Attrition warfare

The guerrilla warfare along the Kansas-Missouri border has generally been considered an outlier of the American Civil War. While interesting to read about, its impact on the war and on Union policies were not always important to historians. Early in the study of this conflict historians chose to focus on the leaders and actions of the guerrillas. More recently, scholars have endeavored to understand how guerrilla war in the Civil War affected the society in which it took place. This shift in historiographical

The warfare mentality went from a war of mobility, to a war of attrition and that was due to the establishment of trench warfare throughout the battlefield. Trench warfare was no doubt a horrifying and awful type of warfare that caused countless non-battle deaths, yet it was necessary at the time. Without trench warfare, the war would have been a short but extremely bloody war because there was no way to combat the ferocity of the new weapons used in the war and there was no way to advance on the

miles of trench structures set all over Europe. Both Allied and Axis forces were weary of fighting this war of attrition and were desperate to try new and diverse types of warfare to break these lines. As explained by Citino, “After much trial and error, the German army developed a new method of fighting. Stormtrooper (Stosstupp) or infiltration tactics was the solution to the trench warfare stalemate. Infantry could once more cross “no man’s land” and come to grips with the enemy” (16). Consequently

The Battle of the Somme epitomizes the harsh realities of trench warfare for the Allies and represents the negligent battle planning and technological advancements that are associated with the stalemate of World War One. Trench warfare was common across the Western Front, with similar strategies being employed by both opposing sides. Sir Douglas Haig, one of the British coordinators for the Somme offensive is blamed with an offensive strategy destined for failure. The British offensive, an utter

firing gun caused for defensive positions to be much harder to take. As a few machine guns could easy decimate entire battalions of soldiers on plain lands. This reality, in addition to other heavy artillery rounds shaped what was known as trench warfare.

for this was because most high ranking officers only knew old tactics. One of the biggest strategies that most are familiar with is the use of trench warfare. The many problems both sides faced when using trenches was how vulnerable soldiers were inside them. They were prone to constant chemical attacks, artillery barrages, and tanks. Trench warfare was not a pretty fight but it was one of the most used tactics throughout the war. An offensive at Somme was a prime example of the use and tactical advantage

asymmetric warfare is an inherently relational concept. It refers to a relative dissimilarity between opponents’ in battle, derived from a difference in relational strength amid warring sides. This asymmetry has tended to be in terms of status and organization; means and resources, goals and objectives; and strategies and tactics. The relationship between the belligerents in today’s conflicts varies in many tactical, strategic and operational levels, which has come to be perceived as changing warfare. This

National security requirements exercised the most significant influence on the development of airpower in Europe and the United States before the Second World War (WWII), because nations on both sides of the Ocean had to cope with the multifaceted disastrous results of World War I (WWI) and airpower seemed to be the answer for future wars. Primarily, understanding the context and consequences of WWI is vital to apprehend airpower theorist like Douhet, Mitchell and Trenchard and their revolutionary

Question: Analyze the rise of asymmetric warfare. Provide illustrations and assess how it has reshaped behaviors and outcomes. The “asymmetry” in asymmetric warfare is an inherently relational concept. It refers to an irregular conflict that is distinct by the relative dissimilarity between opponents’ in battle. The asymmetry is derived from the character of warfare and dictated by the difference in relational power amid warring sides. This asymmetry has tended to be in terms of status and organization;

INTRODUCTION The earliest recorded example of trench warfare occurred during the appropriately named Battle of the Trench, which took place in the year 627 A.D. Muhammad had ordered his Muslim followers to defend the region known as Medina, and in response, a man named Salman the Persian introduced the tactic of digging defensive trenches around the soldier’s positions as a means of protection and surprise (The Islam Project). The strategy earned the Muslims a decisive victory and has been implemented