Home
Latest images
Register
Log in
@ Garry B
".......Just before WWI it was believed a world war would not be possible because two major factions had developed in Europe each serving as the others deterrent... there could not be war in Europe because the two enormous colossal factions would make a conflict horrendously costly and brutal for both sides with the result being a terrible stalemate that could last years.Of course it was bollocks.You don't prevent war by building up coalitions of the stupid that arm themselves up with trillions of dollars in weapons.... eventually they end up using them........"
I think their reasoning was valid . The East / West alliances had rough parity and this kept the peace in Europe . The problem now is that these coalitions in Europe now favour the West against the East . Then balance of forces is broken , and this leads to instability and war . The smart thing to do is to form smart alliances as you suggest . And these should be allowed and do form . And they should be dissolved , once conflicts subside . Otherwise they constitute a source of instability .
In Europe , in case of tensions , a coalition may form that involves say France and Britain to confront or deter Russia alone or an alliance of Russia and say Germany . This may be a spontaneous temporary arrangement that stops full scale war . This is a natural evolution of local conditions . Will keep the peace . A smart arrangement .
However super-alliances involving several states , such as the pan-Turkic or pan-Arabic or pan -European , even if they form and hold together , result in expansionist and escalating and devastating wars . One way to allow for smart alliances , is to allow nations an adequate national defence force . And the other is to avoid formation of super-alliances , that are unnecessary .
".......Just before WWI it was believed a world war would not be possible because two major factions had developed in Europe each serving as the others deterrent... there could not be war in Europe because the two enormous colossal factions would make a conflict horrendously costly and brutal for both sides with the result being a terrible stalemate that could last years.Of course it was bollocks.You don't prevent war by building up coalitions of the stupid that arm themselves up with trillions of dollars in weapons.... eventually they end up using them........"
I think their reasoning was valid . The East / West alliances had rough parity and this kept the peace in Europe . The problem now is that these coalitions in Europe now favour the West against the East . Then balance of forces is broken , and this leads to instability and war . The smart thing to do is to form smart alliances as you suggest . And these should be allowed and do form . And they should be dissolved , once conflicts subside . Otherwise they constitute a source of instability .
In Europe , in case of tensions , a coalition may form that involves say France and Britain to confront or deter Russia alone or an alliance of Russia and say Germany . This may be a spontaneous temporary arrangement that stops full scale war . This is a natural evolution of local conditions . Will keep the peace . A smart arrangement .
However super-alliances involving several states , such as the pan-Turkic or pan-Arabic or pan -European , even if they form and hold together , result in expansionist and escalating and devastating wars . One way to allow for smart alliances , is to allow nations an adequate national defence force . And the other is to avoid formation of super-alliances , that are unnecessary .
JohninMK
