The Spoils of War

[alan8325]

First of all, I'm not promoting warfare or anything like that, but the whole recent anti-war mentality has made me wonder about some things. I'm probably going to sound like Hitler, but all I'm doing is examining the mentality of people today versus people of the past.

Historically, there have been some huge empires created by conquering surrounding (or not surrounding) territories that were held by people with less military strength. Alexander the Great, Ghengis Khan, the Roman Empire, England and others each had periods of vast imperial expansion. During their conquest of territory, they managed to gain large amounts of resources and expand the living area of their own people. After every battle, the winning side would have the freedom to take whatever they want from the losing side.

It sounds brutal, but the people of expanding empires were proud to be a part of such a powerful force that would improve their lives through the securing of new resources. Additionally, the losing side would accept defeat or face the execution of many people, mostly men, while leaving the women and children to learn the ways of the new rulers.

What I'm wondering is what has caused such a change in mentality where the people of a powerful country, such as the United States, would be in protest of securing the resources of a weaker country? Also, why would the government not want to secure the resources of the conquered country for itself? I can understand why other countries would be upset over an invasion, but what about the people who would benefit from the spoils of war, if there is still such a thing? War doesn't seem to have any real spoils anymore, except to rid some other country of its ruler(s). With all the Americans that died in Iraq and with all the oil there, my gasoline should be practically free. Sure there are a lot of people whose lives will get dramatically worse through war, but if one side is willing to go to war, why not make the most of the sacrifice? It looks like through the Iraq war, the U.S. really isn't getting anything. Maybe this is why so many Americans don't like it?

I know I probably sound like a horrible human being, but I guess it's just primal insticts to take what you can. Feel free to flame away. :flame:

 

[Prone]

Not even worth flaming really. You are entitled to your opinion.

 

[Sprafa]

meh..... we should have evolved beyond the imperialistic mentality...

 

[Mr-Fusion]

You do sound like a horrible human being. There's a certain percentage of humans living on this planet who want to evolve and grow past the primitive need for war, conquest and power. Live together like happy chappies etc...

Spoils of war, earnt from death, bloodshed and suffering hmm. My set of morals tells me that's wrong. I find it highly unlikely anti-war people would change their opinions if oil prices suddenly dropped to record lows.

Give me my frigging hydrogen powered car. Petrol is too expensive.

 

[K e r b e r o s]

What I'm wondering is what has caused such a change in mentality where the people of a powerful country, such as the United States, would be in protest of securing the resources of a weaker country?

People dont like taking "spoils of war" anymore, because its personal property--even the US GI's after the Fall of Berlin, respect this.

Why dont people do it now, or enjoy it today? Because, it'd make half of them unpopular in the forums today.

Leave a communist to do all the dirty work.

Additionally, the losing side would accept defeat or face the execution of many people, mostly men, while leaving the women and children to learn the ways of the new rulers.

This is true.

Also, why would the government not want to secure the resources of the conquered country for itself?

Because, apparently, its for Iraqis. Meanwhile...insurgents are trying to burn the fields.

I can understand why other countries would be upset over an invasion, but what about the people who would benefit from the spoils of war, if there is still such a thing? War doesn't seem to have any real spoils anymore, except to rid some other country of its ruler(s).

Ideally, because after overseeing the massacre caused by the Concentration Camps and GuLAG's, people have instituted a policy of "never again".

Needless to say, if this was'nt the time of now, and Germany happened to be invading the middle-east, Fallujah would just be another St. Petersburg.

With all the Americans that died in Iraq and with all the oil there, my gasoline should be practically free. Sure there are a lot of people whose lives will get dramatically worse through war, but if one side is willing to go to war, why not make the most of the sacrifice?

Because, all people fear sacrifice to some element. Well, in the US anyway. Also, in Canada. Also, in Europe.

If people were willing to make sacrifice, they're might've been a World War III.

 

[Spartan]

What I'm wondering is what has caused such a change in mentality where the people of a powerful country, such as the United States, would be in protest of securing the resources of a weaker country?

I think it's called civilization.

 

[Prone]

Needless to say, if this was'nt the time of now, and Germany happened to be invading the middle-east, Fallujah would just be another St. Petersburg

What happened in St. Petersburg? I mean, I'm German but I'm too uneducated to know...

