# Why was WWI such a stalemate? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [March 5, 2012, 9:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-wwi-such-a-stalemate/614861 "2012-03-05T21:52:38Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 6\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![md2000](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/73ab20/32.png) [@md2000](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/md2000)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2012, 3:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-wwi-such-a-stalemate/614861/61 "2012-03-09T15:26:55Z")
As a side note - notice that the Iran-Iraq war basically degenerated into the same sort of 10-year stalemate once the two sides used up their advanced weapons. They degenerated to a WWI level of technology, what they could both sustain, and the open frontier between them became a trench warfare zone. Simple artillery and mass troop (??) attacks could not dislodge dug-in troops. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2012, 4:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-wwi-such-a-stalemate/614861/62 "2012-03-09T16:50:34Z")
> [@Dioptre](#): > > The epitome of this is story of the Hindenburg line. The Germans throughout 1915 and 1916 were more invested than the British and French in permanent fortifications, but after 1st Somme they constructed a series of well-built fortified areas behind their lines, and retreated to them. This is the sort of strategy that says “I know we are not about to win, so instead of trying to win now, I’ll do something smart to help our eventual victory”. > > This longer-term strategy almost worked (the French army was broken and in mutiny) - the difference between one 14 month plan, and 20 3 month plans. Unfortunately the Germans decided that they were winning, and invested in another short-term offensive, which led to the Hindenburg line being breached in the counter-offensive, and possibly back to stalemate if the US supply of troops and equipment hadn’t begun to tip the balance so much. Actually the Germans were following the plan they had made. The plan was to fortify the western front and go on the defensive there. Then take the extra troops that freed up and send them to the eastern front and knock Russia out of the war. Then bring those troops back and launch a big offense on the western front to knock France and Britain out and win the war. The first couple of steps worked and they almost got the third one too. But they didn’t have quite enough resources left to win in the west. Britain also had a long-term strategy. Put a blockade on German trade and contain them on the battlefield. Then wait until their economy collapsed under the cost of the war. It was a slow strategy but it did work in the end. ---
**Author:** ![carnivorousplant](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnivorousplant/32/3563_2.png) [@carnivorousplant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/carnivorousplant)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2012, 5:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-wwi-such-a-stalemate/614861/63 "2012-03-09T17:36:01Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > The first couple of steps worked and they almost got the third one too. But they didn’t have quite enough resources left to win in the west. They moved too many troops to be ready for the Russians that weren’t needed. ---
**Author:** ![Hypno-Toad](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/b2d939/32.png) [@Hypno-Toad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hypno-Toad)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2012, 5:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-wwi-such-a-stalemate/614861/64 "2012-03-09T17:57:17Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > Actually the Germans were following the plan they had made. The plan was to fortify the western front and go on the defensive there. Then take the extra troops that freed up and send them to the eastern front and knock Russia out of the war. Then bring those troops back and launch a big offense on the western front to knock France and Britain out and win the war. > > The first couple of steps worked and they almost got the third one too. But they didn’t have quite enough resources left to win in the west. > > Britain also had a long-term strategy. Put a blockade on German trade and contain them on the battlefield. Then wait until their economy collapsed under the cost of the war. It was a slow strategy but it did work in the end. This exacerbated the stalemate because the Germans wanted to just sit on defense in France until Russia was out of the fight. So when they saw the Schlieffen plan was not going to work, they isentified the best ground in their possession for strong defense. Then they built a very VERY strong defensive line on terrain that was already in their favor and pulled their troops back to that line. At the Somme, for example, the German lines were on the high ground east of the Somme River overlooking the allied terrain. So to attack, the brits first had to cross over marshy ground that was already chewed up by artillery. Then they had to attack uphill. And because the German side was higher, they couldn’t see what was beyond the initial lines except by aerial recon, which is no use in the heat of an assault. This was the general situation all along the western front. The Germans sat in strong positions and simply held off attacks. The most notable exception, Verdun, shows how when the Germans were attacking strong French positions, it was just as pointless. ---
**Author:** ![Dissonance](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/85f322/32.png) [@Dissonance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dissonance)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2012, 8:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-wwi-such-a-stalemate/614861/65 "2012-03-09T20:10:43Z")
> [@MOIDALIZE](#): > > The main problem I see with cavalry units in WWI is that they tended to be staffed by the most brash and impetuous soldiers, the kind of soldiers who seek out fights to win medals, but since they were no longer effective in shock attacks against defended positions it was mostly a waste of good troops. I’m reminded of a line from [The Lighthorsemen](http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0093416/) about the Australian light horse cavalry charge at [Be’er Sheva](http://www.israeldailypicture.com/2011/10/battle-of-beer-sheva-october-31-1917.html) in 1917 where a British cavalry officer scoffed at the idea, derisively stating something to the effect that they were mounted rifles, not ‘proper’ cavalry. It was just a line in a movie and could well be apocryphal, but is indicative of the idea. Poland’s use of a large number of cavalry brigades in 1939 is often shown as a sign of how backwards and obsolete they were militarily. In fact they were slowly in the process of being upgraded to mechanized brigades as much as the limited budget would allow, they had a large allotment of anti-tank guns relative to their size as compared to infantry divisions, and were often able to disengage from the advancing Germans in situations where the infantry was either surrounded or overrun. ---
**Author:** ![Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/7cd45c/32.png) [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Elendil_s_Heir)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2012, 8:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-wwi-such-a-stalemate/614861/66 "2012-03-09T20:44:06Z")
> [@sqweels](#): > > To restate ground that’s already been covered, that state of technology was such that armies could not move faster than defensive fortifications could be placed in front of them. Artillery and machine guns were powerful enough to stop an advance and force the attackers to dig in, thus giving the defenders time to prepare defenses and bring up reinforcements. > > Starting in WWII, mechanized formations that can outflank anti-tank defenses can survive artillery and machine gun fire and move so fast that the defenders can’t prepare defenses in time and don’t know where to send reinforcements. That’s one of the best, most concise statements about the difference between the two world wars in W. Europe that I’ve ever read. Thanks! [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-wwi-such-a-stalemate/614861.md?page=3)