Reminds me of my favorite quote from Mad Men:
> Roger: As my mother used to say, your options were dishonor or war. You chose dishonor, you might still get war.
> Don: That was Churchill.
If you want peace, study war
11–20 of 223 posts
Re: If you want peace, study war
#12Interesting article.
> Do we ever want another president asking, as Donald Trump did during a visit to the Pearl Harbor memorial: “What’s this all about? What’s this a tour of?”
Yeah, but Donald Trump is old and studied before decline of military history. And I dont think it was failure of his school, someone who dont care and insists on not caring, wont remember.
Re: If you want peace, study war
#13If you're near the Lüneburg Heath, take a trip to the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_Tank_Museum
Slightly related, because they have "He who wants peace shall speak of war" at their entrance: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/3b/Be...
Re: If you want peace, study war
#14The scary thing for me about wars is that the soldiers aren't the ones making the decisions. Some group of people in comfortable offices look at a map, says "yeah, I think this option is more favourable to us than peace". Then a war happens. It is all about incentives and capabilities.
One of the lessons from being a Stallman watcher for many years - people are profoundly evidence based. If there hasn't been a war in 30 years, then they assume there will not be a war next year no matter how the background is changing.
The fading of WWII in the public memory could be argued as the biggest single risk that society faces. There are too many people who just won't understand how bad and how possible total war is. There is a huge background risk that the age of abundance ends and then things get dicey.
Re: If you want peace, study war
#15I have a theory that offensive weaponry advancements produce peace, while defensive advancements produce war. If you're in a castle, it's easier to send armies around, knowing that you'll be safe. But if there are nukes and ICBMs, just stick with the status quo. Any validity to this theory?
All wanna be conquerors build and used offensive weaponry and produced war. Including Hitler. Plus practically, it is more off weaponry in general used for both offensive and defensive purposes based on strategic goals.
> If you're in a castle, it's easier to send armies around, knowing that you'll be safe.
I do not think that is how it worked historically.
Re: If you want peace, study war
#16There are notes in Sapiens proposing that war (the violent kind) is no longer useful / does not produce outcomes because the global economy has shifted from one of physical resources to knowledge based. That it no longer makes sense to fight over things that aren't worth as much these days, like land, oil or gold, when you can just trade. Most of money comes from peace time commerce.
This seems accurate, but time will tell.
Re: If you want peace, study war
#17Si vis pacem, para bellum.
Re: If you want peace, study war
#18War Studies has always been a peculiarly conservative field. The War Studies department at Kings College London was the most Tory, privately educated one I’d ever scene (and one of the few feeder schools to the intelligence services outside of Oxbridge)
I wonder if any studies have done on military/intelligence/political leaders who were War Studies graduates? I.e were they better at it?
Re: If you want peace, study war
#19"If You Want Peace, Study War" the groups I heard about that adopted that or similar motto were all aggressive and originators of the violence.
The Genius of the Crowd.
Re: If you want peace, study war
#20There are notes in Sapiens proposing that war (the violent kind) is no longer useful / does not produce outcomes because the global economy has shifted from one of physical resources to knowledge based. That it no longer makes sense to fight over things that aren't worth as much these days, like land, oil or gold, when you can just trade. Most of money comes from peace time commerce. This seems accurate, but time wil…
when you can just trade
Peacetime commerce requires free waterways. Everyone can "just trade" because the U.S. Navy has guaranteed free navigation of the seas since Bretton Woods[1]. When America withdraws from its security obligations, others will fill the vacuum, with all the uncertainty that implies.
A national leader who fears being cut off from essential resources will very logically view war as an option.
Edit: