Summary: Bloodier Warfare

1150 Words 5 Pages
As the Military Revolution revolutionized the way that people fought, it wasn’t only part of the western rise to power but it was also the creation of much bloodier warfare. “The Infantry Revolution marked a sharp increase in causalities on the battlefield. Whereas formerly it had been important to capture the knights for the purpose of realizing a ransom, common infantrymen neither held that value, nor did they share knightly notions of chivalry. Battle thus became more sanguine affairs.” (Krepinevich, 2). Even though some argue that there where far bloodier conflicts outside of the European sphere. Europeans fought more fiercely and shed more blood than other people which led to far bloodier war because organizational Infantry along with …show more content…
With a common American soldier in today’s armed forces, the Infantryman has more readily power disposable at the palm of his hand than at any time period in humankind. The most effective weapon in the battlefield is not the rifle, nor is it a longebow that revoutioninzed the infantry during the middles ages, but is the radio used for communications. This is the most important weapon that is effectively used in combat today. With radio you have the single most important element of humankind. If used effectively to communicate, it can be used to coordinate with other maneuver or support elements such as air strikes or artillery to further devastate the enemy. One can say that along with the combined arms that was introduced during this timer period along with the radio are the new innovations that have made war much bloodier in modern times. In the combined arms example for example and infantry platoon or company sized elecmet can easily call for support such as tanks to blow up a target or ven call air strikre s to maximize the ffectivenss of the aggressor. While this does make this accurate, it makes the infantry more capable of accepting casualties. “In future warfare, there will be need to retain the capability to seize and hold territory, along with establishing a strong a dense presence in many situtaions.” (O’Hanlon, 80-81). This along with the combination of combined arms will be instrumental in warfare. “The concept of “Combined Arms” has existed for centuries, but the nature of the combination and the organizational level at which it occurred have varied greatly… In succeeding centuries, the general trend has been to combine the arms at progressively lower levels of organization. The concern of commanders has gone from

Related Documents

Related Topics