Politics & Policy

How Warfare Has Evolved over the Past Century

Over the past year, I’ve been reading books inspired by the centenary of World War I, a war with horrific casualties painful to contemplate. What helps in comprehending the scale of the slaughter is a book by one of Bill Gates’s favorite authors, the Canadian academic Vaclav Smil, Creating the Twentieth Century: Technical Innovations of 1867-1914 and Their Lasting Impact.

Smil leads the reader through the invention and development of electricity, oil production and distribution, the automobile, steelmaking, the telephone, the airplane, and the production of synthetic ammonia — to his mind the most important because without it agriculture couldn’t feed the world’s 6 billion people.

All these developments were in place and widespread when the world went to war in August 1914. The three American Progressive Era presidents, Theodore Roosevelt, William Howard Taft, and Woodrow Wilson, all born in the late 1850s, were old enough to have memories of the end of the Civil War — and of an America in which all of these technologies were unknown.

The same technologies, considerably redesigned and more universally available, were in place in everyday life in the mid-20th-century nation in which today’s older Americans grew up. New appliances, adapting technology available in 1914, were introduced after World War I — the refrigerator and the disposal, automatic washers and driers, radio and television, air conditioning.

Americans today are inclined to think that information technology has transformed people’s lives, and in some ways it has. Typewriters have become antique and laptops nearly universal; an array of entertainment is available in homes; air conditioning, uncommon in houses and cars back in midcentury America, is regarded as a necessity today.

But surely, there was more change in the work and home lives of the Progressive Era presidents and their contemporaries than there has been in the corresponding years a century later. The experience of driving a car or riding in a jet airplane is not much different in 2015 than in 1965. The tech entrepreneur Peter Thiel was on to something when he said, “We were promised flying cars, and instead what we got was 140 characters.”

One thing that has changed, however, is warfare. World War I was an industrial-era conflict in which the efficiency with modern weapons could slaughter soldiers in trench warfare and wreck cities through artillery and air bombardment. Armies were huge and casualties high. Historian Niall Ferguson pegs combat deaths at 9 million and wounded at 15 million — estimates, to be sure, but roughly the right magnitude.

On the first day of the Battle of the Somme, July 1, 1916, 19,000 British soldiers died. In the ten months of the Gallipoli campaign in 1915, 42,000 British, Australian and New Zealand troops died, plus 14,000 of their French allies, in a campaign that was an utter failure. The victorious Turks lost 86,000 men.

Deaths and casualties were even greater in World War II, in which aerial bombing vastly increased the number of civilian deaths. And America’s development of the atomic bomb made weaponry even more deadly. Something like 200,000 people were killed by single bombs in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. In the Cold War, the United States and the Soviet Union had the capacity and developed elaborate plans to kill hundreds of millions.

The small bombing campaigns of World War I and the intensive bombing of World War II produced far more collateral damage than destruction of intended targets. Today, drones almost invariably destroy only the intended targets.

Against this background, information-age warfare has proved to be, so far at least, much less deadly. About 6,800 U.S. soldiers died in a decade of warfare in Iraq and Afghanistan — about the same as the average number of soldiers dying every day between August 1914 and November 1918 in World War I.

The small bombing campaigns of World War I and the intensive bombing of World War II produced far more collateral damage than destruction of intended targets. Today, drones almost invariably destroy only the intended targets. The media treat very occasional collateral deaths as some kind of scandal. In historic perspective it’s exceedingly minor.

We are told that the American people after Iraq and Afghanistan are war-weary and casualty-averse. But in historic perspective, deaths are relatively low, military medicine saves many who would have died in previous conflicts and prosthetics technology enables many wounded to live far better than those wounded a century ago.

Memorial Day is a time to remember and thank the fallen — and to be grateful that there are so many fewer of them than there were 100 years ago.

— Michael Barone is senior political analyst for the Washington Examiner. ©2015 the Washington Examiner. Distributed by Creators.com.

Michael Barone is a senior political analyst for the Washington Examiner, resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, and longtime co-author of The Almanac of American Politics. © 2018 Creators.com

Most Popular

Trump vs. Biden: A Rundown

One week out, the contrasts are worth assessing. Foreign policy Biden so far has issued no substantive critique of Trump’s foreign policy other than banalities that Trump’s comportment and unpredictability have offended allies and tarnished America’s reputation. But who exactly, according to Biden, is ... Read More

Trump vs. Biden: A Rundown

One week out, the contrasts are worth assessing. Foreign policy Biden so far has issued no substantive critique of Trump’s foreign policy other than banalities that Trump’s comportment and unpredictability have offended allies and tarnished America’s reputation. But who exactly, according to Biden, is ... Read More
Law & the Courts

The Kavanaugh Court

If Justice Barrett votes as her mentor Justice Scalia did, she will be part of an ascendant conservative majority on the Supreme Court. What kinds of decisions can we expect from this majority? Short answer: Ask Brett Kavanaugh. Contrary to how journalists frame each seat change on the Court, comparing the new ... Read More
Law & the Courts

The Kavanaugh Court

If Justice Barrett votes as her mentor Justice Scalia did, she will be part of an ascendant conservative majority on the Supreme Court. What kinds of decisions can we expect from this majority? Short answer: Ask Brett Kavanaugh. Contrary to how journalists frame each seat change on the Court, comparing the new ... Read More

The Pollster Who Thinks Trump Is Ahead

The polling aggregator on the website RealClearPolitics shows the margin in polls led by Joe Biden in a blue font and the ones led by Donald Trump in red. For a while, the battleground states have tended to be uniformly blue, except for polls conducted by the Trafalgar Group. If you are a firm believer only in ... Read More

The Pollster Who Thinks Trump Is Ahead

The polling aggregator on the website RealClearPolitics shows the margin in polls led by Joe Biden in a blue font and the ones led by Donald Trump in red. For a while, the battleground states have tended to be uniformly blue, except for polls conducted by the Trafalgar Group. If you are a firm believer only in ... Read More
Law & the Courts

Some Counterfactual Thinking

Election Day is one week away. Can you believe it? On the menu today: contemplating what would be different, and what would be the same, if Ruth Bader Ginsburg had retired in 2013 instead of staying on the Court until her death earlier this year; a couple of flubbed words on the campaign trail; yes, people really ... Read More
Law & the Courts

Some Counterfactual Thinking

Election Day is one week away. Can you believe it? On the menu today: contemplating what would be different, and what would be the same, if Ruth Bader Ginsburg had retired in 2013 instead of staying on the Court until her death earlier this year; a couple of flubbed words on the campaign trail; yes, people really ... Read More
Law & the Courts

Whose Seat?

Amy Coney Barrett is confirmed. And I think there are two little things to say about it. The first is that we very likely have in Barrett the true successor to Antonin Scalia on the Court. Barrett clerked for Scalia and her articulation of his philosophy is probably the most faithful on the court. Justices ... Read More
Law & the Courts

Whose Seat?

Amy Coney Barrett is confirmed. And I think there are two little things to say about it. The first is that we very likely have in Barrett the true successor to Antonin Scalia on the Court. Barrett clerked for Scalia and her articulation of his philosophy is probably the most faithful on the court. Justices ... Read More