2006-10-04 13:14:07 · 4 answers · asked by lsupergeorgel 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
There are whole books on the subject. But the short version is:
1) No peace talks
2) both sides were in stalemate on the Western front. In the East, Russia had political issues.
3) Other then Jutland, the Navies stayed in port mostly.
4) Both sides had support from neutral nations.
5) Bad leadership on both sides & tactics not up to speed with the technolgy.
6) no body wants to be a looser.....
2006-10-04 14:26:06 · answer #1 · answered by lana_sands 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The military leaders were reluctant to accept that the infantry is NOT the queen of the battlefield in the face of artillery & machineguns. Even ehrn they intoduced tanks, they were used as infantry support & not as independent units.
2006-10-06 03:49:46 · answer #2 · answered by Kevin F 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
the military tactics that they used at the start of the war ran into at stall mate and first they had to adopt new tactics and material ( the tank ) to break the stall mate of the artillery , the barb wire and the machine gun.
2006-10-05 07:09:11 · answer #3 · answered by general De Witte 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I guess because " everyone else was doing it. "
2006-10-04 13:19:53 · answer #4 · answered by vanamont7 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