[Cozumeleno]

I use 1939 because that is the most generally accepted date for the beginning of World War II. Really, you could list all sorts of conflicts that appeared before then. But 1939 is hardly my own random date and, whether the best theoretical date or not, it's the date that is most accepted universally as 'the beginning' of World War II.

Originally Posted by rats60

Why not use 1931 when Japan invaded Manchuria? Why not use 1935 when Italy invaded Ethiopia and Germany invaded the British and French controlled Saar Valley? Why not choose 1937 when Japan invaded China? Why do you use the date of 1939 when England declared war on Germany instead of the others? You say that was because war was going on, but it was going on those other dates too.

We use World War 2 as a defining event because it is the only time the world was at war. At its peak, there were shooting wars in Europe, Asia, Africa and Oceania. Australia and North America were attacked by the Axis. South American was the only region not under direct attack, although there was fighting with uboats in the Caribbean and South Atlantic. Many Latin American countries declared war on the Axis and Brazil fought along side the Allies.

The 1941 date is the only one that makes sense to me. In 1939 it was a European war much like WW1, Germany vs. England. The "World War" broke out in 1941 with 2 events. Germany breaking their non aggression pact with
Russia bringing them into the war. Japan deciding to go to war with USA, England and the Netherlands and attacking Pearl Harbor. These two events brought the other 3 major military forces into the war, Russia, Japan and USA and caused most countries in the world to align themselves with one side or the other. I choose the date when the war started in full for the world and not a European date or date of another regional conflict.