 

[alan8325]

I don't buy the "we evolved" argument, but I do agree that maybe the previous imperialist wars were driven by a NEED for more resources. This is why the people supported it. Currently, the U.S. does not need more resources. Rather than just take the resources in Iraq, I guess it is more important, and the government sees that we will benefit more in the long-term, to remove a potentially threatening leader and make the people of Iraq like us. It doesn't seem to be working so far though.

I do believe though, that once a modern "civilised and evolved" country begins to run out of resources, they will return to, and people will support, an expansionist mentality. There simply would be no other choice.

 

[Sprafa]

I don't buy the "we evolved" argument, but I do agree that maybe the previous imperialist wars were driven by a NEED for more resources. This is why the people supported it. Currently, the U.S. does not need more resources. Rather than just take the resources in Iraq, I guess it is more important, and the government sees that we will benefit more in the long-term, to remove a potentially threatening leader and make the people of Iraq like us. It doesn't seem to be working so far though.

I do believe though, that once a modern "civilised and evolved" country begins to run out of resources, they will return to, and people will support, an expansionist mentality. There simply would be no other choice.

maybe union instead of imperialism.

 

[K e r b e r o s]

What happened in St. Petersburg? I mean, I'm German but I'm too uneducated to know...

Its just a metaphorical name for...what was it? Kiev, Kharkov, or some other place with a K.

Needless to say, the German army was advancing in 1941, when a pocket of 200,000 Soviet Troops got caught around this one city.

The Soviet Commander tried to throw up a last ditch effort to control the Germans away from Moscow, but, within five days, the whole saliant was wiped away.

The City involved was the last to be captured, and it was smashed into literal rubbel.

...or was St. Petersburg for something else? Like a, "grad" at the end. But not Stalingrad.

But yes, im clearly talking about a town I know exists, but I just dont know the correct name for.

 

[Sprafa]

It was Stalingrad....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Stalingrad

 

[Prone]

thanks for clearing that up

 

[K e r b e r o s]

Oh yes! Thank you very mucho.

 

[Tropico]

The truth is mankind have evolved.
Humans are seen as individuals and not as simple tribes or population.
Within countries there are factions.
Also war for territory makes no sense.A bit of land is not that important.
The real prize now is natural resources.Oil gold etc..
And war is still fought for that.

 

[K e r b e r o s]

The truth is mankind have evolved.
Humans are seen as individuals and not as simple tribes or population.
Within countries there are factions.
Also war for territory makes no sense.A bit of land is not that important.
The real prize now is natural resources.Oil gold etc..
And war is still fought for that.

I can make a poem too, but it does'nt involve your thinking. Get outside of the box, its a little obvious your a conspiracy theorists.

 

[Lil' Timmy]

why are you people flaming alan? it's a valid observation, and the explanation is actually quite simple. it has to do with tribalism and personal identity. past conflicts involved people with strong senses of 'us' and 'them'.

humans are a social animal, and the social systems usually exhibited by humans are (in increasing social complexity) are 1) clans, 2) tribes, 3) kingdoms/chiefdoms, and 4) nation-states. we define ourselves as an 'us' identity in relation to our society. within clans, 'us' is usually defined by extended families, a strong genetic relationship is apparent. for tribes, it's usually a group of related families. essentially a group of related clans. the leap from tribes to kingdoms is noticeably more profound than the leap from clans to tribes. kingdoms often involve a ruling class of fairly-related individuals (a clan/tribe, if you will), but the subjects ruled over can be very diverse in their ethnicity. often this is manifested in social castes, but it's important to note that distantly related peoples can live under the umbrella of a kingdom without one being enslaved by the other. similarly to clans -> tribes, kingdoms -> nations involves the cobbling together of several of the lower-order systems. but in every case, we see ourselves as part of our social group, and people outside of this group are qualitatively distinct, and generally, less human (in the sense that it is not taboo to destroy or dominate them).

lets take a tribe as our example: within any given tribe, it is nearly always forbidden to kill another tribe member. moreover, there is a level of respect among persons of the same tribe. but other humans that are members of different tribes are not afforded the same respect. they are not the same, they are different, others. others can be killed, raped and owned. and this is almost uniformly what happens when one tribe conquers another (killing of men, in war or after, rape of women, and enslavement of either).

this basic understanding can be used for any of the major social organizations. history has trended towards more complex societies for various reasons, one of them being that when a higher-order society encounters a lower-order one, generally the higher-order one conquers and annihilates/subsumes the other. today, a new system seems to be emerging (we'll see if it actually does, and we'll see how stable it is). 'globalism' is a burgeoning concept. 'globalists' tend to see every human as a part of the 'us' group.

now, on a completely unrelated issue, there are many people who don't support this war for completely non-'globalist' reasons. people within kingdoms and nations can often have widely disparate concerns and beliefs; this is how civil disputes arise (this is less true of clans and tribes). there are those of us who think that war in iraq is stupid, not for humanitarian reasons, but b/c it's a waste of our men and women and our money. it's detrimental to our society.

i think both of these things are at play.

