Why didn't First World War Armies Only Defend?

Check out Manta Sleep by using the YouTube shopping tab, or here https://tinyurl.com/5uzrv7wy and make sure to use code BRANDON10 for 10% off your order!

~~Video Description~~

It is a common trend throughout military history that the defender always has an advantage over the attacker, and this thought is no more prevalent than in the history of the First World War when it seemed that defensive technology- machine guns, rapid-firing small arms, modern artillery, and rail networks among many others- had outpaced the means necessary to defeat them. Why, then, during the Great War did so many armies throw their men into the meat-grinder of the offensive? Why bother to attack when it involved charging men into machine guns, when instead these armies could fight their wars of attrition in a purely defensive manner, allowing the enemy to run themselves down against their lines? Well as is often the case with the First World War, the answers are many and complex, and the question itself may be a little bit flawed as well!

Learn more about the First World War at https://www.nativeoak.org/

~~Other Links & Contact Info~~

`Find a free digital library, shop for books and merchandise, and learn more about this channel's charity work at: ` https://www.nativeoak.org/

You can directly support my work by becoming a Patron of this channel:
`   / brandonf  

You may also give a one-time tip here:
` https://ko-fi.com/brandonf



~~Timestamps~~
Why Not Defend? 00:00
The German Perspective 01:55
The British & French Perspective 05:57
Sponsored Message 08:56
Attacking and Defending 12:01
Wastage and Attrition 18:30
Conclusion 22:20