Because WWI was a war of inches, and yards. That is also where the first term of "trench foot" came from, and the first use of Gas.
2007-02-20 05:09:31
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Trench warfare was 90% of WWI. Both sides moved very little for most of the war. The trench was the only way to hold ground. Since they were fighting primarily in an open field they needed to get out of the way of incoming fire. So they dug trenches. Both sides utilized snipers and machine guns to pick off men and fend off attacks respectively. But the main problem with trench warfare was the living conditions. Men at the front didnt leave their spots. They went to the bathroom in the trench, ate, and slept in the trench. The tank was invented in WW1 to get at trenched positions of the enemy.
The trench warfare of WW1 was a giant stalemate. Both sides held ground and neither could get to the other side without sufferring massive losses. Disease, Poison Gas bombs, and artillery took heavy tolls on boths sides of the fight. Trench warfare was absolutely miserable conditions to fight in.
2007-02-20 05:13:31
·
answer #2
·
answered by fenderjonesy 2
·
2⤊
0⤋
Trench warfare is a form of war in which both opposing armies have static lines of defense. Trench warfare arose when there was a revolution in firepower without similar advances in mobility and communications. Periods of trench warfare occurred during the American Civil War (1861–65) and the Russo-Japanese War of 1904–05, and reached peak brutality and bloodshed on the Western Front in the First World War.
Background
Fortification is nearly as old as warfare itself; however, because of the relatively small size of the armies and the lack of range of the weapons, it was traditionally not possible to defend more than a short defensive line or an isolated strongpoint. The very long fortifications of the ancient world, such as the Great Wall of China or Hadrian's Wall, were exceptions to the general rule and were in any case not designed to completely prevent enemy crossing the border, but to act as a deterrent to casual border infringement, as well as to act as a border control.
Although both the art of fortification and the art of weaponry advanced a great deal in the second half of the second millennium, the advent of the longbow, the muzzle-loading musket, and even of artillery did not substantially change the traditional rule that a fortification required a large body of troops to defend it. Small numbers of troops simply could not maintain a volume of fire sufficient to repel a determined attack.
[edit] Siege warfare
Most of the techniques used in trench warfare had existed for years in siege warfare. It was the implementation of these techniques between two armies in the field that was new.
Julius Caesar in his Gallic Wars describes how at the Battle of Alesia the Roman legions created two huge fortified walls around the city. The inner circumvallation, 10 miles, held in Vercingetorix's forces, while the contravallation kept relief from reaching them. The Romans held the ground in between the two walls. The besieged Gauls, facing starvation, eventually surrendered with their relief force standing by helpless. Thucydides describes a similar, but unsuccessful, siege of Syracuse by the Athenians during the Peloponnesian War.
Once siege engines were developed the techniques involved in assaulting a town or a fortress became well known and ritualised—the siège en forme. The attacking army would surround a town. Then the town would be asked to surrender. If they did not comply the besieging army would invest (surround) the town with temporary fortifications to stop sallies from the stronghold or relief getting in. The attackers would then build a length of trenches parallel to the defences and just out of range of the defending artillery. They would then dig a trench towards the town in a zigzag pattern so that it could not be enfiladed by defending fire, it also created a good vantage point from which to survey the enemy. Once within artillery range another parallel trench would be dug with gun emplacements. If necessary using the first artillery fire for cover, this process would be repeated until guns were close enough to be laid accurately to make a breach in the fortifications. In order that the "Forlorn Hope" and their support troops could get close enough to exploit the breach, more zigzag trenches could be dug even closer to the walls with more parallel trenches to protect and conceal the attacking troops. After each step in the process the besiegers would ask the besieged to surrender. If the first wave stormed the breach successfully, the defenders could expect no mercy. It was customary, from antiquity through the Middle Ages, for successful besiegers to massacre the inhabitants of any city that resisted a siege. Some conquerors, notably Tamerlane, liked to build huge mounds of skulls as monuments to their prowess.
just look at this site.....
2007-02-20 05:12:28
·
answer #3
·
answered by b c 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
Men in trenches were hidden from small arms fire, and had some protection from artillery. A force hidden in the ground had an advantage over a force above ground in the open. That is why so many men were killed when they "went over the top" - that is they left the protection that their tranches gave them and attacked their enemies over open ground. Trenches were a military advantage but men in trenches could only win a battle if they were attacked and were able to kill sufficient of their enemies now in the open to beat the attack off. To win a meaningful battle under these circumstances entrenched troops would themselves have to attack as a numerically reduced enemy retreated after a repulse. Hope this helps.
2007-02-20 05:12:11
·
answer #4
·
answered by Tony B 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
conflict interior the Trenches • conflict descends into trench conflict—armies struggling with from trenches • Battles bring about many deaths, small land beneficial properties • existence in trenches is depressing, confusing, unsanitary • New weapons in basic terms bring about greater deaths • huge losses for the two facets at 1916 battles of Verdun and Somme gadget weapons have been first used interior the Civil conflict.
2016-10-16 02:39:41
·
answer #5
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
basically because if they did not fight from trenches and have a place to take shelter in, everyone involved would have died.. at that time, the development of newer, more deadly, weapons was progressing much more rapidly than the development of protective equipment or defense systems
2007-02-20 05:12:41
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
There's too much to explain so try this site, It'll give you all the information on WWI and trench warfare.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trench_warfare
2007-02-20 06:28:52
·
answer #7
·
answered by julie_ramrattan2003 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
"there are no Atheists in foxholes"
2007-02-20 05:12:55
·
answer #8
·
answered by sirtitan45 4
·
0⤊
1⤋