We didn't enter those wars for those reasons, those reasons have only been applied afterwards. Take WWII for example. We declared war on Germany (and thus entered WWII) because Poland was invaded by the Reich - that was our war aim, the liberation of Poland due to an alliance.

Now clearly although we won the war, this aim was completely pointless: because Poland would then remain under Soviet domination for another 50+ years. Indeed it's a puzzle why we entered the war for Poland as the status of Poland was pretty much not of British foreign policy interest.

[oli]

How much a life worth?

On the grand scheme of things, a billion lives isn't worth anything.

[AgnesIO]

On the grand scheme of things, a billion lives isn't worth anything.

What if it includes yours?

Sent from my HTC One X

[Kardan]

In terms of modern post-imperial history, only the Falklands war in my eyes has been justified.

In terms of WWI and WWII when we were an imperial power - both were a disaster and failed in their objectives, indeed it was due to us getting involved in these wars that led to the demise of our Empire and us being overtaken as the world power by the United States.

In hindsight, if we weren't in the war, we would have ended up the same way as France did during the war, would we not? Surely if we didn't take part in WWII there is a good chance that most of us wouldn't be speaking English right now? And surely not even being British would slightly impact the British Empire? :P

[-:Undertaker:-]

In hindsight, if we weren't in the war, we would have ended up the same way as France did during the war, would we not? Surely if we didn't take part in WWII there is a good chance that most of us wouldn't be speaking English right now? And surely not even being British would slightly impact the British Empire? :P

I'm not arguing that war wouldn't come eventually - although there's strong suggestions that Hitler never had ambitions on Britain and her Empire, rather he wanted to create a Empire of his own in a world which had already more or less been taken up by other colonial powers.

But let's assume that war would eventually come between the British Empire and Third Reich: we were in no position on the eve of war to fight such a large battle - having signed the ridiculous Washington Naval Treaty (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington_Naval_Treaty) - which meant we were much weaker than we should have been in the late 1930s. Secondly, if we were going to eventually have to fight the Third Reich then declaring war over Poland was ridiculous for the reason that as I said earlier, Poland wasn't of our interest and it was fruitless anyway as Poland is located in Eastern Europe and has always been a pawn of either Russia, France or the Prussian states (later Germany).

What we should have done is re-armed and waited until (if ever) an attack was made against us. We then would have had a reasonable objective in fighting the war (the preservation of the Empire against German aggression) and we would have been better prepared.

[Lewis]

No war, war doesnt solve anything.

A war is worth it if the others give us no choice but to be a part.

[Kardan]

I'm not arguing that war wouldn't come eventually - although there's strong suggestions that Hitler never had ambitions on Britain and her Empire, rather he wanted to create a Empire of his own in a world which had already more or less been taken up by other colonial powers.

But let's assume that war would eventually come between the British Empire and Third Reich: we were in no position on the eve of war to fight such a large battle - having signed the ridiculous Washington Naval Treaty (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington_Naval_Treaty) - which meant we were much weaker than we should have been in the late 1930s. Secondly, if we were going to eventually have to fight the Third Reich then declaring war over Poland was ridiculous for the reason that as I said earlier, Poland wasn't of our interest and it was fruitless anyway as Poland is located in Eastern Europe and has always been a pawn of either Russia, France or the Prussian states (later Germany).

What we should have done is re-armed and waited until (if ever) an attack was made against us. We then would have had a reasonable objective in fighting the war (the preservation of the Empire against German aggression) and we would have been better prepared.

No worries, I wasn't arguing that the initial reason was stupid, just that sooner or later it would have happened and that we should have got involved eventually :)

[Ardemax]

What we should have done is re-armed and waited until (if ever) an attack was made against us. We then would have had a reasonable objective in fighting the war (the preservation of the Empire against German aggression) and we would have been better prepared.

The Empire was pretty much down the drain (the writing was on the wall) before the war, was it not?

[-:Undertaker:-]

The Empire was pretty much down the drain (the writing was on the wall) before the war, was it not?

Not really. It's true that economically socialism was starting to grip - but that was true throughout the western world - and it's also true that whereas in the 1850s to around 1890 Britain was miles ahead of it's rivals, the inter-war period and after 1900 we had a rapidly rising America and a newly unified Germany as competitors ... along with a stronger Japan in the East. I wouldn't label it as 'decline' .. more as a fact of rivals appearing.

I think without the wars then we'd be talking about a world today where the US, British Empire and Germany would be more or less equal powers with no single power being the top dog - kind of like a world when it was the USA vs USSR as opposed to today where America is unchallenged as the world power.

But hey, the annoying thing is that we'll never know. :P

[oli]

What if it includes yours?

Sent from my HTC One X

Still doesn't matter on the grand scheme of things.

[peteyt]

I'm not arguing that war wouldn't come eventually - although there's strong suggestions that Hitler never had ambitions on Britain and her Empire, rather he wanted to create a Empire of his own in a world which had already more or less been taken up by other colonial powers.

