I agree with Keith A. that surrender would not have been a desirable alternative for Britain and France, once the war had started. But there had been plenty of other options since 1900. The governments had taken their seats at the gambling table for power (not just "sleepwalked"), soldiers taking the role of pawns in chess. Understandable at that time, but not to be approved of. Each single one of the major powers could and should have prevented the world wars (- WWII being unimaginable without WWI, so to speak).

We must demand from our governments to counteract the reasons for future wars as soon as they become apparent. We and they have learned a lot since 1914, but not enough by far. Governments and other powerful institutions who are allowed to glorify their past heroes will feel encouraged to play the same games as their predecessors again. If we achieve this, we may still have to send soldiers to fight, but much more rarely and with a better conscience. I mentioned Afghanistan in the other thread.