3 ms·

Oh the modern world still has a taste for imperialism. The techniques of imperialism are not even that different than that of centuries old, though with modern

Oh the modern world still has a taste for imperialism. The techniques of imperialism are not even that different than that of centuries old, though with modern spins. Plus WWI and WWII were not the result of imperialism or at least not as much as you imply in your comment. Current foreign policy is still called "The Great Game" - though when said now it is meant to convey the modern game in context of the history of the middle 1800s into the 1900s continuing into the Cold Wars. The big difference now seems to be that the type of total warfare used in the early and middle 1900s between great powers is not palatable to the world today - much in line with the Einstein quote the destruction both to civilian life and to infrastructure would be absolutely terrifying. The Great Game continues today with proxy wars, economic warfare, subterfuge including sabotage and intelligence warfare (much of it network and satellite today), and with stability warfare (trying to pull the support of people from beneath their governance).

dragontamer 12y ago
Point. I'll give you that. But I feel like a major aspect of the "Great Game" was using superior technology to massacre civilians and other soft targets. The invention and use of Gatling Guns, Explosives, and Chemical Warfare through that period was truly terrifying.
- xnull2guest 12y ago
  Certainly new technology and unprecedented populations were major aspects of warfare during this time period. I would add poison gases to your list. Remember though that many other (non-destructive) technologies made their entrance during these wars: blimps, new classes of naval vehicles (the so called battlecruiser) and also submarines, precision bombing, new types of artillery, the first tanks, trains for transporting goods and troops, radar... And remember that the tactics of the time changed as much or more than the technology. In WWI a prevailing tactic was troop attrition - the infamous Battle of Verdun being a sick but paragon example. WW II saw the advent of the term 'strategic bombing' which in essence was the idea that if you directly kill huge numbers of civilians it will demoralize the enemy, cause them to withdraw, and end the war faster - in the end supposedly saving lives. Of course it didn't work out that way, but the belief that it would contributed to the constant bombing raids and huge civilian bombardments that WWII was famous for.

dragontamer 12y ago

Point. I'll give you that. But I feel like a major aspect of the "Great Game" was using superior technology to massacre civilians and other soft targets. The invention and use of Gatling Guns, Explosives, and Chemical Warfare through that period was truly terrifying.

xnull2guest 12y ago
Certainly new technology and unprecedented populations were major aspects of warfare during this time period. I would add poison gases to your list. Remember though that many other (non-destructive) technologies made their entrance during these wars: blimps, new classes of naval vehicles (the so called battlecruiser) and also submarines, precision bombing, new types of artillery, the first tanks, trains for transporting goods and troops, radar... And remember that the tactics of the time changed as much or more than the technology. In WWI a prevailing tactic was troop attrition - the infamous Battle of Verdun being a sick but paragon example. WW II saw the advent of the term 'strategic bombing' which in essence was the idea that if you directly kill huge numbers of civilians it will demoralize the enemy, cause them to withdraw, and end the war faster - in the end supposedly saving lives. Of course it didn't work out that way, but the belief that it would contributed to the constant bombing raids and huge civilian bombardments that WWII was famous for.