I think trench warfare was a good technique for fighting, but also bad.. Trench warfare protected the opposing forces. Though it caused some stalemates, it was a safer way then running around getting shot. Trench warfare also was dangerous because if you got out of the ditch, then you would probably die. So trench warfare can be both a good and a bad idea.
In my opinion trench warfare was both a bad and a good technique. It was a good technique because it was a safer than other ideas. It protected both sides of the fight. It was a bad technique because if you left the ditch you might have a chance of being killed. The trench warfare also cause stalemates, which means no one lost and no one won. This is why trench warfare is both a good and bad idea.
I think that trenchwarfare was a bad technique, because although it protected people from getting shot it also either caused no one to be killed, or if you did leave the ditch, you were deffinately killed. This technique caused many stalemates and this meant that no one was going to win the war if it continued. Even thoughI don't consider myself a war expert, I think that if no one is winning, it can't be considered a good thing. Oposing forses need to be able to actually fight in a war and with trenchwarfare, this seems impossible. For these reasons, I think that trenchwarfare is a bad technique to usein war.
I think it was a good idea. This protected people from getting shot. In the ditch people can keep safe, with the barbed wire around it. This might be a bad idea because no one will win. They would have a tie. If no one got out of the ditch and if no one took the first move then no one could win. It's a safer but unsatisfying way to construct a war.
During war, there were many techniques that were used, such as trench warfare. In my opinion, the trench warfare was good and bad. It is a good idea to use a trench warfare because it prevents people from getting shot. Although it was a good idea, it was not very useful if a soldier exited the trench. If a soldier left the trench, then they would have a better chance of getting shot. It created a lot of ties, or stalemates. Therefore, a trench warfare was a useful technique, but not sufficient if the soldier left the trench.
I think that trench warfare was both a good and a bad war technique. It was a good technique because it would cause less death than a usual war. Many armies had to strategize how they would win the war instead of shooting bullets and hoping to kill more soldiers than the opposing side. That was also the problem, killing is not a good thing but how else were you supposed to win a war? During there wars most would just sit in the trench and just wait for someone to come out so they could shoot. Many of these battles led to nothing causing many stalemates. It was both a good and bad technique.
In my opinion, the trench warfare was a good technique. This technique prevented many of the soldiers from getting shot. They made a ditch and had barbed wires around it. Also it is very effective because it caused a stalemate between Germany and the French troop. I think its better to have a tie rather than have one side gain more and the other lose. Thats why I believe that using the trech warfare technique was good for fighting.
I find that trench warfare was the best style of fighting for the time. I think that it was a good idea because during the time there was no way for the enemy to land an aerial attack on you and the only thing you had to protect yourself from was other soldiers and land based artillery. What I find to be pointless was the opposing side copy the obviously better strategy. I think that whoever was the second nation to use this technique were not thinking correctly. Using the same strategy on both sides of the war, would only lead to a stalemate,which was exactly what happened. I think that if the opposing side would have found a way to go underground instead of just mimicking the enemies maneuvers the war would have been much swifter and would have had less pointless deaths.
Trench warfare was a good idea, yet it had its downside. During battles and war, death is tried to be avoided. The ditch is used as a way of protection and safety. Less people died this way during battles. It was a bad idea though because once a person exited the ditch they're chances of death shot up. It was a safe way to conduct a war, but quite preposterous because nobody really won.
In my opinion, trench warfare was a good technique for fighting because it forced both sides to use strategy instead of thousands of people with guns staring at each other shooting. It also lowered the death tolls which is a big plus. I believe that the stalemate was a cause of not great strategy by both sides. I believe that neither side was used to having to fighting when both sides had protection. I believe that trench warfare was a good style of fighting but it wasn't executed to its fullest causing stalemates.
I think that using trench warfare was a very effective way of fighting at the time. It provides good cover, a safe way to maneuver around the battlefield, and it was very simple. It prevented many pointless deaths and was an overall safe strategy. I don't think that using trench warfare is a good counter strategy to itself which is why there was a stalemate. One side should've used something else or developed a better way of dealing with trench warfare.
I think that trench warfare was a smart way to fight because it was a good way not to get shot. It provided a good hiding spot and prevented pointless deaths. By using this technique both sides would have to think of a strategy, war would also depend on brains not just strength. The only thing wrong with this technique was that both sides would use this technique so the battle would go into stalemate. Both sides would wait till soldiers from the other side would come out and they would kill them. This technique was good and bad in so many ways. But I believe it was better than just shooting each other without protection.
I believe that Trench Warfare was a good way of fighting because in the war your are trying to stay alive while you are fighting. In this case the ditch provided very good protection for the soliders to avoid from being shot. This way of war left many less people dead and or wounded from bullets or any other types of weapons. That is why I believe that Trench Warfare was a good and affective war style.
