Question:
The Great War of 1914, or World War 1, was the first large scale war. It's impact on human life was unbelievably large and up until then, it was unheard of. However, due to the sheer scale of the war, as well as the intensity of fighting, special tactics, and deadly weapons, World War 1 quickly became a largely destructive war.
Until the First World War, there was never a large war involving so many countries. The new scale of the war was responsible for the number of casualties. The armies, instead of being small to fight a few battles, were in much larger scales, sometimes even millions. France for example had an army of 550,000 men. For this reason, casualtie amounts were much larger. Germany and Russia, as a result of the war, lost 2 million men each. The estimated total casualties of the war is roughly 40 million men, 20 million dead and 20 million wounded. Because of the larger amounts of men fighting, more men were dying. Also, the war was truly a World War because of Americas involvement. It was no longer just a clash between the European Powers, or a third Balkan War, but it came to a much larger scale - a world war. The First World War was also much longer than previous wars or battles. Although predicted to end within a few months, World War 1 carried out for four year, and the armistace was signed November 11th 1918. Due to the amount of men fighting and the length of the war, World War 1 was a new level of warfare which was unimaginable and took many by surprise, therefore resulting in large amounts of casualties.
Over the four years in which World War 1 was occuring, many ferocious battles took place. Some lasted for several months at a time. One of the "bloodiest" battles was that of The Battle Of The Somme. On July 1st 1916 an estimated 58,000 British were killed. Other battles also followed in this trend: the Battle of Jutland on May 31st 1916, the Battle of Verdun on February 21st 1916, and the Battles of Ypres. These battles were among the bloodiest and some of the longest of the war. Verdun, for example, lasted from February into December. It was a key point in the war, and the amount of casualties because of it is extremely high. An estimated 714,000 men were lost in this battle alone. The tenacity of the battles and well as the harshness of them caused a great amount of destruction of human life in the First World War.
The battles of World War 1 would not have had the same effect if it wasn't for the tactics used by both sides. Extreme offensive attacks, as well as massive opening and frontal attacks, caused for the deaths of many men. Trench warfare was extremely common during the time and allowed for very heavy fighting on the front. Germany however, was the first to expand their infantry tactics and create deadlier positions. Often there would be offensive attacks in waves, the first wave going through and sweeping away everything they could, while the second wave followed behind and "cleaned up." One of the most successfull acounts of the 'infiltration tactics' was at The Ludenorff Offensive of March 1918, where Germany defeated Russia. Also, the use of the attrition tactic led to many more deaths than expected. Attrition by definition is,"the act of weakening or exhausting by constant harassment, abuse, or attack." This exact tactic was used during the battles of Verdun and the Somme as forementioned. At the battle of Verdun, Germany threw constant waves of men at the French fortresses, with the expectancy to defeat them easily and wear them out. However, in this particular case, the plan failed and the Germans were forced to give up. Another new tactic which allowed for increased amounts of casualties was that of bombing. This way, it was possible to attack without leaving the front and sweep across enemy lines and drop bombs. The casualties due to this tactic were extremely high. World War One's casualties were largely due to the tactics used.
Weaponry became one of the key factors in the destruction of human life in World War 1. Artillery was responsible for 70 percent of all casualties. Tanks and airplanes were also largely responsible. This was the first war in which the use of the machine gun came into play. Also, there was expirementation with the means of chemical warfare. Increased deadliness of weaponry caused for the loss of many lives. Napalm, machine guns, flame throwers, grenades, artillery, bombers, and improved rifles led to amazingly high amounts of casualties in the war. The effectiveness of weapons was much higher than before, and the loss of life due to this was optimum.
World War One was on a much larger scale than ever seen before. It caused larger amounts of destruction of human life than ever seen before then. This was due to the sheer scale, intensity of battles, tactics, and weaponry of the war. Up until then there had never been such a destructive war.
