Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Reasons to Fear Another ‘Great War’

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 400 posts

Re: Reasons to Fear Another ‘Great War’

#111

Post by EthanHeilman »

jeffdavis wrote: post #29

What's the point of war in the modern world? Gain land/people? If there's a thriving economy there, war will probably change that quickly. If there's no thriving economy, what's the point? You could try to exploit the people/resources there, but the profits in that seem (at least compared to a world power) pretty thin. Unskilled labor and unimproved land are just not worth what they used to be. Specific resources mig…

>Gain land/people? If there's a thriving economy there, war will probably change that quickly. If there's no thriving economy, what's the point?

The point of war in the modern world may in fact be the denial of a thriving economy or industrial base to an adversary. For instance in a large scale nuclear war many of the plans call for the destruction of enemy nuclear weapons as to protect your own infrastructure/population and to destroy enemy infrastructure/population to gain an economic and industrial advantage after the war ends.

War is also not always an economic calculation: humanitarian concerns, revenge, fear, upholding the law, alliances and thoughts of glory can often motivate a conquest that holds no real value to the victor.

Why did Alexander engage in his wars? He didn't seem to particularly enjoy the job of government.

What was the economic value to Rome of destroying Carthage?

Re: Reasons to Fear Another ‘Great War’

#113

Post by teeray »

everdev wrote: post #17
AcerbicZero wrote: post #6

A modern "great war" would require countries of relatively equal military industrial power, so either it would be a great war without the US involved, i.e. China/India, Russia/China (with caveats), etc. In those situations the countries may temporarily forgo the use of nuclear weapons, at least until one side is pressed beyond the point of rational response. I'd also suggest the last time countries were so dominant i…

A counterpoint would be examining each country's idea of "acceptable losses". If losing 1 major city to nuclear weapons is considered unacceptable, then the major nuclear power are essentially on equal footing. Nuclear deterrence seems to be so effective because no nation to date has seemed to be willing to trade 1 of their cities for 2+ of their enemies.

The trouble is that opponents can mount a response while the attack is in progress. Information asymmetries would force a defender to assume the worst once they see the first missile in the air and launch their entire arsenal before their counter-attack capability was destroyed. It becomes a feedback loop when the aggressor is forced to assume they'll be met with the defender's entire arsenal.

Re: Reasons to Fear Another ‘Great War’

#114

Post by jryan49 »

AimForTheBushes wrote: post #103
jryan49 wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pretty sure no one can disagree with that, but HOW do you do it? Even harder, how do you do it and respect free speech?

Education!

In the US we spend 12 years in state mandated school and no body seems to come out any smarter :P

Re: Reasons to Fear Another ‘Great War’

#115

Post by IshKebab »

tboyd47 wrote: post #95

Our world looks similar to 1914 in a lot of ways, but it looks different in a lot of ways too. 1) Mutually assured destruction. 2) No major empires dissolving. 3) Global news keeps everyone on the same page as crises unfold. 4) World powers separated by vast seas, neutral countries, and demilitarized zones. 5) The UN exists (not always effective, but at least it's there). 6) Less chauvinism. Kaiser Wilhelm II makes T…

> Global news keeps everyone on the same page as crises unfold

Have you watched Russian news? Or Fox?

> World powers separated by vast seas, neutral countries, and demilitarized zones.

That's just not true. Where was the demilitarized zone or neutral country between Ukraine and Russia?

> Less chauvinism. Kaiser Wilhelm II makes Trump look diplomatic and cordial in comparison.

I somewhat doubt that. Again, you've heard of Putin?

Re: Reasons to Fear Another ‘Great War’

#116

Post by robbiep »

EthanHeilman wrote: post #111
jeffdavis wrote: post #29

What's the point of war in the modern world? Gain land/people? If there's a thriving economy there, war will probably change that quickly. If there's no thriving economy, what's the point? You could try to exploit the people/resources there, but the profits in that seem (at least compared to a world power) pretty thin. Unskilled labor and unimproved land are just not worth what they used to be. Specific resources mig…

>Gain land/people? If there's a thriving economy there, war will probably change that quickly. If there's no thriving economy, what's the point? The point of war in the modern world may in fact be the denial of a thriving economy or industrial base to an adversary. For instance in a large scale nuclear war many of the plans call for the destruction of enemy nuclear weapons as to protect your own infrastructure/popula…

Ultimately the answer to the economic value of Rome destroying Carthage was that Rome became the undisputed ruler of the Med for 500 years. Up until not that much time prior to the Punic wars, it wasn't at all clear that Rome would become the power that it did.

