this post was submitted on 14 Jun 2025
1182 points (97.6% liked)
memes
15587 readers
2651 users here now
Community rules
1. Be civil
No trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour
2. No politics
This is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world
3. No recent reposts
Check for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month
4. No bots
No bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins
5. No Spam/Ads
No advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.
A collection of some classic Lemmy memes for your enjoyment
Sister communities
- !tenforward@lemmy.world : Star Trek memes, chat and shitposts
- !lemmyshitpost@lemmy.world : Lemmy Shitposts, anything and everything goes.
- !linuxmemes@lemmy.world : Linux themed memes
- !comicstrips@lemmy.world : for those who love comic stories.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
This is a very novel take of historical revisionism, first time I've encountered it.
Do you have any sources other than yourself that support your claim that ww1 was started by Germany attacking Belgium?
That's an article about a military campaign in a war that was already on going. The article even has a section called "outbreak of the war", in which the actual outbreak of the war is explained (which was not Germany invading Belgium). The article does not in any way support your claim that Germany started world war 1 by invading Belgium.
Why are you linking articles and then misrepresenting what is in those articles?
Bravo, another vague link. Can you explain how what you link to supports your claim?
1 Wikipedia is a garbage source.
2 Russia/Ukraine has nothing to do with it.
The wiki article is actually very good. The historical revisionist is just claiming that it says things which it definitely does not.
He is indeed a revisionist or more probably ignorant and stupid from seeing his other comments.
In this case the wiki article looks OK but I stand by my claim about Wikipedia.
It's useful to look up stuff about flowers, geography, mathematics and other stuff.
But if the subject has the slightest political relevance it can't be trusted.
You are OC not right, especially since you're putting words into my mouth I didn't say.
Clearly mentioning facts that show you are wrong on WW1 Germany is not 'defending them'.
"Russia’s invasion doesn’t have an historical conect they’re inherently evil "
Again didn't say anything like that, only that it has nothing to do with WW1
hope you crash