The Nineteen Hundred Years

In the history of war there are many different aspects and some similarities. The Great War introduced the “automatic” gun and the idea of trench warfare. The Great War had more casualties by artillery and it was said “No flesh or a bone could live above ground in the battlefield”. Everything was fought across “No man’s Land”. Many advancements led to soldiers hiding behind a wall of dirt in the ground which really changed up the game. Fighting this way seemed more dangerous due to the automatic guns and it was more effective than the U.S. Civil War where everything was fought face to face only a few yards away.

The concept of war as a static and unchanging occurrence is an outdated and dangerous miscalculation. More accurately, war is a fluidic, evolving and shifting phenomenon constantly reinventing itself, rendering stagnant, inflexible principles potentially disastrous. Consequently, as students of war and future players in this transforming theatre, the study of eras of significant development is an extremely relevant pursuit. Recognizing the need for adaptation and the creation of doctrine is now a prerequisite for any effective modern commander. War is unpredictable in nature and particularly so in current theatres of operation, in which change is rapid

War has always been an unfortunate part of our society and civilization. War will sadly and undoubtedly be with us as long as we exist. However, the portrayal of war for many centuries gave a sense of patriotism and romanticism. Then the invention of the camera changed how humanity perceived war in the late to mid 19th century. And all of a sudden, images of war became of shear violence and destruction. The violence in these images would play a significant part in the social and political standpoints of war in our nation.

Wars are often glorified in tone to give praise and respect for those on the battlefields. There is an overall understanding that there are sacrifices needed in order to accomplish a larger goal. Excluded from this understanding is the realization that the effects of war

During the Middle Ages, or also known as the Medieval Ages, change was a major part of that period. Europe was watching war become much different. In the older times, a few thousands of troops were considered a large army. Nowadays, nobody has ever seen such size of an army with such variety in weapons including guns, munitions, and artillery that were all developed during that period. Besides, it was obvious that the face of warfare was changing by the end of the fifteenth century. Two of the most significant developments were the maintaining of a fair amount of troops on a permanent basis at the ready, and the rising need of gunpowder weapons and munitions. In essence The Middle

The beginning of the twentieth century brought with it relative peace and growth of economies throughout the world. New technological developments such as airplanes, radio, cinema, and automobiles were created during this time frame. Europe’s powerful countries consolidated in their colonial conquests from earlier decades that balanced their alliances. However, after only a few decades into the twentieth century multiple tensions between the great powers surfaced. These tensions caused the great powers to separate into different alliances and eventually lead to the Great War.

The conflict of war and its effects have been debated throughout history. Some argue that there are other peaceful alternatives besides war that would lead to a better outcome, but in reality this is not the case. War is a natural part of human interactions, and even though it brings death and destruction, war will not cease to exist. Wars are the human way of getting one group to look superior than the other. The idea of a passive approach is ideal, but it is almost nearly impossible and may not always lead to the same outcome as if a war had taken place.

7. “The essential act of war is destruction, not necessarily of human lives, but of the products of human labour. War is a way of shattering to pieces, or pouring into sphere, or sinking in the depths of the sea, materials which might otherwise…make the masses to comfortable.”

Some say that war never changes. That in the end, it is always the same, a time where conflict took the better of humanity. They take a look at the big picture, but never take the time to look at the pieces that compose it. War is a constantly evolving puzzle, where new pieces are constantly being added, making the puzzle more complicated every time. With every new era comes new tools. In the American Civil War, a country divided against itself will see warfare like never before, from repeating rifles, different type cannons and ammunition, submarines, grenades, and many more. (Weaver)

Set-up - Warfare is constantly changing, for the tools of war are always evolving, as do the societies that wage war. Between 1400 and 1918, western warfare went through four periods that saw such profound change that it can fairly be said that a "military revolution" occurred. According to historians MacGregor Knox and Williamson Murray, military revolutions "fundamentally change the framework of war" and "recast society and the state as well as military organizations." While all of the military revolutions studied in H100 were important in the evolution of warfare, one clearly stimulated greater change than the others.

There are no universal theories to explain the true nature and character of war, and any war theories are not a fact or absolute truth. All strategic principles are dynamic and contextual, so “every age had its own kind of war, its own limiting conditions, and its own peculiar preconceptions.” The battlefield environment of the 21st century will be the volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous, and nature of war will be completely different because of the Revolution in Military Affairs. Highly advance communication and information technologies, a dramatic increase in computing capabilities, developed of precision munitions, dominant air and space power ‘war could be waged by the projection of

War has been going on just about as long as people have been alive. Whether it is just some cavemen fighting over a fire, or multiple countries going to war for justice, there has always been some scale of war. I am going to be analyzing way through functionalist, conflict, and symbolic interactionist perspectives.

War is controversial, unfortunate, and certainly misunderstood; it is a transforming agent, a catalyst for change. Nonetheless, many people focus on war's negative consequences, while positive effects are downplayed. War is a necessary evil in the sense that it stabilizes population, encourages technological advances, and has a very high economic value. Without war, the overpopulation of the human race is inevitable. It is this reason that war is a useful tool by not only Mother Nature, but also humans themselves to institute population control.

The comprehension of the term ‘total war’ has had great significance towards the understanding as to how wars are fought, affect society and differ from other conflicts. The main issue that arises is conclusively defining total war and is continually differing between both historians and military combatants alike. Roger Chickering defines states “total war is distinguished by its intensity and extent. Theatres of operation span the globe; the scale of the battle is practically limitless” all the while adding “total war requires the mobilisation not only of armed forced but also of whole populations” This definition, while not quintessential is a good starting point for a definition due to its broadness and acceptance of the idea of the incapability to fully mobilise a society’s entire resource. David A. Bell states that it is often defined as ‘a war involving the complete mobilization of a society’s resources to achieve the absolute destruction of an enemy, with all distinction erased between combatants and non-combatants’ . However, he notes the limitations of such an idea including the inability for societies to meet such criterion, in particular, the ability for a society to completely utilise its resources towards the war effort. Ultimately, Jeremey black, while not giving a conclusive definition for the term, total war, does acknowledge different definitions by various individuals distilling many of their arguments and consequently outlining main characteristics of

The first half of the 19th century was a time of sweeping changes. With transportation, and factories increasing, North America was in for a major upgrade. While all of those things are going on, the two regions that made up the growing nation was the North and South. These two sides were very different in their approach of lifestyle which would soon lead to conflicts. Two issues stood out more than others as the North and South headed towards civil war. One reason increase of tariffs and taxes the Congress placed on the south to ship goods to other countries. The other was the idea of keeping slavery in the country. The tariffs placed economic inequality between the northern states and the southern states.