But let's assume that war would eventually come between the British Empire and Third Reich: we were in no position on the eve of war to fight such a large battle - having signed the ridiculous Washington Naval Treaty (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington_Naval_Treaty) - which meant we were much weaker than we should have been in the late 1930s. Secondly, if we were going to eventually have to fight the Third Reich then declaring war over Poland was ridiculous for the reason that as I said earlier, Poland wasn't of our interest and it was fruitless anyway as Poland is located in Eastern Europe and has always been a pawn of either Russia, France or the Prussian states (later Germany).

What we should have done is re-armed and waited until (if ever) an attack was made against us. We then would have had a reasonable objective in fighting the war (the preservation of the Empire against German aggression) and we would have been better prepared.

The problem with waiting though is sometimes it can be too late. What's to say that if we waited instead of fighting, we wouldn't have been ready and then easily defeated.

While we might have went to war with Germany for the wrong reasons I do feel it was the right thing to do in the end and I do believe we made a difference.

[AgnesIO]

Still doesn't matter on the grand scheme of things.

I don't believe you have so little value for your own life. Realistically, if you were going to be killed I am sure you would want someone to come and save you.


First they came for the communists (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist),and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a communist.
Then they came for the socialists (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialist),
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a socialist.
Then they came for the trade unionists (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trade_unionist),
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a trade unionist.
Then they came for me,

and there was no one left to speak for me.

[-:Undertaker:-]

The problem with waiting though is sometimes it can be too late. What's to say that if we waited instead of fighting, we wouldn't have been ready and then easily defeated.

While we might have went to war with Germany for the wrong reasons I do feel it was the right thing to do in the end and I do believe we made a difference.

Well where is the evidence for that? the Royal Navy even at the time of when war was declared (and we were ill-prepared) was the biggest Navy in the world along with the United States, hence why the Germans and Axis powers never had control of the seas. Not only that, but Britain controlled the Pacific area (backed by the US as a counter-weight to Japan) along with being in ownership of the oil-producing areas of the Middle East (Iraq, Jordan, Arabia). Add on to that again, it's highly likely that (as happened anyway) the Third Reich and the Soviet Union would lock themselves in a long war against one another meaning that as they destroyed themselves, Britain would be rearming whilst Germany would be fighting for her survival.

Besides, I have always seen the Reich as a modern version of the Mongolian Empire - that it was only strong while it expanded fast and used up resources, economically it was a pillage Empire unlike the Spanish, British and French Empires which actually had a good economic outlook. So I think even while Hitler may have been successful at first, it would have eventually crumbled.

[Ardemax]

Not really. It's true that economically socialism was starting to grip - but that was true throughout the western world - and it's also true that whereas in the 1850s to around 1890 Britain was miles ahead of it's rivals, the inter-war period and after 1900 we had a rapidly rising America and a newly unified Germany as competitors ... along with a stronger Japan in the East. I wouldn't label it as 'decline' .. more as a fact of rivals appearing.

I think without the wars then we'd be talking about a world today where the US, British Empire and Germany would be more or less equal powers with no single power being the top dog - kind of like a world when it was the USA vs USSR as opposed to today where America is unchallenged as the world power.

But hey, the annoying thing is that we'll never know. :P

Hmm I'm not entirely sure. As the Dominions became bigger and more economically advanced I'm pretty sure they would've wanted independence sooner rather than later and would have preferred to rule over themselves (take Canada, Australia and South Africa for example).

I know a lot of politicians back then we very fussed about preserving the Empire and I can understand where they are coming from, but I'm not entirely sure it was feasible.

[Grig]

okay I'd go as far to say that WW2 wasn't in our national interest but it was a necessary war to take part in, the only problem for us was that we didn't join soon enough. who knows maybe we'd still be the british empire if we joined in earlier.

another war would be the cold war, even though it was publicized as usa vs russia it was pretty much all western countries vs russia I think it was all of NATO not sure though. well the cold war was stupid and impractical even though it led to amazing technological advancements it led to much tension and a relentless amount of fear for everyone globally, should have stayed out!

gulf war another war we were pulled into because of the usa and us having our noses shoved firmly up their arse was unnecessary and in my opinion was only to strengthen bonds with the oil rich saudi arabia. i mean it was bush.........................

"Operation Desert Fox" was another one which was stupid considering it was purely to cripple the already crippled iraq and led to much hate and tension between the western world and iraq and possibly one of the main factors of the "war on terror".

I disagree about the Cold War. It was Thatcher's cozy relationship with Gorbachev that got Reagan on board to negotiate. She played a large part at the back half of the Cold War.

Also Britain had a much higher spending in arms compared to its European neighbours and much less in welfare, despite people saying "oh it was the welfare state". Statistically, other European countries spent much more on welfare.

Sure, it wasn't publicized as much, like you say, but looking into it, Britain was definitely involved.