Friday, January 25, 2008
Tuesday, December 18, 2007
Causes & Consequences of the Balkan Wars
Question: What were the causes and consequences of the two Balkan Wars
FIRST BALKAN WAR:
The first Balkan War began to spark when the Balkan League was formed. The League contained the four Balkan Powers: Serbia, Bulgaria, Greece, and Montenegro. This alliance scared Turkey and the other Great Powers, because the Balkan Powers were opposed to them. This meant the threat of war. Turkey send a note on August 14th to the Balkan League telling them to, "act cautiously." The Balkan Powers used the Macedonian riots as a way to spark war, and began to mobilize their troops on September 30th 1912. However, they did not officially declare war until October 18th. Turkey, at this time was already conveniently weakened from war with Italy and did not stand a chance at defending themselves. The outcome of the First Balkan War was threatening to all of the Great Powers, especially that of Austria-Hungary whom was extremely opposed to Serbia's expansion to a coastline. Russia and France although did support Serbia. On December 17th a peace conference was held to "end" the war. As a result Turkey was asked to give up Adrianople and Crete, but refused to do so. This conference allowed for very little progress due to the fact that on February 3rd Turkey declared war once again, and was quickly defeated. A truce was signed on April 16th and the Bulgarians claimed Adrianople. The official Treaty of London was signed May 30th once the negotiations had come to an end. As an outcome Greece overtook Crete, southern Macedonia was given to Salonika, Albania became independant, and Bulgaria claimed Thrace, while Serbia won much of Macedonia in the central and northern regions.
SECOND BULKAN WAR:
The main cause of the Second Bulkan War was due to the dissatisfaction of the negotiations in the Treaty of London. Serbia was looking to expand to the Adriatic Sea and was not able to. They also felt that their share of Macedonia was not enough. Bulgaria however, quite opposed this view, and felt that Macedonia was to be left "to arbitration by the Tsar." On June 1st 1913 Serbia and Greece formed an alliance in attempts to win back what they thought was unfair treatment and had been denied to them. Bulgaria also had the same intentions. On June 29th the war began. Serbia and Greece declared war on Bulgaria due to an attack. Romania and Turkey joeined with Serbia as a way to "choke" Bulgaria. Because of the Treaty of Bucharest, signed August 10th, Bulgaria was forced to give up much of their claimed land. This success caused Serbia to become power hungry and invade Albania on claims that they had attacked Western Serbia. Austria-Hungary intervened however, and demanded that the Serbians end the invasion. The consequences of these wars enabled the Balkan powers to make prestigious and territorial gains. They cut into the plans of Austria-Hungary and Russia, whom had planned for the domination of the Balkan Powers. This meant that there was an uneasy ground for the Great Powers as well as the Balkan Powers, and this tension may have contributed to the outbreak of World War I in 1914.
FIRST BALKAN WAR:
The first Balkan War began to spark when the Balkan League was formed. The League contained the four Balkan Powers: Serbia, Bulgaria, Greece, and Montenegro. This alliance scared Turkey and the other Great Powers, because the Balkan Powers were opposed to them. This meant the threat of war. Turkey send a note on August 14th to the Balkan League telling them to, "act cautiously." The Balkan Powers used the Macedonian riots as a way to spark war, and began to mobilize their troops on September 30th 1912. However, they did not officially declare war until October 18th. Turkey, at this time was already conveniently weakened from war with Italy and did not stand a chance at defending themselves. The outcome of the First Balkan War was threatening to all of the Great Powers, especially that of Austria-Hungary whom was extremely opposed to Serbia's expansion to a coastline. Russia and France although did support Serbia. On December 17th a peace conference was held to "end" the war. As a result Turkey was asked to give up Adrianople and Crete, but refused to do so. This conference allowed for very little progress due to the fact that on February 3rd Turkey declared war once again, and was quickly defeated. A truce was signed on April 16th and the Bulgarians claimed Adrianople. The official Treaty of London was signed May 30th once the negotiations had come to an end. As an outcome Greece overtook Crete, southern Macedonia was given to Salonika, Albania became independant, and Bulgaria claimed Thrace, while Serbia won much of Macedonia in the central and northern regions.
SECOND BULKAN WAR:
The main cause of the Second Bulkan War was due to the dissatisfaction of the negotiations in the Treaty of London. Serbia was looking to expand to the Adriatic Sea and was not able to. They also felt that their share of Macedonia was not enough. Bulgaria however, quite opposed this view, and felt that Macedonia was to be left "to arbitration by the Tsar." On June 1st 1913 Serbia and Greece formed an alliance in attempts to win back what they thought was unfair treatment and had been denied to them. Bulgaria also had the same intentions. On June 29th the war began. Serbia and Greece declared war on Bulgaria due to an attack. Romania and Turkey joeined with Serbia as a way to "choke" Bulgaria. Because of the Treaty of Bucharest, signed August 10th, Bulgaria was forced to give up much of their claimed land. This success caused Serbia to become power hungry and invade Albania on claims that they had attacked Western Serbia. Austria-Hungary intervened however, and demanded that the Serbians end the invasion. The consequences of these wars enabled the Balkan powers to make prestigious and territorial gains. They cut into the plans of Austria-Hungary and Russia, whom had planned for the domination of the Balkan Powers. This meant that there was an uneasy ground for the Great Powers as well as the Balkan Powers, and this tension may have contributed to the outbreak of World War I in 1914.
