Is it normal to look at warfare as a form of art?

There is a movie that is a black comedy called Oh What a Lovely War. It's all about the futility of war.

Millions died in WWI using modern weapons such as gatling guns and 18th century "gentleman" war methods where the enemy would be signaled an attack was coming.

WWII saw the rise of Hitler in Europe and the surprise attack by the Japanese at Pearl Harbor.

Now Germany and Japan are our allies.

Let's not forget the Vietnam conflict that took hundreds of thousands of lives including civilian. Vietnam is still a communist country but is peaceful and is a trading partner.

War is necessary at the time but is seen as totally useless years down the road. All they do is curb overpopulation.

Art is pretty much impossible to define, as everyone has a different take on it, and discussing whether or not something qualifies as art never seems to lead anywhere.

But yes. We humans are pretty good at killing each other.

You sound confused. Warfare would be performance art but you didn't mention that you talked about the tools. The tools could be considered art as in good/efficent design.

I prefer more traditional performing arts like music and dance. But I've also been getting into the Lowbrow art movement of paintings and sculpture.

I prefer the old assault rifle in the school yard myself