Talk:List of theaters and campaigns of World War II

message: Excuse me while I catch my breath, but where is it stated as correct that Norway is part of the Baltic states??? I realize that in some extremely wide geographical definitions of the Baltic region (even here in Wikipedia, alas) Norway is listed, but still it gives a close-to (if not totally) erroneous picture of the area. When referring to the Baltic states, however, one always means the former Soviet republics (and as of last midnight, brand new EU members) of Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania, located along the eastern Baltic sea coast between Russia and Poland...
I therefore strongly suggest that, in this article's list and the corresponding 'listbox', Operation Weserübung is assigned to a theatre of war called Scandinavia (or less good, Nordic region). Anything else would be totally misleading, no matter what some sources might state. --Wernher 22:32, 30 Apr 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: You appear to be quite right.  The correction is made and I'll make it on the msgbox that's meant to replace this page as well.  Oberiko 22:57, 30 Apr 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, that was lightning quick! Just one more nitpicking maneuver: the usage is more like Invasion of Scandinavia, i.e. without the the article in it. For the listbox, just the word Scandinavia is best for denoting the Scandinavian theatre. BTW, thanks for the work on the campaign and theatre classification; it makes Wikipedia much more navigable.  I'm thinking of establishing some similar stuff for some other Wikipedia areas I care about. --Wernher 01:06, 1 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Geographic confusion

message: Why is the Spanish Civil War considered contemporaneous? DJ Clayworth 19:04, 5 Jul 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spanish Civil War 

message: I think that it is useful to put the initial phases of the European Theatre under
Blitzkrieg because they were German initiated and with the exception of the Battle of
Britain German victories.
* Blitzkrieg
** Battle of Poland (Fall Weiss)
** Phony War
** Invasion of Denmark and Norway (Operation Weserübung)
** Battle of France (Fall Gelb)
** Battle of Britain (Operation Sealion Unternehmen Seelöwe )
** Balkans Campaign (Operation Marita)
I would not include Eastern Front because although Operation Barbarossa started as a Blitzkrieg it rapidaly became a war of attrition. Philip Baird Shearer 22:58, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I would disagree with them all being listed under Blitzkrieg, which is a method of waging war, not really a campaign or theatre in and of itself.  IMO, all the campaigns listed above should be recorded seperately and indepedantly of each other. Oberiko 01:30, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Blitzkrieg is, indeed, neither a campaign nor a theater. john k (talk) 22:46, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Blitzkrieg 

message: The North West Europe Campaign if it refers to anything was the British Canadian push of 44-45. But the Americans fought on a wide front not a narrow one. For example those troops who landed on French med coast (US Seventh Army) in operation Operation Dragoon fought on the Western Front not the "North West European Front". Also the US front stretched from Belgium to Switzerland so if WWI had a Western Front so did WWII. Philip Baird Shearer 20:06, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Western Front

message: Once the Western allies came into the war they were allied with the nationalists under Chiang Kai-shek (who declared war on Japan after Pearl Harbour,) the war was not a concurrent war but part of the Allied Pacific Asian War against Japan. Indeed several Nationalist Divisions fought under the US General Stilwell in Burma alongside British, Indian, and US units. As the Sino-Japanese war started before to be consistent it could be considered as also being a Pre-WW2 Philip Baird Shearer 20:21, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Sino-Sino-Japanese War

message: I think this should be included here, although it was very small border "war" between Japan and Soviet Union, it had it's merits inhibiting Japan to attack Soviet Union 1941 and as it was contemporary with final negotiations for Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact and the start of Polish campaign (Fall Weiss). --Whiskey 22:24, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure if it's considered concurrent or not, since it occurs before the Polish September Campaign.  Perhaps we need some kind of "related war" category, where we could also include the Spanish Civil War. Oberiko 02:27, 4 Dec 2004
Included as Pre-WW2 Soviet-Japanese Border War (1939). It also should be mentioned because it was those troops, who with the combat experiance against the Japanese, which lead the winter counter attack in December 1941 outside Moscow. One of the most important engagements of World War II. 
It should not be included as contemporary because it was all over bar the shouting by the time WWII started and to do so is confusing. Philip Baird Shearer 11:16, 4 Dec 2004 (UTC)

text: It is hard to say. Zhukov's offiencive was on the way at he time negotiations for Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact were in critical phase, and even with Sorge Stalin has no way to know if Japanese were escalating the conflict. Only after the start of Polish campaign did they announce their willingness to ceasefire. So, in the worst case, Soviet Union would have faced two-front war already 1939. I'd still say contemporary, but it is only my opinion. --Whiskey 20:05, 4 Dec 2004 (UTC)

text: The other problem is that it invovles the Japanese, and the starting date of the Asian Theatre of World War II is a bit sketchy.  Probably safest just to leave it as pre-WWII though, since Poland is usually accepted as the beginning. Oberiko 23:25, 4 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Nomonhan Incident]]