Monday, November 12, 2007
Colonialism and European Military Planning
Question:
The colonial wars impacted the military thinking and planning/strategics of the European powers prior to World War 1. The biggest target of the powers during the time was that of Africa. Because of their rich resources, strategic locations, and lucrative trade routes abundant with prosperous materials, many parts of Africa were taken and colonized by The Europeans. Although countries such as Great Britain and Germany had rich economies, the greed for more land and more power caused them to experiment with the means of expansion. Asia and the Caribbean were also targets of the Europeans due to the large amount of territory which was potentially obtainable. The race for land and power caused wars and "military conflicts" between the competing countries and the indigenous peoples of the native land. The Europeans easily had an advantage over the colonies in which they were overcoming, including many advancements in both weaponry and tactics. Inventions such as rifled guns and artillery allowed the Europeans to easily manipulate the outcome of various situations. Although the Europeans were not well adapted to the land, they knew better than to go on suicidal rampages and tried to maintain a balance of both strong offensive and defensive forces. The overcoming of a nation was two-fold. First any given European nation would invade the chosen territory, and then they followed up with a securing of the territory and the proclaiming of it as their own. This of course, without any say from the native peoples. Upon learning that said tactics and weaponry were more proficient they were able to use them in the entering of World War 1. Helpful military inventions allowed many strategies to be altered in attempts to comply with the advanced weaponry. For instance, before these inventions, wars were fought anywhere between 10 and 30 feet away from each other. Guerrilla tactics came into play quite rapidly and allowed for the great metamorphosis of tactics. The advantage of having aerial views of your opponent changed the way that war was looked at from both sides. While it was said that the European nations had a large advantage, the opponents were also extremely helpless when a plane or artillery from a large distance fired projectiles in their direction. However, on some unique accounts of war, the European armies occasionally faced defeat in the hands of the native forces. This was due to arrogance of the European nations and the underestimating of the indigenous forces of Africa, as they did not treat the battles with the same sense of caution as in previous wars. As a whole, the Colonial wars of the Europeans greatly altered the outlook upon military thinking and planning due to various reasons including the advancement of weapons and the difference of opponent; thus in turn changing the way the European powers went about fighting in World War 1.
The colonial wars impacted the military thinking and planning/strategics of the European powers prior to World War 1. The biggest target of the powers during the time was that of Africa. Because of their rich resources, strategic locations, and lucrative trade routes abundant with prosperous materials, many parts of Africa were taken and colonized by The Europeans. Although countries such as Great Britain and Germany had rich economies, the greed for more land and more power caused them to experiment with the means of expansion. Asia and the Caribbean were also targets of the Europeans due to the large amount of territory which was potentially obtainable. The race for land and power caused wars and "military conflicts" between the competing countries and the indigenous peoples of the native land. The Europeans easily had an advantage over the colonies in which they were overcoming, including many advancements in both weaponry and tactics. Inventions such as rifled guns and artillery allowed the Europeans to easily manipulate the outcome of various situations. Although the Europeans were not well adapted to the land, they knew better than to go on suicidal rampages and tried to maintain a balance of both strong offensive and defensive forces. The overcoming of a nation was two-fold. First any given European nation would invade the chosen territory, and then they followed up with a securing of the territory and the proclaiming of it as their own. This of course, without any say from the native peoples. Upon learning that said tactics and weaponry were more proficient they were able to use them in the entering of World War 1. Helpful military inventions allowed many strategies to be altered in attempts to comply with the advanced weaponry. For instance, before these inventions, wars were fought anywhere between 10 and 30 feet away from each other. Guerrilla tactics came into play quite rapidly and allowed for the great metamorphosis of tactics. The advantage of having aerial views of your opponent changed the way that war was looked at from both sides. While it was said that the European nations had a large advantage, the opponents were also extremely helpless when a plane or artillery from a large distance fired projectiles in their direction. However, on some unique accounts of war, the European armies occasionally faced defeat in the hands of the native forces. This was due to arrogance of the European nations and the underestimating of the indigenous forces of Africa, as they did not treat the battles with the same sense of caution as in previous wars. As a whole, the Colonial wars of the Europeans greatly altered the outlook upon military thinking and planning due to various reasons including the advancement of weapons and the difference of opponent; thus in turn changing the way the European powers went about fighting in World War 1.
