Idealists Study World War II; Realists Study World War I

100% correct.

I think WWII was more than a global war; it represented a global shift in ideology. Prior to 1945, we were still insular; more pragmatic. Perhaps the sheer monstrosity of genocide and atomic power demanded a redefining of moral relativity. Yes, millions died in WWI, and arguably for far, far less "justifiable" reasons than WWII...but they were killed (for the most part) by the mathematics of war. In stark contrast, the victims of WWII at least seemed more to be victims of radicalized ideologies and extreme necessities. At places like Verdun and the Somme, we learned to hate war...at Normandy, Dresden, and Hiroshima, we learned to defend it. All that said, I think if one wants to truly make parallels with today, they should study even older conflicts...the English and American Civil Wars, the French and Russian Revolutions, perhaps even the 100 Years War. Society in 1939 wasn't so far removed from the slaughter of 1916 as we are from that of either. Our collective memory has Vietnam, the Cold War, and the perpetual war in the Middle East as a backdrop for perspective...and there's something troubling about all that, if you give it enough thought.

Or the first modern war, the Civil War. If you look at the carnage generated by the leaps in technology during the Civil War, rifles as the predominate weapon, long range artillery and mortars, cartridge firearms, breech loading fire arms, repeating firearms, and even the introduction of the machine gun to a limited extent, the results of the WWI were entirely predictable.
Just watched a Documentary on the Somme, what a waste of Infantry.

Of course. WWI is the Great War as it changed everything. WWII just rubber stamped an "Okay" on the results and smacked the Japanese.