Not too many generations ago war was a limited affair involving relatively few people.
When a ruler went to war, he marched into battle at the head of a column of his retainers. Subservient noblemen perhaps supported him by leading their own retainers into the fray. Relatively few people were involved and the carnage, though horrendous, was limited.
Today, decisions to go to war are made by aging politicians who then, ensconced in sumptuous situation rooms partaking of fine food and drink, watch the offspring of lower economic classes shed their blood and endure the privations inherent in their assigned missions.
Personally, I prefer the old way -- requiring those with war making authority to risk their own skins and the skins of their own children in the game.
In addition, the limited wars of old seem to me to have been preferable to the wars we have today that with modern weapons wreak widespread and unlimited havoc and destruction on people who just want to be left alone to live their lives.
What all of this boils down to is the possibility that our species in some respects has not progressed but instead actually has regressed.
But then, our current popular culture suggests that evolution also is a two way street and that homo sapiens have been devolving in recent decades.