Static warfare was significant to the psychological impact on soldiers. Because they could not predict the future or plan for it, the men were constantly on guard. There was also a feeling of claustrophobia because the men could not flee or actively defend themselves.
No, trench warfare was not widely used in World War II as it was in World War I.
in world war 1 warfare was mainly fought in the trenches and in world war 2 there was alot of invasions and bombing.
During World War 2! lol
Yes, World War II did involve trench warfare, but it was not as prevalent as it was in World War I. Trenches were still used in some battles, but the war also saw the use of new tactics and technologies that reduced the reliance on trench warfare.
Trench warfare was ineffective during World War I because it led to a stalemate, with neither side able to make significant advances. The static nature of trench warfare made it difficult to gain ground and resulted in high casualties without achieving decisive victories. Additionally, the conditions in the trenches were harsh, with soldiers facing disease, poor sanitation, and constant danger from enemy attacks.
it was known for vilonce
Mobile warfare (Blitzkrieg) as compared to the static trenchlines of WW1 .
Warfare in World War 2 are illegal and dangerous than warfare in World War 1.
World War 1 introduced aerial warfare with airplanes and trench warfare
No, trench warfare was not widely used in World War II as it was in World War I.
For the first time it made visible what was going on behind enemy lines. (Other than by use of static balloons) It made warfare 3 dimensional.
in world war 1 warfare was mainly fought in the trenches and in world war 2 there was alot of invasions and bombing.
In WW1 there was a trench warfare. In the 2nd there was a different style of warfare. Like Urban Warfare or Blitzkrieg
Modern Warfare 3 IS World War 3.
trench warfare chemical warfare
rules of warfare
Trench Warfare