~Poisonous gas
~Most violent war yet known to man
~Almost killed more than the plauge
2007-10-07 13:51:40
·
answer #1
·
answered by Buffy 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Your question is a bit vague really. A complete disaster in what way? Militarily, politically, morally, techonologically, or environmentally?
Militarily it was really only a disaster because it completely shattered the romanticized respect the people had for the military. Their insistence on using outdated tactics in the face of new technology was simply shameful.
Politically it was a nightmare of entangled treaties and obligations. A relatively minor incident quickly escalated into the largest armed conflict the world had ever seen to that time.
Morally it was a disaster because it was the first time civilian populations had been deliberately targeted, and it was the first time chemical weapons were used in large scale combat.
Technologically, well here it was not really a disaster. Strictly speaking any technological advancement is good if you're looking at it strictly as a technology issue.
Environmentally, well, they're still finding shells and explosives from that war in the old battlefields. And I'm sure there was more effect from all that mustard gas then was really noticed at the time.
I hope this helps.
2007-10-07 14:42:12
·
answer #2
·
answered by rohak1212 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
1. New Technology
2. Antiquated Tactics
3. The combination of 1 and 2.
The period after the American Civil War saw huge andvances in the technology that would see action on the battlefield. Such things as Long range repeating rifles increased the firepower of the individual riflemen on the lines as well as added to the effective kill range. Machine guns, heavy artillery, poison gas, airplanes, and even tanks were all advances that were created before the outbreak of the way.
The problem was, that the commanders of the worlds armies had had little chance to test out this technology, and many of them had been career soldiers and were classically trained in the art of war that was created during the Napoleonic era. Massed frontal assaults, bayonet charges, and widespread field maneuvers that worked because of the weapons limitations that the armies had.
Example: The classic battle lines that we think of during the Civil War or the American revolution were created to fire a wall of bullets at the enemy because the individual weapons of each soldier were vastly inaccurate.
When the weapons evolved, the tactics did not. In the beginning, those frontal assaults and tight formations were still standard procedures, in the face of murderous new technology.
2007-10-07 14:04:03
·
answer #3
·
answered by Jason L 1
·
1⤊
0⤋
1) The use of untrained soldiers led to too many deaths: Soldiers were sent to the trenches without enough training in combat, survival strategies and the use and prevention of death from mustard gas. (This kind of trench warfare also spread disease quickly.)
2) It was the first war fought from the air: The introduction of airplanes and seaplanes in war led to a great amount of deaths due to bombing, lack of training, crashing and dogfighting.
3) Economics: The Europeans borrowed a great deal of money from the US banks to finance the war. These debts were never fully paid back after the war, the first start of an economic depression that led to The Great Depression.
I mentioned these three because these were lessons learned from this war and attempts to rectify all three of these problems were attempted in World War II.
2007-10-07 14:09:38
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
1) The European Nations were all jealous of each other, and their colonial aspirations. International diplomacy was largely centered around nations own self interests. For example, the 'entente cordiale' between France and Britain had little to do with friendship and co-operation, and lots to do with self-interest and superiority over the central European nations.
2) There were no really valid reasons for war, and there were no inspired diplomats in international politics to prevent it happening.
3) The two opposing factions were far too evenly matched in manpower and technology for the war to be quickly decided.
2007-10-07 14:59:04
·
answer #5
·
answered by Ynot 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
1. It was prolonged, and both sides waisted resources and time
2. On most of fronts, nothing was achieved except for loss of life. There was no strategy, lack of leadership, and no far sight on either side
3. They pushed as much head count as possible into war, without proper training, so people just died
2007-10-07 20:39:15
·
answer #6
·
answered by Urooj 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
The Treaty of Versailles demanded too many reparations from Germany. Hitler rose to power because of German resentment of these reparations.
2007-10-07 19:01:36
·
answer #7
·
answered by ? 3
·
0⤊
0⤋