If we define “total war” as a type of war that affects and involves every part of a society, then it can be argued that the First World War is the first attempt by part of military and political leaders to engage in such a conflict. Modernity was at Europe's doorstep, thus leading to the inventions and innovations that would enable warfare on a scale and scope that had never been considered before. However, the point is not that these innovations and technologies existed, or that specific conflicts made war necessary, but rather that the political and military elite, emerging from an era of pompous militarism, made decisions based on previous experiences and not about future possibilities. . These decisions had a negative effect not only on the outcome of the war on a political level (regarding treaties and borders), but also affected individuals on a grassroots level, creating a subsequent era of mistrust, listlessness and ultimately aggressive feelings creating the perfect storm from which Nazism could rise again. In the aftermath of the devastation, as soldiers and civilians realized that things were not as they seemed, little remained of what individual governments said or did. No one trusted the government, and so the nations of Europe fell into a tumultuous period of attempted reform and subsequent revolt. This ultimately gave rise to the fascist movements that became the bane of the democratic West, as well as the socialist East, and would launch Europe into a second and even more devastating “Total War.” Because the leaders and commanders of World War I were forever changed. the nature of the war, influenced the subsequent decisions of the Nazi leaders and forced the next group of allies to adapt to a completely new concept of total war since often… an honorable victory and nothing less). This required Allied leaders to embrace a similar ideology of total war to be competitive. Thus total war, as defined by the leaders of World War I, was elaborated by the leaders of World War II. They changed it from something that was total on the battlefield to something that encompassed all of humanity. But this change in definition created problems that its initial practitioners did not have to deal with. Hitler and Stalin faced each other in a battle of attrition that went far beyond what had been fought for at Verdun. Their battle, based almost exclusively on principles and not actual strategy, although similar to the battle in France, would change the remainder of World War II and subsequently shape the fate of both Germany and Russia, culminating in the defeat of Nazism and in the dawn of an era of an entirely new kind of total warfare.