It was the first contrived war to secure billions of profits for monopolist profiteers like morgan, carnegie, ford and the federal reserve. Wars like this do not just "happen" becasue of the death of one man, archducke ferdinand.
The "total war" means they 'totally set it up and profited from it obscenely". It was the largest war ever at the time, dwarfed by WW2 though.
2007-02-18 07:28:05
·
answer #1
·
answered by dragon3652001 2
·
1⤊
5⤋
Two reasons:
1. Total war across the globe, from Europe to Asia, Atlantic and Pacific.
2. The nations involved in the war had everything geared towards the war. The entire industry of countries were geared to building weapons or something for the war.
Yes its true that the Napolanic Wars could be considered the first war across the globe, #2 was missing, the first war to include that was actually the US Civil War in 1860s but that was not a global war.
2007-02-22 00:49:33
·
answer #2
·
answered by rz1971 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
I'd argue the Napoleonic Wars have that "honor." Clausewitz had said the general populace should hardly notice when a good general went to war. The new total war concept closely involved the entire population, with the entire economy altered to support the war effort and a substantial proportion of the male population available for conscription.
2007-02-18 09:07:16
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
WWI was the first major war that followed the Industrial Revolution. The armies that fought in WWI were often over one million men (Russia, France, Germany, and the US all had over one million soldiers each!). It was no longer a question of sending men off to fight - all of society had to participate to win. Think about the supplies and food necessary to keep one million people fighting in a war that lasted four years! Women had to fill in for the men that were off fighting and began to do jobs that were once considered "men's work".
The generals in charge of fighting this war realized the connection between the "home front" and the actual war. Civilians were targeted when possible (i.e. the Germans sent blimps to bomb Britian) because hurting the other side's civilian population (most of whom worked to supply the military in some way) was just as important as killing enemy soldiers.
War was no longer just army vs. army - it was society vs. society and anything was fair game, hence the concept of "total war". An estimated ten million civilians died in WWI, which was by far the highest number in history, but WWII would be even worse twenty years later.
2007-02-18 07:37:43
·
answer #4
·
answered by Matt H 2
·
5⤊
0⤋
i'd evaluate the Crimea through fact the 1st modern conflict - frequently for the impact of press coverage on the domicile international locations and the replaced view of the worry-unfastened soldier through fact of that coverage. yet - that's no longer between the thoughts given - so Civil conflict - on the initiating of the Civil conflict weaponry had replaced dramatically, however the expert infantrymen persevered to apply the strategies that they were taught, Napoleonic strategies. Overcoming the deficiencies interior the old strategies grow to be the 2d step in the direction of modern conflict. Quote from unknown source - "the difficulty with conflict is that the army is often experienced to combat the previous conflict, no longer the present one".
2016-10-15 23:02:52
·
answer #5
·
answered by ? 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Various grounds could be proposed, and they are cumulative.
The threat to whole nations of starvation by blockade, warfare not confined to the military:
The British navy on Germany as well as unrestricted submarine warfare by Germany.
The realignment of industries on an unprecented scale to support the war effort. (possibly, above all, for artillery shell production)
The degree of disruption of civilian life well away from the battlefield. (with women occupying unheard-of roles)
The numbers of troops and casualties, and the geographic spread, was probably less critical.
Enormous armies had been seen before, and the British had fought the French from India to the Caribbean to Canada.
2007-02-18 07:36:54
·
answer #6
·
answered by Pedestal 42 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
Actually the first time the term "total war" was used was by General Sherman during the Civil War. It was in regards to his order to burn and destroy everything in his path so that i could not be used later by the confederates.
2007-02-18 07:55:01
·
answer #7
·
answered by Coyote81 3
·
4⤊
1⤋
It was the first war with so many important powers involved. It spanned continents. It devastated across continents.
2007-02-18 08:47:01
·
answer #8
·
answered by Kristie 3
·
0⤊
2⤋
j
2014-12-05 15:53:42
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