I think trench warfare was a good technique for fighting, but also bad.. Trench warfare protected the opposing forces. Though it caused some stalemates, it was a safer way then running around getting shot. Trench warfare also was dangerous because if you got out of the ditch, then you would probably die. So trench warfare can be both a good and a bad idea.
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion trench warfare was both a bad and a good technique. It was a good technique because it was a safer than other ideas. It protected both sides of the fight. It was a bad technique because if you left the ditch you might have a chance of being killed. The trench warfare also cause stalemates, which means no one lost and no one won. This is why trench warfare is both a good and bad idea.
ReplyDeleteI think that trenchwarfare was a bad technique, because although it protected people from getting shot it also either caused no one to be killed, or if you did leave the ditch, you were deffinately killed. This technique caused many stalemates and this meant that no one was going to win the war if it continued. Even thoughI don't consider myself a war expert, I think that if no one is winning, it can't be considered a good thing. Oposing forses need to be able to actually fight in a war and with trenchwarfare, this seems impossible. For these reasons, I think that trenchwarfare is a bad technique to usein war.
ReplyDeleteI think it was a good idea. This protected people from getting shot. In the ditch people can keep safe, with the barbed wire around it. This might be a bad idea because no one will win. They would have a tie. If no one got out of the ditch and if no one took the first move then no one could win. It's a safer but unsatisfying way to construct a war.
ReplyDeleteDuring war, there were many techniques that were used, such as trench warfare. In my opinion, the trench warfare was good and bad. It is a good idea to use a trench warfare because it prevents people from getting shot. Although it was a good idea, it was not very useful if a soldier exited the trench. If a soldier left the trench, then they would have a better chance of getting shot. It created a lot of ties, or stalemates. Therefore, a trench warfare was a useful technique, but not sufficient if the soldier left the trench.
ReplyDeleteI think that trench warfare was both a good and a bad war technique. It was a good technique because it would cause less death than a usual war. Many armies had to strategize how they would win the war instead of shooting bullets and hoping to kill more soldiers than the opposing side. That was also the problem, killing is not a good thing but how else were you supposed to win a war? During there wars most would just sit in the trench and just wait for someone to come out so they could shoot. Many of these battles led to nothing causing many stalemates. It was both a good and bad technique.
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion, the trench warfare was a good technique. This technique prevented many of the soldiers from getting shot. They made a ditch and had barbed wires around it. Also it is very effective because it caused a stalemate between Germany and the French troop. I think its better to have a tie rather than have one side gain more and the other lose. Thats why I believe that using the trech warfare technique was good for fighting.
ReplyDeleteI find that trench warfare was the best style of fighting for the time. I think that it was a good idea because during the time there was no way for the enemy to land an aerial attack on you and the only thing you had to protect yourself from was other soldiers and land based artillery. What I find to be pointless was the opposing side copy the obviously better strategy. I think that whoever was the second nation to use this technique were not thinking correctly. Using the same strategy on both sides of the war, would only lead to a stalemate,which was exactly what happened. I think that if the opposing side would have found a way to go underground instead of just mimicking the enemies maneuvers the war would have been much swifter and would have had less pointless deaths.
ReplyDeleteTrench warfare was a good idea, yet it had its downside. During battles and war, death is tried to be avoided. The ditch is used as a way of protection and safety. Less people died this way during battles. It was a bad idea though because once a person exited the ditch they're chances of death shot up. It was a safe way to conduct a war, but quite preposterous because nobody really won.
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion, trench warfare was a good technique for fighting because it forced both sides to use strategy instead of thousands of people with guns staring at each other shooting. It also lowered the death tolls which is a big plus. I believe that the stalemate was a cause of not great strategy by both sides. I believe that neither side was used to having to fighting when both sides had protection. I believe that trench warfare was a good style of fighting but it wasn't executed to its fullest causing stalemates.
ReplyDeleteI think that using trench warfare was a very effective way of fighting at the time. It provides good cover, a safe way to maneuver around the battlefield, and it was very simple. It prevented many pointless deaths and was an overall safe strategy. I don't think that using trench warfare is a good counter strategy to itself which is why there was a stalemate. One side should've used something else or developed a better way of dealing with trench warfare.
ReplyDeleteI think that trench warfare was a smart way to fight because it was a good way not to get shot. It provided a good hiding spot and prevented pointless deaths. By using this technique both sides would have to think of a strategy, war would also depend on brains not just strength. The only thing wrong with this technique was that both sides would use this technique so the battle would go into stalemate. Both sides would wait till soldiers from the other side would come out and they would kill them. This technique was good and bad in so many ways. But I believe it was better than just shooting each other without protection.
ReplyDeleteI believe that Trench Warfare was a good way of fighting because in the war your are trying to stay alive while you are fighting. In this case the ditch provided very good protection for the soliders to avoid from being shot. This way of war left many less people dead and or wounded from bullets or any other types of weapons. That is why I believe that Trench Warfare was a good and affective war style.
ReplyDelete