Geoffrey Blainey challenges the longstanding assumption that advances in military technology necessarily produce shorter wars. More powerful weapons, faster transport and improved communications might appear likely to bring conflicts to a quicker conclusion by allowing one side to defeat another more decisively. However, historical experience repeatedly contradicts this expectation. Technological developments can transform the conduct of warfare without necessarily reducing its duration or making victory easier to achieve.

New military capabilities may benefit opposing forces simultaneously, strengthen defensive positions or encourage governments to overestimate their prospects of success. The length of a war also depends on political objectives, economic resources, military strategy and the willingness of opposing sides to negotiate. Blainey does not deny that technology influences warfare. Rather, he questions the belief that technological progress produces predictable outcomes. His observation illustrates the limits of explanations that treat military innovation as the decisive factor in determining how long wars last.