Obviously the animosity between the two played a huge part in the desire to salt the fields of Carthage, but that is almost exactly how The Entente and the Central powers felt towards each other after 2 years of war - neither of them could stomach laying down their arms, because so much blood had been spilt. So they had to keep going, and going, and going

Re: Reasons to Fear Another ‘Great War’

#117

Post by geggam »

beachy wrote: post #37

I believe that the likeliest cause of another Great War is not to save the planet from dictators, but from environmental destruction. At some stage, a consensus must build for stopping our destruction of the climate. (Well perhaps it won't, but in that case we're doomed, so there's little point in evaluating that path). At that point, some countries (presumably rich ones) will have cleaned their own houses emissions-…

Clausewitz

Der Krieg ist eine bloße Fortsetzung der Politik mit anderen Mitteln

War Is Merely the Continuation of Policy by Other Means"

Politicians always cause wars ... and always will. The only way we have a war over environment is when we impact a nation so they have no choice... or it has something to do with profit.

Re: Reasons to Fear Another ‘Great War’

#118

Post by EthanHeilman »

us-throw1 wrote: post #19
AcerbicZero wrote: post #6

A modern "great war" would require countries of relatively equal military industrial power, so either it would be a great war without the US involved, i.e. China/India, Russia/China (with caveats), etc. In those situations the countries may temporarily forgo the use of nuclear weapons, at least until one side is pressed beyond the point of rational response. I'd also suggest the last time countries were so dominant i…

Are you really sure that the US is undisputed in those 4 categories? A list of obvious weaknesses: * The US economy and industrial power is dependent on IT and brittle supply chains. Nobody knows how much the cyber infrastructure holding this up is already compromised. * Russian S-400s can already deny air superiority to Israeli planes, which are not far behind US planes. * How does the US have space superiority when…

> When was the last time US ships actually had to fight? Vietnam?

1988 Operation Praying Mantis [0] during the Tanker War in the Iran-Iraq war. Iran deployed swarm attacks, but only at a small scale. Which was one of the largest US naval battles after WW2.

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Praying_Mantis

Re: Reasons to Fear Another ‘Great War’

#119

Post by fhfjgjfducucuf »

thereare5lights wrote: post #72

Nationalism. This has been rising up like a plague in recent years and it isn't going away any time soon. When ego and emotion come into play, the question of what is the point because a matter of pride and the point is just to win regardless of the costs.

I feel this is too reductive in some senses. WWI was a war directed by imperialists sacrificing other people's children to profitier and try to grab power and influence for the elites in each country. Yes some elites did demonstrate egoism and inflame predjudice but that's the show for the rubes to get them to sacrifice their children and labor for the imperial project. Egoist leaders can only get their way if theirprogram works for enough of the people implementing their decisions.

Eugene Debs went to jail in America for imploring the working class not to fighta rich mans war and many soldiers walked away completely disgusted. Just a few miles from the trenches filled with death, the war profitiers were making a killing offering hotels and foodstuffs to soldiers on leave.

We still have a command economy based on war and our imperial project is still ongoing. We should take the lessons of world war one to heart and refuse to fight and fuel wars of domination and conquest. I can't recall the last time the western world was called to fight a defensive war after WW2, perhaps the only "good" war in our history.

https://www.marxist.com/first-world-war-a-marxist-analysis-o...

Re: Reasons to Fear Another ‘Great War’

#120

Post by eezurr »

jbattle wrote: post #68
vvillena wrote: post #44

At this point wars between powerful nations are almost impossible. Proxy wars are the current fashion, and those tend to be controlled in scale by the puppetmasters behind it. I'm more scared about a great civil war in a powerful nuclear nation. Civil wars are a savage affair where no rules apply.

This book was hugely influential in the years just before WW1 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Great_Illusion Premise: the large nations of the world are far to intertwined by commerce and culture. Large scale war would be suicidal and the leadership of these countries would never do something so foolish.

The book was right about it being suicidal, but before ww1 did we have any evidence for this?
Post reply on HN