Types[edit]

Main article: Types of war

War must entail some degree of confrontation using weapons and other military
technology and equipment by armed forces employing military tactics andoperational
art within a broad military strategy subject to military logistics. Studies of war by military
theorists throughout military history have sought to identify thephilosophy of war, and to
reduce it to a military science.

Ruins of Guernica (1937). TheSpanish Civil War was one of Europe's bloodiest and most brutal civil
wars.

Modern military science considers several factors before a national defence policy is
created to allow a war to commence: the environment in the area(s) of combat operations,
the posture that national forces will adopt on the commencement of a war, and the type of
warfare that troops will be engaged in.

Asymmetric warfare is a conflict between two populations of drastically different levels

of military capability or size. Asymmetric conflicts often result in guerrilla tactics being
used to overcome the sometimes vast gaps in technology and force size.
Chemical warfare involves the intentional use of chemicals in combat. Poison gas as
a chemical weapon was principally used during World War I, and resulted in an estimated
1.3 million casualties, including 100,000260,000 civilians. Tens of thousands or
more civilians and military personnel died from chemical weapon effects such as scarring
of the lungs, skin damage, and cerebral damage in the years after the Great War ended.
[11] Various treaties have sought to ban its further use. Non-lethal chemical weapons, such
as tear gas and pepper spray, are widely used, sometimes with deadly effect.
Civil war is a war where the forces in conflict belong to the same nation or political entity
and are vying for control of or independence from that nation or political entity.
Conventional warfare is an attempt to reduce the enemy's capability through open
battle. It is a declared war between existing states in which nuclear,biological, or chemical
weapons are not used or only see limited deployment in support of conventional military
goals and maneuvers.
Globalizing war refers to a form of war which extends beyond the national or regional
boundaries of the immediate combatants to have implications for the whole planet. [2] An
obvious example of this form of war is World War II, but others such as the Vietnam War
also qualify. Globalizing war thus includes world war- with that category tending to be
restricted by convention to the two main examples. Transnational war, a cognate concept,
refers to wars fought locally, but with implications or hostilities across the boundaries of
nation-states[12]
Nuclear warfare is warfare in which nuclear weapons are the primary, or a major,

method of coercing the capitulation of the other side, as opposed to a supporting tactical
or strategic role in a conventional conflict.
Unconventional warfare, the opposite of conventional warfare, is an attempt to achieve
military victory through acquiescence, capitulation, or clandestine support for one side of
an existing conflict.

Behaviour
and conduct[edit]
The nature of warfare never changes, only its superficial
manifestations. Joshuaand David, Hector and Achilles would recognize the combat that our
soldiers and Marines have waged in the alleys of Somalia and Iraq. The uniforms evolve,

bronze gives way to titanium, arrows may be replaced by laser-guided bombs, but the heart of
the matter is still killing your enemies until any survivors surrender and do your will.
Ralph Peters[13]
The behaviour of troops in warfare varies considerably, both individually and as units or
armies. In some circumstances, troops may engage in genocide, war rape and ethnic
cleansing. Commonly, however, the conduct of troops may be limited to posturing and
sham attacks, leading to highly rule-bound and often largely symbolic combat in which
casualties are much reduced from that which would be expected if soldiers were genuinely
violent towards the enemy.[14] Situations of deliberate dampening of hostilities occurred in
World War I by some accounts, e.g., a volley of gunfire being exchanged after a misplaced
mortar hit the British line, after which a German soldier shouted an apology to British
forces, effectively stopping a hostile exchange of gunfire. [15] Other examples of nonaggression, also from World War I, are detailed in "Good-Bye to All That." These include
spontaneous ceasefires to rebuild defences and retrieve casualties, alongside behaviour
such as refusing to shoot at enemy during ablutions and the taking of great risks
(described as 1 in 20) to retrieve enemy wounded from the battlefield. The most notable
spontaneous ceasefire of World War I was the Christmas truce.
The psychological separation between combatants, and the destructive power of modern
weaponry, may act to override this effect and facilitate participation by combatants in the
mass slaughter of combatants or civilians, such as in the bombing of Dresden in World War
II.[citation needed] The unusual circumstances of warfare can incite apparently normal
individuals to commit atrocities.[16] Sociologists and historians often
viewdehumanization as central to war.

History[edit]