Tuesday, October 16, 2007
New Imperialism
Questions:
1. The European powers were greatly expanded due to their economic motives. They constantly found that neighboring countries and continents had very useful resources. In order to expand, it was necessary to take over these countries and take what they had. As Americans we called it ‘manifest destiny.’
2. The term “the scramble for Africa” meant that the European powers realized the value of Africa and went to take control of it and make use of it. Also, several claimed parts of it by making treaties with African chieftains. These however, were not really valid, seeing as parts were dually claimed and purchased by different European countries.
3. European imperial expansion should not be explained only in economic terms, or else the value of human nature and greed playing a part in it would be lost.
4. The major powers acquired new colonies between 1870 and 1890 to try and become more powerful than their rivalries. They grasped onto any country with raw materials and resources. This way they could expand their markets and economy.
5. “New Imperialism” was a nicer way to say that there was a major race for power and this meant taking over countries to use their resources.
6. The first theory states that the purpose for expansion was merely due to the race for power. The second however, states that the reason for the expansion was the overpopulation of these major powers.
7. After 1880 the “scramble for Africa” continued because it was “necessary” to civilize the Africans and conform them to a specific set of beliefs and customs in order to make the colonization complete.
1. The European powers were greatly expanded due to their economic motives. They constantly found that neighboring countries and continents had very useful resources. In order to expand, it was necessary to take over these countries and take what they had. As Americans we called it ‘manifest destiny.’
2. The term “the scramble for Africa” meant that the European powers realized the value of Africa and went to take control of it and make use of it. Also, several claimed parts of it by making treaties with African chieftains. These however, were not really valid, seeing as parts were dually claimed and purchased by different European countries.
3. European imperial expansion should not be explained only in economic terms, or else the value of human nature and greed playing a part in it would be lost.
4. The major powers acquired new colonies between 1870 and 1890 to try and become more powerful than their rivalries. They grasped onto any country with raw materials and resources. This way they could expand their markets and economy.
5. “New Imperialism” was a nicer way to say that there was a major race for power and this meant taking over countries to use their resources.
6. The first theory states that the purpose for expansion was merely due to the race for power. The second however, states that the reason for the expansion was the overpopulation of these major powers.
7. After 1880 the “scramble for Africa” continued because it was “necessary” to civilize the Africans and conform them to a specific set of beliefs and customs in order to make the colonization complete.
Friday, October 12, 2007
Nationalism in Nineteenth Century Germany
Questions:
1. Due to the rise in newspaper production, as well as the increase in literacy across Europe, military affairs were weighed in on severely by the public’s opinion. The idea of militarism caused all public issues to be put in to the hands of the government, which was intertwined with the peoples. Therefore, the public’s opinion had great influence on military affairs.
2. Industrialization during the time had a huge impact on the nature of warfare. It produced many technological developments in the areas of communication and arms which created a more organized and more affective army. It also caused places to become more, “urbanized” which led to the increase of literacy and more people reading about military affairs in the newspapers. This caused a fear of bad conduct in war to be published and scare or anger the general population. Therefore, the nature of warfare was more organized and more deadly, yet had a fear of being ashamed by the public.
1. Due to the rise in newspaper production, as well as the increase in literacy across Europe, military affairs were weighed in on severely by the public’s opinion. The idea of militarism caused all public issues to be put in to the hands of the government, which was intertwined with the peoples. Therefore, the public’s opinion had great influence on military affairs.
2. Industrialization during the time had a huge impact on the nature of warfare. It produced many technological developments in the areas of communication and arms which created a more organized and more affective army. It also caused places to become more, “urbanized” which led to the increase of literacy and more people reading about military affairs in the newspapers. This caused a fear of bad conduct in war to be published and scare or anger the general population. Therefore, the nature of warfare was more organized and more deadly, yet had a fear of being ashamed by the public.
