How did trench warfare contribute to the terrible loss of life in World War 1?

Answer 1

During World War I, the use of trenches as a basic tactical element contributed greatly to the casualties suffered by both sides of the conflict. Without decisive offensive capabilities, the combatant nations suffered high casualties in their attempts to overcome the entrenched forces on the opposite side of the battlefield.

Answer 2

So many people were killed because technology had outpaced the thinking of the people in charge of the fighting. Weapons, artillery & the machine gun, were far more effective than could be countered by advancing at the walk across 'no mans land'. The trench in fact was a means of keeping men alive, cover from fire, cover from being seen. But it made men into static targets in a concentrated situation. Verdun is the classsic example of the means of warfare which became known as Attrition. The German commander, von Falkenheyn, thought he could absorb so many French, and kill so many by continually attacking & drawing in reserves into that sector (The British operation on the Somme was supposed to relieve this to aid the French) but in fact the Germans also had huge casualties at Verdun, it remained in French hands, and in totality all the deaths achieved precisely nothing. But it is a fact that although British & to a lesser extent French generals are critiscised to this day for their profligacy, not a word is mentioned of the German part in this example. So many people died because, in many instances, the Generals were still fighting the previous war, it s something that always happens because warfare had changed out of all recognition in the 20th century. Having said that, even with hindsight, what else were they to do in that situation ?

Answer 3

Trench warfare was so costly in human life for a number of reasons.

New technologies meant that men would always die in larger numbers than in previous wars. The machine gun was particularly deadly in mowing down foes and resulted in enormous loss of life. Larger guns like Germany's "Big Bertha" meant that troops could be killed in great numbers from far away. These are only two such examples.

To be honest, an entire book could be written on this subject, but to sum it up it was really the fact that no one moved during the war that did it; men sat in trenches that barely moved and as a result everyone knew exactly where to strike. It's like two men standing within arms length of each other while hitting each other without moving.

This, coupled with new weapons which were always going to cause more deaths, made the First World War so costly.

The final reason which is worth a shout is the fact that hygiene in the trenches was so appalling that any cut or graze could easily become infected and kill a man.

Like I say, there are a plethora of other reasons, but these are the main ones. .

Answer 4

First you need to think of what it looked like, two trenches facing each other across fairly flat ground maybe some hundred yards apart.

As long as soldiers stay in the trench they're safe, but as soon as they get out of the trench, the soldiers in the other trench have a clear shot at them.

The only way to "win", to be able to take the other trench was to rush ahead with so many people that some would make it across alive. But as they had to run across something close to a shooting range, tremendous amounts of soldiers got killed.

Answer 5

Warfare was deadly mr. walters nows alot you should watch his class.