Has anyone seen analysis of the likely outcomes of a major modern war, in terms of damage to people (deaths), capital (cities, infrastructure), and costs? Peop

Has anyone seen analysis of the likely outcomes of a major modern war, in terms of damage to people (deaths), capital (cities, infrastructure), and costs? People who know far more of war than we do, the victors of WWII (who also participated in WWI), including Churchill and Roosevelt, saw warfare as the worst scourge of humanity, and feared that with 1945 technology - and not just nuclear weapons - another war would devastate civilization. That's why they built institutions and structures to prevent another one. Those included the rules-led international order (i.e., the rule of law), which banned war (with a few exceptions like self-defense), and the United Nations to provide a means of resolving disputes and, as much as possible, enforcing those rules. If they feared devastation in 1945, what would happen with 2018 technology? Also, I fear Americans see war through the lens of WWII and the much smaller conflicts since then, where war was something that happens someplace else, watched from the comfort of your living room. War with China, even conventional war, would bring a rain of missiles and bombs down on American cities and infrastructure. Many militaries can attack or can develop the means to attack the U.S. mainland; even North Korea can do that now. I've never seen analysis (i.e., serious research) of the actual costs and outcomes, information that seems essential to these issues, especially as the current U.S. administration and much of the GOP seem to embrace warfare as a legitimate option.