Not tonight Jasonephine :DL

http://www.battlefield-site.co.uk/traditions.htm

http://img102.imageshack.us/img102/7131/waterloo.jpg

World War II because it encompassed everything.

World War I because the best books have been written about that conflict and the lead-up to it (Dreadnought, Castles of Steel, Guns of August).

As far as I'm concerned, history started with the launch of HMS Dreadnought.

The ancient era, Rome especially. It has fascinated me for years now.

World War 2 is my main interest, all started on a holiday in Normandy

HunterICX

You left off my favorite, the Rennaissance. Early guns competing with bows. Polish Pancerni. Yarr.

WWI for no other war has as much impact on the world. Many of our current issues have their history in the First World War and the period between the wars.

Actually my favourite period of study is the period between WWI and WWII. It is oft overlooked or minimized in many history classes. A lot happened during that time.

Anyone remember the TV Series "Between the wars"? :yeah:

Platapus is absolutely correct, imo. It's a shame we didn't learn more from the political goings-on in that period. We continue to pay for the mistakes made then to this day. Other than aerial and naval combat, though, I don't find WW1 all that intriguing. Too much tragic waste of life in vain.

I didn't see "Between the Wars", but I'll see if I can't find it somewhere.

WW2 and ancient stuff, especially the Romans.

I voted cold war only because thats what I'm focussed on atm.

But overall, far and away, ancient warfare. Greeks, Macedonians, Hittites, Assyrians....

These bastards walked thousands of kilometres, set up camp, THEN engaged in hand to hand battle. If they won, they kept going, if they lost, they walked home again.. Tell me those men in skirts arent tough :O:

WWI-present.

I continue to wow my US history class with my incessant knowledge of warmaking technology

Medieval :yep:

Ancestory goes back to the Scottish Highlands.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...re2-Morges.jpg

I voted US Civil war, WW1 and 2 but I really don't have a favorite. In my library Xenophon shares a shelf with Rommel who sits next to Ambrose, Shaara, Jomini and Frederick the Great.

Pop quiz:DL

1) Who were the main compeitors for the design of the Tiger II's turret?

2) What was the main advantage of the T-34 over German tanks in the field of mobility (two possible answers)

3) What early 20th-century technology was used to provide wing airflow control on the Fokker E.III?

4) Name at least two instances in which the movie "Saving Private Ryan" was historically inaccurate in terms of battlefield technology.

5) What is "squeeze-bore" technology and what does it do? What are its' drawbacks?

6) Bonus question: Which battle was the most decisive in determining the outcome of the Second World War?

A) Midway
B) Kursk
C) Moscow
D) Iwo Jima

6 is actually debatable - but I would have to go with Moscow for 2 reasons.

Had Russia lost Moscow, it would have forced Stalin to capitulate, or at the least reduced the Russian front to a mere sideshow.

However, more importantly, the failure to take Moscow is why Hitler took over total control over the army, leading to a number of disasterous decisions that allowed final victory. It also pissed off alot of his military generals, which led to some of the attempts on his life, as well as numerous other problems for him.

While Kursk is strategically important, one could argue that Stalingrad was more devastating to German fortunes.

Iwo Jima - though famous, was a small piece of the puzzle in the pacific. Though important, it did not have nearly the strategic impact that other battles did.

Midway is the runner up here. While it did open the door to the events that followed, and turned the tide of the pacific war when one considers the surface conflict - I have argued that even had the surface fleet remained defensive, the submarine force would still have been able to restrict the supplies to Japan. A loss at midway would have lengthened the war considerably, and created more hardship for submariners, but it was not the Aircraft Carrier that won the war. They may have gotten all the glory, but that is just one more reason subs have always been called - the Silent Service.

1) Porche and Krupp

2) Wide tracks suitable for mushy ground

3) Beats me

4) "Das Reich" didn't enter the Normandy fighting until a month later and then they went into action against the Brits at Caan not against the Americans to the west.
Hitting the bottom of a mortar round on a hard surface does not turn it into a grenade.
Telephones didn't have coiled handset cords in the 1940's.
Jackson sniper rifle had a Unertl scope. Those ere only issued to the Marines in the pacific.
The bridge was an 82nd objective not the 101st's.
The "Tiger" tanks had what looked like T-34 road wheels.
There were no Tigers in the American sectors.

5) Dunno

6) Trick question. WW2 was way too large to have a single "most decisive" battle and there are several others which had more impact on their respective theaters than the ones listed. Saipan, Stalingrad, Overlord, El Alemain come to mind.