Its all about the demise of infantry in the field of combat. WW1 was so bad that we (the British) invented tanks to break the stalemate. It didn't really work, but by WW2 tanks were good enough to ensure that infantry were made redundant. Today what aircraft and artillery don't kill, tanks do, and infantry are just for mopping up and urban fighting.
i think the commanders from british/usa war were plain stupid, they were just giving away their army..the most numbered army would win, resulting in catastrophic casualties
i don't understand how that was acceptable
The thing that you have to remember about this time period is that it was very elitist, the rich Aristocrats were in charge, not because they were skilled generals but because they had come from a family of generals, especially in the case of Britain, also they had a high sense of 'honour' and 'duty' and were of course highly patriotic which lead them to do some rather stupid things
___________________
if i had a hammer...
Dec-28-2003 14:33
Z1D
Senior tranceaddict
Registered: Jan 2003
Location: Edmonton AB
Actually, until the lat 1800s, the casualties from such an organized type of war were a lot lower than you might think, typically running about 10-25%. When breach loading weapons guns with clips and better accuracy started showing up, this style of warfare became obsolete in a big hurry.
