Talk:History of warfare

Urban warfare?

Should there be a new category for Urban Warfare? Just curious.

-TN

new period of warfare needed?

We need an article about a period of warfare that would fit inbetween Early and Modern warfare. EMW only covers up to the 18th century and Modern warfare seems to only cover the 20th century. This leaves the 19th century unrepresented, which is odd, considering that was the century that gave way to the development of the repeating rifle, revolvers, gatling guns, etc.--Kross | Talk 23:58, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

We could also expand the modern war article to cover much of the nineteenth century. The American Civil War and the Franco-Prussian war are both quite modern, early modern should cover everything up to the end of the Napoleonic Wars. - SimonP 00:16, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

While everyone figures out how to do this, I created a stopgap period called Industrial Warfare (A working title, which we can easily change) to cover the Nineteenth Century and Twentieth Century (Prior to 1980s). BTW, my votes are for Gunpowder warfare (1500-1800), Industrial warfare (1800-1980), Modern warfare (1980-). The major cutoffs between the first and second period are massive conscript armies, rifling, and total war. Between the second and third, the Revolution in Military Affairs which saw the return to small professional militaries and the widespread use of computers. I'll expand on this more if anyone's interested. Palm_Dogg 09:35, 25 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I think we need more distinctions, warfare has generally kept pace or led technology, and has thus changed just as rapidly. I would personally suggest we follow the military equipment categories and go with Industrial warfare, World War I warfare, World War II warfare, Cold War warfare and then Modern warfare. Perhaps even an article on what speculations there are on Future warfare as well. Oberiko 01:02, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Warfare sorted by "people"

The section by people seems somewhat awkward to me, should these entries perhaps rather be organized chronologically? (or be more specific). As it now stands, for example Arab warfare is a difficult concept, should this involve asymmetrical warfare in the Israel-Palestine conflict of today or Iraqi usage of Scuds in 1991 vs. warfare during the crusades. Should a British warfare omit the Royal Navy during WWII or Falklands war to allow for an entry regarding the Spanish Armada? I'd suggest other categories be expanded, or specific timeframes should be added (such as the entries Roman warfare and ancient Greek warfare). Ideas, comments? Scoo 15:37, 16 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

history?

this article says very very little about the history of warfare! Kingturtle 07:14, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. It needs a lot of work. It also needs to be clearer that we do indeed have a detailed series of articles, which do have a fair amount of content. - SimonP 14:19, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]