Was World War 1 or 2 more devastating?

Answer 1

This question is quite broad being that both were very devastating in different regards. If you are talking about deaths, WW2 was definitely more destructive with total deaths including civilians tallies in the area of 52 million. WW1 on the other hand is much lower, an exact figure I do not know. On the other hand WW1 set a new bench mark for carnage, it did in some ways prelude what was to come in the future and showed what man was capable of. Some believe that WW1 was the point of no return for man's path to total annihilation. In literal terms WW1 actually was one of the main causes of WW2. I will explain: Adolf Hitler was fuelled by not only his hatred of what he called lesser races, but also by Germany's defeat in WW1 at the hands of the other European powers. He in essence, wanted revenge. I believe that this was a major factor apart from, the spanish civil war, poverty in Germany, and France's embargos on Germany that caused the Second World War.

Answer 2They were different destructively in the following ways:

WWI was probably the most politically devastating war in all of human history. Several of the centuries old monarchies were destroyed. Empires were overturned. Incredible economic turmoil was generated. The 'loss of innocence' completely changed western culture - art, music, paintings, etc..

The war was also, of course, very bloody, but in that respect not a lot more than other wars such as the Napoleonic or Thirty Years wars.

WWII was incredibly destructive and bloody, easily the most of any prior conflict. The Allied powers deliberately massacred millions of Axis nation civilians. The cities of many nations were laid waste - Japan, Philippines, Germany, China, western Russia, Poland, Hungary, Austria. The numbers of refugees was unprecedented. The mass rapes and pillaging by the Soviets have no comparison in modern times. The German destruction of the Jews of Europe was enormous. However even with all this destruction and overturn of governments, the political changes wrought by WWII have been far less than those of WWI.

Answer 3In one respect, World War I can be seen as the more devastating conflict because the world had never seen such destructive warfare. Millions of lives were lost gaining negligible amounts of territory on the fronts. The conditions faced by the soldiers during WWI was probably far worse than in WWII (not saying either situation was favorable), seeing as trench warfare and life in the trenches for months was a hell unto itself.

As previously stated, WWI marked a crucial turning point in Western civilization (if not the world) as the European empires and monarchies dating back centuries were felled. The real "20th century", so to speak, arguably started in 1914.

A very important thing to remember is that World War II was a direct result of the effects World War I left (and also the Great Depression). 1914-1945 can be seen as a conflict with a period of peace in the middle (one must remember that Imperial Japan began invading China as early as 1931). Another result, although not solely due to the Great War, was the formation of the Soviet Union.

Answer 2

It depends on what is meant by "severe". More people died in WWII. But trench warfare in WWI was dreadful, as many leaders had yet to update tactics in line with "modern" weapons.