 

[K e r b e r o s]

This is true ^

 

[NeptuneUK]

Not even worth flaming really. You are entitled to your opinion.

if only the rest of the population thought this way... omg if EVERYONE was like that there would be no wars! and we would all run around hugging trees and stroking rabbits with pink fur and shiny eyes.. *shudder*

 

[K e r b e r o s]

if only the rest of the population thought this way... omg if EVERYONE was like that there would be no wars! and we would all run around hugging trees and stroking rabbits with pink fur and shiny eyes.. *shudder*

I agree. Too bad 9/11 had to happen.

 

[The Mullinator]

Human beings have not evolved at all, we have the exact same brains as people from 2000 years ago.

What this shows is that our ways of thinking depend more on what we are taught, what we observe, what we experience as children is what will determine our way of thinking. We are animals, we always have been. In the past we simply allowed our animal instincts to have more control of our beliefs and what we teach to our children. As time went on and a combination of complicated historical events and changes occured we started to teach our children differently and tell them to embrace peace.

The result was what we have today where the mentality is that war is bad, we are still the same animals as we have always been but for most of us our beliefs don't show it. However deep down we are still the same animal, many people here would punch Bush in the face given the chance even though they oppose war. Go figure.

Personally I don't really mind war in the long run. In the short term and at an individual level it is horrible but in the greater picture it has proven a good thing alot of the time. One of the greatest reasons war occurs is because we are an ambitious race, and if we weren't ambitious then we probably would be the same stone tool making, spear weilding cave men we were in the past.

War gives us technology, it unifies us, and it destroys opposition which often in the long run means more unification. The reason we are so divided now is because in the past there was no completely dominating empire that was able to maintain its hold on its own territory. In the long run we will need to be completely unified. I utterly despise this idea of national identity, I despise this idea that one nation is greater than another, I despise this idea that we are segregated by country. We are all human. We shouldn't have almost 200 national anthems, we should have one world anthem. War in the past would have been the way to get that, however due to how inter-connected we are now that is impossible. War would be the fastest and most efficient way to do it but it won't be able to happen that way now. We will have to take the long and unsure path to unification.

EDIT: I really truly do wish I had an army so advanced and so large that I could completely take over the world, destroy all other militaries, put down any rebellions, eliminate all ideas of "national" identity and for the first time in history bring all of humanity under one banner.

 

[Tr0n]

It's gonna be a long long time before this world unites.There would have to be something drastic to happen.I don't think it's ever gonna happen in our lifetime...

 

[dart321]

"Only the dead have seen the end of war." -Plato

 

[Platinum]

alot of reading there ... thank you for your opinion

 

[nick_t]

I utterly despise this idea of national identity, I despise this idea that one nation is greater than another, I despise this idea that we are segregated by country. We are all human. We shouldn't have almost 200 national anthems, we should have one world anthem. War in the past would have been the way to get that, however due to how inter-connected we are now that is impossible. War would be the fastest and most efficient way to do it but it won't be able to happen that way now. We will have to take the long and unsure path to unification.

...eliminate all ideas of "national" identity...

I like the idea of national identity. I would hate for everyone on earth to have the same culture as me and speak only my language. Anyway you look at it, people always feel a part of something. National identity is one thing. Take that away and they will find another way to be part of something else (their community, family etc.). All in all, people will never be completely unified. Everyone is part of the world community, their nation, their local community, their family, their culture/race, their religion, etc. However, people always compete against one another and often under a certain "indentity". So to eliminate all this competition you would have to remove all identities people might categorize themselves by untill everyone is the same exact person (like clones). In conclusion, removing national identity won't help with anything because the same problems of national idenity will conceal themselves under other idenitities and people can never be unified because nature causes them to compete against each other to show their supremacy.