Wednesday, October 10, 2007
Nationalism & Militarism
Questions:
1. Due to the rise in newspaper production, as well as the increase in literacy across Europe, military affairs were weighed in on severely by the public’s opinion. The idea of militarism caused all public issues to be put in to the hands of the government, which was intertwined with the peoples. Therefore, the public’s opinion had great influence on military affairs.
2. Industrialization during the time had a huge impact on the nature of warfare. It produced many technological developments in the areas of communication and arms which created a more organized and more affective army. It also caused places to become more, “urbanized” which led to the increase of literacy and more people reading about military affairs in the newspapers. This caused a fear of bad conduct in war to be published and scare or anger the general population. Therefore, the nature of warfare was more organized and more deadly, yet had a fear of being ashamed by the public.
1. Due to the rise in newspaper production, as well as the increase in literacy across Europe, military affairs were weighed in on severely by the public’s opinion. The idea of militarism caused all public issues to be put in to the hands of the government, which was intertwined with the peoples. Therefore, the public’s opinion had great influence on military affairs.
2. Industrialization during the time had a huge impact on the nature of warfare. It produced many technological developments in the areas of communication and arms which created a more organized and more affective army. It also caused places to become more, “urbanized” which led to the increase of literacy and more people reading about military affairs in the newspapers. This caused a fear of bad conduct in war to be published and scare or anger the general population. Therefore, the nature of warfare was more organized and more deadly, yet had a fear of being ashamed by the public.
Monday, October 1, 2007
War In The Industrial Age
*i attempted to sign on and when it didn't work repeatedly i wrote out the answers, i hope these are still acceptable
Questions:
1.Kings tried to return their armies to a more traditional role by making them "smaller professional armies, consisting of long-term troops and aristocratic officers." This meant that they were only allowing upper class members of society to fight. Therefore not everyone could serve to protect their country. As well as that if you were in the army you had to stay in it for a very long time.
2.Mass production along with improved technologies and "more effective communications" were major developments in military and non-military technology. The means of mass production meant that weapons could be made consistantly and at a more effective rate, while improved technologies meant that they were deadlier. As for communications, they aided in allowing troops to establish communication from the battlefield to the base.
3.The technologies which improved the rifle were:
*The percussion cap - a more efficent way of igniting the gun powder than the flint
*The minie bullet - a grooved bullet which had more accuracy and range due to it's build
*Breech-loading - a faster way of loading the gun by a break in the stock
4. The firepower of artillery was increased by the same methods of breech-loading which were used on the rifle. Because of this, artillery was made into rifled guns which were simplified versions of the regular artillery, but more effective.
5. Railroads aided in:
*moving troops from one place where needed to the next
*allowing constant supplies (weapons and ammunition)
*supplying more troops to battlefields
*less work for the troops instead of walking to their field and tiring out
*quick removal of the wounded and dead
6. The telegraph helped generals in battle by allowing instant sending of urgent messages to base. However, if one was to want to communicate with another set of troops, the use of a messanger or another way of communcation was necessary.
Questions:
1.Kings tried to return their armies to a more traditional role by making them "smaller professional armies, consisting of long-term troops and aristocratic officers." This meant that they were only allowing upper class members of society to fight. Therefore not everyone could serve to protect their country. As well as that if you were in the army you had to stay in it for a very long time.
2.Mass production along with improved technologies and "more effective communications" were major developments in military and non-military technology. The means of mass production meant that weapons could be made consistantly and at a more effective rate, while improved technologies meant that they were deadlier. As for communications, they aided in allowing troops to establish communication from the battlefield to the base.
3.The technologies which improved the rifle were:
*The percussion cap - a more efficent way of igniting the gun powder than the flint
*The minie bullet - a grooved bullet which had more accuracy and range due to it's build
*Breech-loading - a faster way of loading the gun by a break in the stock
4. The firepower of artillery was increased by the same methods of breech-loading which were used on the rifle. Because of this, artillery was made into rifled guns which were simplified versions of the regular artillery, but more effective.
5. Railroads aided in:
*moving troops from one place where needed to the next
*allowing constant supplies (weapons and ammunition)
*supplying more troops to battlefields
*less work for the troops instead of walking to their field and tiring out
*quick removal of the wounded and dead
6. The telegraph helped generals in battle by allowing instant sending of urgent messages to base. However, if one was to want to communicate with another set of troops, the use of a messanger or another way of communcation was necessary.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)