Talk:First-generation warfare

Moved from article

Alternatively, it has been argued that the Peace of Westphalia did not solidify the power of the nation-state, but that the Thirty Years' War itself ushered in an era of large-scale combat that was simply too costly for smaller mercenary groups to carry out on their own. According to this theory, smaller groups chose to leave mass combat—and the expenses associated with it—in the domain of the nation-state.

(Above misread's the source - "the Thirty Years’ War itself showed that war had become extremely costly to wage, even for major powers.28 Thus, the sheer expense of organized armed conflict tended to push it beyond the capacity of smaller states and many nonstate actors, who sought to avoid it except, of course, to participate as mercenaries." p. 9. The state is a concept going back to at least the 16th century, while the nation-state becomes key starting around 1789.) - 24.231.54.204

There doesn't seem to be any misreading of the source; the source disputes the idea that, after Westphalia, mass combat was left to nation-states. But the US Army is not the end-all authority on military history and theory; the idea does exist, disputed or otherwise, and is worth mentioning. I don't think two sentences is undue weight. Kafziel ^{Complaint Department: Please take a number} 22:19, 2 June 2011 (UTC)