Ms/Mrs. Beck
Honors World Cultures
08 May 2017
Comparing and Contrasting the Western and Eastern Front World War I was the most influential war of it’s time. This was due to the amount of lives taken throughout the various battles. The war was split up between the Western Front and the Eastern front. The Western front consisted of the Allied forces of Belgium, France, Britain, Portugal, and United States. The Eastern front consisted of Central Powers of Germany, Austria-Hungary, Bulgaria, and the Ottoman Empire. These two fronts had both been very impactful to the war. As most things they compare and contrast in different aspects, including the contrast in size, the similarities of trench warfare, and the differences of favoured …show more content…
This action resulted in the fluidity of warfare and was very beneficial to many of their battles during the war but ”many” does not mean all.
Unlike the Western Front, the war for the Eastern Front was marked by mobility. “Mobility” in the military use means to prepare and organize troops for active service. The Eastern Front attempted to move or to mobilize into Western territory. These attempts resulted in the defeat of the Eastern Front in battles such as the Battle of Tannenberg and the defeat in the Battle of Masurian Lakes. So in comparison The Western Front was much smaller and less experienced in warfare than the Eastern Front. In trade The Western Front was much better at the use of trench warfare and was able to utilize the benefits of small arms and hand grenades, while often surprise attacking the Eastern Front after the use of their various types of chemical agents. Where one aspect a front struggled with the other excelled in. The two fronts were crucial to World War 1 and were contributors to the development made throughout the war. The front’s contrast in size and the similarities between the warfare and tactics made for a series of respectable battles in the early nineteenth