Why World War I was such a Bloodbath

[Ken S.]

You tell me... But first of all, I'd still like to know why only 10% chose to retain French citizenship and how many of the ethnic Germans were actually clamouring to return to France?

[Troyfan]

Way, way back German people populated all the area east of the Meuse. Even today it is striking how many places particularly in Alsace have German-sounding names. Wissembourg, Bitche, Hagenau, Strasbourg, and many more.

The German/French mutual hatred is truly ancient, stemming at least from Charlemagne's days. Maybe those nationalities' joy in killing each other is enough to explain WWI's slaughter.

[Mikestone8]

Originally Posted by Troyfan

Way, way back German people populated all the area east of the Meuse. Even today it is striking how many places particularly in Alsace have German-sounding names. Wissembourg, Bitche, Hagenau, Strasbourg, and many more.

The German/French mutual hatred is truly ancient, stemming at least from Charlemagne's days. Maybe those nationalities' joy in killing each other is enough to explain WWI's slaughter.

Can't see much evidence of it. Medieval Germans spent far more time warring in Italy (and on their eastern border) than in France, while crusading in the Holy Land and elsewhere seems to have been the main French preoccupation, when they weren't at war with the Kings of England.

[Troyfan]

Germans participated in the 2nd, 3rd and 4th crusades. Their wars in Italy were mainly over the role of the pope vs. the Holy Roman Emperor.

In the 200 years before WWI, France had invaded German states around 30 times. Before that, the 30 Years War, mainly between the Bourbons and Hapsburgs, largely played out in Germany and killed half the population. True, the Crusades gave both peoples a respite before that. But only after Charlemagne had converted the Germans (Saxons) to Christianity and killed their pagan priests.

Germans did fight with the Slavs and Swedes, even the Russians. It goes with the territory, being in the middle of Europe and being divided into hundreds of small principalities. If there's a fight, you're going to be in its way or in it.

In 1914 the Germans had still not forgotten Napoleon and France had not forgotten Sedan. Both had good reasons to hate and fear the other. It almost makes me wonder, given Euro and European developments, how long the entente of the last 60 years will last.

[brightdoglover]

I suspect one reason WW1 gets short shrift in the media is because there's relatively little video or visuals stuff to show on TV. Most of the important info is words, spoken or written, not visual, so that dictates what gets covered.

[mwruckman]

Originally Posted by banjomike

You're right about the weaponry, but you missed the greatest technological killer of all.

Barbed wire was the deadliest weapon of WWI. Barbed wire had never been used before in such a degree, and the wire slowed both sides of a fight down and wire, used with trenches, restricted both the size and the mobility of the battlefield. Barbed wire entangled everyone and made everyone more vulnerable when they were out of the trenches.

Massed charges had always killed lots of men, but they worked as long as the officers in front were able to keep their troops moving forward rapidly and steadily. Closing with the enemy as fast as possible allowed a frontal charge to succeed. The past reasons they succeeded was due to how fast the force moved, not how fast the guns were opposing them.

Frontal charges would work only if the officers leading the charge from the front survived. If the officers in the lead were all killed during the charge, a unit lost all it's command structure. Enlisted officers seldom knew the full plans of the high command; only the commissioned officers knew the plans.

The officers died in higher percentages than the men they led. Officers traditionally not only led their troops from the front of the rank, they were ofter far in front of their men. Barbed wire slowed the officers down more than the troops that followed because the officers encountered the wire first. Once the officer were all dead, confusion would set in within the ranks.
So a charge slowed down, or failed to turn when it was supposed to, or any number of other things, and that left them more vulnerable to the guns of the other side.

Gas was used as a way to kill more effectively in the trenches than artillery. The tank was invented as a way late in the war to plow through acres of barbed wire, clearing a path that allowed for more rapid movement. Neither decided the outcome. The defensive positions on both sides were far stronger than any methods developed to overcome them.

Each side could hold it's stand for as long as their supply and nerves held out, but neither side could easily overcome the huge defenses of the other side in an assault.

None of the participants foresaw this defensive stalemate, and the trench works extended from one end of the international battlefield to the other, with very few breaks where a force could go around them or over them. That's why so much ground was traded back and forth with so little change to the war.

This is also why World War II stayed mobile. All sides had learned the lessons of trenches, barbed wire and not being able to move fast the hards way.

Not all of WW2 was fought mobile, American and Japanese troops fought bloody fights over island bases that keep the mobility of ground forces to a minimum (For example Tarawa, Saipan, Iwo Jima, Okinawa). They were taken foot by bloody foot.