xlvii There were some continuities, but more important discontinuities, in mili-tary lessons drawn from World War I about operational as against merely tacti-cal mobility.. Not all were
Trang 1xlvii
There were some continuities, but more important discontinuities, in
mili-tary lessons drawn from World War I about operational as against merely
tacti-cal mobility New offensive doctrines were introduced by all sides that strove
to overcome profound defensive advantages and quicken the pace of battle
Not all were successful, as realities of industrial attrition meant that by 1945
the killing rate in battle exceeded that of the Great War At the same time, old
ideas about sea power and armies on the move had to be adjusted to incorporate
new ideas and realities of air power Everywhere, there was newfound devotion
of government and science to weapons development That process meant the
means of destruction available were vastly greater by 1945 than when the war
began, more than a single technological generation ahead of what planners
anticipated just a few years before it started Armies and navies were subjected
to protracted attritional combat for which few had planned and none were
really prepared, even as military leaders searched for alternate strategies that
might provide a quicker route to “decisive victory.” Everyone learned better
utilization of combined arms and radio-linked command and control systems
so that more powerful killing machines became more effi cient as well as more
numerous in late-war battles Accompanying rising military capabilities was a
deterioration in moral and operational restraint, until World War II became a
true total war
World War II was more truly global in its causes and theaters of extraordinary
violence, and perhaps in lasting demographic and geopolitical consequences, than
the preceding world war It had a pronounced and ultimate character as a war not
just among opposing national militaries, but as a “race” war: a confl ict so deep
in the ambition of hatred that some parties sought not just permanent political
and economic domination, but biological extermination of their enemies Perhaps
the most important difference between the world wars was that World War II was
fought not mainly to adjust national borders or gain imperial provinces or
colo-nies Right from the start, it was waged by Nazi Germany as a Vernichtungskrieg
(“war of annihilation”), a war of “race and blood” beyond the normal clash of
na-tions, wherein whole peoples and civilizations were marked off to disappear from
the face of the Earth Some very nearly did
On the German side, World War II was a total war in ends sought from the
fi rst day to the last Dedication to total victory by any means did not mark, at
least at fi rst, the goals pursued or methods employed by most other
partici-pants Neither the French nor British began the fi ght dedicated to total
destruc-tion of the German enemy Far from it; the RAF spent much of the fi rst winter
of the war dropping leafl ets instead of bombs on the Ruhr That changed
start-ing in mid-1940, as progressive decisions were made to smash Germany’s war
production from the air, then to destroy its cities and morale by targeting its
people for bombing Despite the horrors of Shanghai and Nanjing, the
Japa-nese war of aggression underway in China was essentially a traditional war of
conquest of territory and for regional geopolitical and economic dominance
Once fi ghting in Asia and the Pacifi c merged with war in Europe from the end
of 1941, however, those theaters also took on the general character and methods