When Did 'Modern Warfare' Begin?

[Mordhiem]

I have left the meaning of 'Modern Warfare' deliberatley open to discoussion. I shall list the various wars that i have seen mentioned in relation to this subject. Of course, if you think another, feel free to say that too.

a) English Civil War
b) American War of Independence
c) Napoleonic Wars
d) American Civil War
e) First World War
f) Second World War
g) Other

I would think tat modern warfare began with World War I. It saw the true introduction of the machine gun as a staple of infantry combat, the effective end of cavalry as an offensive weapon, the beginnings of air warfare, the massive increase of importnace on artillery and fire support and, of course, the introduction of the tank. Now, debunk me.

*cough*pollplease*cough*

[Drakken]

The problem is that "modern" is quite a bit earlier than that. Modern is more seen as "post-medieval" or "post-feudal", at least in social sciences.

D.

[Juis]

American Civil War. In the sense that it was the first really "industrial" war: the ability to outproduce your opponent became the most important thing.

Of course, it depends on the definition of "Modern Warfare". Certainly from a tactical point of view WWI was a lot more "modern" than ACW.

Then again think about what warfare is like today: technically superior, high quality armies with huge firepower try to beat rather small guerilla armies. And if any of the big boys ever decided to sort it out with arms, there wouldn't be much left after the dust settled.

So really, what's modern?

[UBootMan]

2nd World War. The wars before that were just brainless mass slaughters where only tactic was to charge at enemy like mad.In ww2 only ones who used that tactic were the Soviets.

[Allenby]

Originally posted by UBootMan
2nd World War. The wars before that were just brainless mass slaughters where only tactic was to charge at enemy like mad.

Wars such as...?

It's difficult to define 'modern' - one man's modern is another man's ancient. Where do you draw the line at 'modernity'? Does it begin with the concept of total war or the adaptation of fighting tactics which we would recognise as similar to those we use now? Supposedly, The First World War was the first 'Total War', or was it the American Civil War? The tactics used in one particular war always have a predecessor whereby the methods used were similar.

For example, airpower is a hallmark of the Second World War but it was first properly used in the Italo-Turkish War of 1911 and grew considerably in significance during the First World War. So if airpower was used as a condition for 'modernity', then the Italo-Turkish war would have to be considered.

Originally posted by UBootMan
In ww2 only ones who used that tactic were the Soviets.

...after heavy artillery and rocket attacks, not to mention using armoured thrusts to break the lines and encircle the enemy, whilst using the Red Air Force's air superiority as well.

[Styrbiorn]

As "modern" can be interpreted in many different kind of ways I really can't give you my answer on this one, unless that the English Civil War nor the American Revolution has nothing to do on that list. These wars were no turning points in military history and had little or none impact on military evolution.

The first Total War was the American Civil War (I think someone asked about that).

Originally posted by UBootMan
The wars before that were just brainless mass slaughters where only tactic was to charge at enemy like mad.In ww2 only ones who used that tactic were the Soviets.

No, on all points.

[HisMajestyBOB]

"Modern," meaning how we conduct wars today (massive air strikes, technological superiority, etc.) started with the 1st Gulf War, IMO.

[Aryaman]

As Drakken said, Modern in History has a very specific meaning as a time period, that from the fall of Constantinople (1453) to the start of French Revolution (1789). In this contest, Modern is opposed to Medieval, meaning mercenary armies with a more important role of infantry (pikemen and firearms), the use of field artillery and the progresive extintion of the feudal cavalry. As that, the Italian wars started by Charles VIII in 1493 are considered the first "modern" wars, but of course it was not a military revolution, but an slow evolution.

[bunp]

From my point of view, modern warfare starts when the gunpowder becomes to be the main weapon to destroy your enemies for two reasons.

1.- The long range fighting becomes accepted at last.

2.- It changes the whole conception of war with a new espectrum of weapons and strategies.

But of course it was not something that happen in one day but a long evolution.

[phelbas]

It would have to be WW2 with. The use of armour as the main tool of the land forces, in co-ordination with airpower, the aircraft carrier becoming the dominant force on the seas and the arrival of the most feared tool of modern warfare, nuclear weapons

[Rindis]

Often, inside the wargaming community 'Modern' = 'post WWII'

Which in the heyday of wargaming generally meant the Korean War + The Vietnam War + the Arab-Israeli Wars.

These days the generalization's getting a bit stretched with the changes in weaponry making the Korean War look a lot more like WWII than Desert Storm. At the same time WWII is more than big enough of a subject all by itself.

Anyway, that's where my thinking lies.

