There is a saying about World War I: "War ends all wars." Do you agree or disagree with it?

This question refers to a saying that the First World War was the "war to end all wars." It is difficult to agree with the saying, because World War I was not really anything of the sort. During the war, some idealists hoped that the sheer horror and the devastation in human life wrought by the war were so traumatic that they would create a new world order in which wars would no longer be fought--people would finally realize that war was not really in their interests. This hope lay behind Woodrow Wilson's "Fourteen Points," which were an attempt to create postwar international institutions that would forestall future conflicts. But this was not to be. The League of Nations and other safeguards proved ineffective in the aftermath of the war, the Treaty of Versailles that ended it was harshly punitive, creating resentment in Germany, and ultimately warlike dictators were able to rise to power in Italy and Germany by exploiting the same spirit of nationalism that had helped bring about World War I. Today, calling the war the "war to end all wars" is an ironic statement, because we know that the most tragic aspect of the war was the fact that it paved the way for an even more tragic and destructive global conflict just two decades later.