Chris Campbell wrote:
I'm skeptical as to whether that would fly in China.
Well, I suppose it would require a conqueror.
Yes, but most countries have no interest in such things (particularly
those with the tech to wage war on the scale we're talking about). We
*might* get something like that in Kashmir. Where else? Taiwan? I
think if China and the West were going to go to war over that little
island they would have done it by now. So what's left that could
possibly be of interest to China? Or the U.S.? Those are the only two
superpowers left, and neither one has expansionist tendencies these days.
True.
Not really. I just recognize the fact that war is a very costly
business, and that most governments in the modern era are answerable
to bureaucracies.
I was thinking the case where the people demand war because of Pride or
Divine reasoning. When it gets out of control. Because you're right,
in this day and age it's pretty hard for a government to convince the
people to risk death by going to war.
Going to war in response to 9/11 was a no-brainer, but Iraq was a much
tougher sell (and ultimately a bad idea, as it fractured the
Republican party and led to Bush being the most reviled president in
U.S. history -- it's not likely a future president, even a Republican,
will make the same error). We'll always have our stupid little
skirmishes, but we haven't had a real large scale war for 60 years,
and I think there's a reason for that -- there's no more land to grab,
and there's no profit to be had in stealing it from someone else.
The Gulf War was large scale. True, it only lasted a hundred hours once
the pre-game interviews and stage show was done and the teams hit the
field but it had two large armies using tanks, air (briefly on Iraq's
side, hahahaa) forces and even amphibious assaults. Multiple
divisions. Probably the last one for a long time, maybe forever.
I'm not saying we've evolved or become more socially responsible or
anything like that. I'm just pointing out that the primary motivations
for war, and the mechanisms that enabled it decades ago, are no longer
relevant.
I would argue with "currently relevant". Now? Next month? Probably no
reason. 5 years from now, though, I have no idea how radically
governments can change, cultures can rise up to the degree that a big
war would be a very real worry.
Not at all. I'm just mindful of the fact that things change, and that
you can't assume the status quo will hold just because that's the way
it's always been.
Well that's what I was getting at. Just because there's no reasonable
justification for a war *now* doesn't mean much in terms of what the
future holds. Only if the status quo was maintained would it be
possible to imagine that wars are over with. Wars many times happen to
change the status quo.
Europe was a land of conflict for centuries, but that stopped after
WWII. Europe is presently more unified than it's been at any previous
point in history, and it *isn't* showing signs of falling apart. That
doesn't mean it never will, naturally, but it does mean we have no
reason to assume it will any time soon. Similarly, given that China
has never been one to meddle in the affairs of other superpowers
(other minor powers is a different story, but beside the point for our
purposes) it's safe to assume that, barring radical events, it will
continue to carry on in that vein. Same with India and the U.S. (which
is prone to meddling but faces such intense scrutiny at home, and so
much turnover in administration, that managing anything large scale
for long is completely beyond its means).
Ya, that may be the one good thing about this Iraq invasion clusterfuck,
that we are such a world scourge that it would take justification to
levels never seen to allow us to attack some other country. Idiots.
That leaves...well, Africa and the Middle East, both of which are so
FUBARed at the moment that *any* prospects of a productive future are
looking pretty damn slim (and the big players in the world have
largely written them off).
Dangerous to write them off but, ya, that seems to be the case currently.
Alfred.
--
--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
"Success is not no violence."
- President Bush, on trying to find a way to be able to claim future
progress and success in Iraq without having to achieve the
complete victory he used to state as the only acceptable goal.
Alfred Urrutia - Digital Domain - 310.314.2800 x2267 - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
--------------------------------------------------
The Gundam Mailing List MK-II [email protected]
Archives: http://www.gundam.com/gml
Help: Email [EMAIL PROTECTED] with this in
the BODY: help list