[pcasey]

As many have pointed out, it depends on your definition of what a "modern" war is.

If you argue a modern war is one primarily decided by industrial and economic factors, I'd say the ACW.

If you argue a modern was is one characterized by the widespread use of motorized transport and combat vehicles (ground and air), then WW I.

If you argue a modern war is one that takes motorized transport and marries it to a doctine of assault and exploitation, then WW II.

If you argue a modern war is one that includes wisespread use of precision munititions, then either Gulf War I (though most munitions were dumb in this one), Kosovo, or Afganistan.

In any event, it's a question in search of a defintion really I think, rather than a question in search of an answer .

On a somewhat philisophical note, I'd actual argue though that we've entered a "post-modern" era of warmaking.

Given that a "total" war between industrial nations in this day and age would involve nukes and be mutually destructive and,

Given that a "total" war between an advanced nation and a poor one would involve one side "glassing" the other and hence be morally unacceptable,

The Clauswitzian concept of "total" war is obsolete, as is his model of warfare, resting as it does on such a premise.

[Anibal]

Modern (today) warfare = guerrilla.

High-tech weaponry is only used by a few powers, and they never really met a high-tech enemy after WWII. And TV doesn't show most of the wars. So I say: modern warfare = guerrilla. Yes.

[Hulaoguan]

Originally posted by Aryaman
As Drakken said, Modern in History has a very specific meaning as a time period, that from the fall of Constantinople (1453) to the start of French Revolution (1789).

This is new to me. I always thought in world history this period is "pre modern" and the modern era begins with the French Revolution and ends in 1917.

On the topic, I would put up Boer War and the Russo Japanese war as beginnings for modern warfare. Boer War because of new developments like Khaki uniforms, barbed wire, concentration camps, guerrilla warfare etc.

Russo Japanese war of 1905 because it has all of the above and it is also supposedly the first war in history which battlefield deaths exceeed those caused by diseases- due to advances in military medicine and field care.

[Dark Knight]

Originally posted by Hulaoguan
This is new to me. I always thought in world history this period is "pre modern" and the modern era begins with the French Revolution and ends in 1917.

"Modern" in European history generally refers to the period beginning with the Italian Renaissance and extending to the present day. "Early modern" generally refers to the part of the "modern" era ending with either the French Revolution or the end of the Napoleonic wars.

The term "modern" can refer to different periods in other contexts, though. So, for example, modern Japanese history might be considered to begin with the Meiji restoration.

[Aryaman]

In fact, the period from 1789 to our days is called "Contemporary", at least that is the classic division of History in time periods.

Ancient -476 AD (demise of Romulus Augustulus)
Medieval 476-1453
Modern 1453-1789
Contemporary 1789-

[w_mullender]

Originally posted by Aryaman
In fact, the period from 1789 to our days is called "Contemporary", at least that is the classic division of History in time periods.

Ancient -476 AD (demise of Romulus Augustulus)
Medieval 476-1453
Modern 1453-1789
Contemporary 1789-

I have learnt it the same way in school
Though we would call your modern renaissance and contemporary modern

[Singleton Mosby]

To me modern wf starts with the ACW and Sherman breaking the southern will trough his marhc trough Georgia and the Carolinas.

Next to this the first introduction of rial on large scale, industry on large scal and machine guns on a small (very small).
The trench warfare of WW1 started around Petersburg VA.

that is my opinion on th matter.

[Sheilbh]

The first modern war - I'm not going to back this up and I'm not too sure about how I'd define modern but - from what I've read was probably the Franco-Prussian war.

[Gothmog]

Originally posted by Mordhiem
I have left the meaning of 'Modern Warfare' deliberatley open to discoussion. I shall list the various wars that i have seen mentioned in relation to this subject. Of course, if you think another, feel free to say that too.

a) English Civil War
b) American War of Independence
c) Napoleonic Wars
d) American Civil War
e) First World War
f) Second World War
g) Other

I would think tat modern warfare began with World War I. It saw the true introduction of the machine gun as a staple of infantry combat, the effective end of cavalry as an offensive weapon, the beginnings of air warfare, the massive increase of importnace on artillery and fire support and, of course, the introduction of the tank. Now, debunk me.

*cough*pollplease*cough*

That's one bugger of a question, one that ultimately boils down to the (boring) point of definition...what does modern mean. Where the modern war starts depends on what you consider modern...then there's the difficulty of whether modern war and the modern era (or whatever you prefer to call it) are two separate things or different parts of the same entity.

For me, it starts with the Great War, the first all out industrial war.
Of course the ACW in particular is in some ways the precursor here...