history consists of “wars to end all wars”, “wars to punish aggressors” and alikes, not a single of them actually worked at stopping future wars. On the other hand just giving in, like many did to Romans, or Mongols, not too infrequently led to centuries of peace.
How do “wars to stop the invaders looting your stuff, killing most of your menfolk, raping your women and eating your lifestock” fit in here?
You have a strange idea of ‘just’ if it doesn’t include a nation defending itself from attack (war) ever.
Oh please, everyone war in history was two nations both “just defending themselves” or having an otherwise good excuse and invader stories are as reliable as the ticking clock of torture stories.
What usually happens is that elites of one country want to get some concessions from elites of other country, and the common people in both suffer. Their vast suffering counts for nothing compared to the slightest one of the elites, of course.
Oh please, everyone war in history was two nations both “just defending themselves” or having an otherwise good excuse and invader stories are as reliable as the ticking clock of torture stories.
No they didn’t. Some just wanted to take over stuff and said as much.
What usually happens is that elites of one country want to get some concessions from elites of other country, and the common people in both suffer. Their vast suffering counts for nothing compared to the slightest one of the elites, of course.
You have changed from everyone to usually. You also completely neglect the fact that the inhabitants of invaded countries are not always treated particularly well. By ‘not treated particularly well’ I mean they are killed, raped, taken as slaves or generally left destitute.
Invasions are not happy events for the populous, even when you do not put up a fight. Especially if you are not the same colour as the conqueror. Prevent them if it is convenient to do so.
Although I find your cynicism appealing the position you have taken in support of your is untenable. You don’t need to kill all the enemy soldiers for “War’s are never about justice” to be victorious here.
No they didn’t. Some just wanted to take over stuff and said as much.
Indeed, and this should be stressed. The Mongols and the army of Alexander the Great are both examples of this. So are the various religion-fueled wars between Christian empires and Islamic empires. Hitler was another would-be conqueror who didn’t make his ambitions much of a secret. Napoleon, too, was an invading conqueror; I don’t know what arguments he made to justify his invasions of the rest of Europe, but he certainly acted like a conqueror.
We usually think of the Romans as conquerors, but they didn’t think of themselves that way. In their writings, they almost always described their wars as defensive conflicts, much like the U.S. has.
How do “wars to stop the invaders looting your stuff, killing most of your menfolk, raping your women and eating your lifestock” fit in here?
You have a strange idea of ‘just’ if it doesn’t include a nation defending itself from attack (war) ever.
Also, if the aggressor is killing all of your population, then it will be their genetic descendants enjoying those centuries of peace, and not yours.
Oh please, everyone war in history was two nations both “just defending themselves” or having an otherwise good excuse and invader stories are as reliable as the ticking clock of torture stories.
What usually happens is that elites of one country want to get some concessions from elites of other country, and the common people in both suffer. Their vast suffering counts for nothing compared to the slightest one of the elites, of course.
No they didn’t. Some just wanted to take over stuff and said as much.
You have changed from everyone to usually. You also completely neglect the fact that the inhabitants of invaded countries are not always treated particularly well. By ‘not treated particularly well’ I mean they are killed, raped, taken as slaves or generally left destitute.
Invasions are not happy events for the populous, even when you do not put up a fight. Especially if you are not the same colour as the conqueror. Prevent them if it is convenient to do so.
Although I find your cynicism appealing the position you have taken in support of your is untenable. You don’t need to kill all the enemy soldiers for “War’s are never about justice” to be victorious here.
Indeed, and this should be stressed. The Mongols and the army of Alexander the Great are both examples of this. So are the various religion-fueled wars between Christian empires and Islamic empires. Hitler was another would-be conqueror who didn’t make his ambitions much of a secret. Napoleon, too, was an invading conqueror; I don’t know what arguments he made to justify his invasions of the rest of Europe, but he certainly acted like a conqueror.
We usually think of the Romans as conquerors, but they didn’t think of themselves that way. In their writings, they almost always described their wars as defensive conflicts, much like the U.S. has.