3 ms·
Neither would I, but that's the context for this discussion. Major conflict between major powers as described in the article. One can bike-shed endlessly about
by eloff 6y ago
Neither would I, but that's the context for this discussion. Major conflict between major powers as described in the article.
One can bike-shed endlessly about definitions, but let's keep it to the context.
- dmos62 6y agoEither you're talking about a World War scale conflict or a regional conflict. "Major conflict in Europe" is by definition regional, because you've constrained it to Europe. If it doesn't involve Europe, it can't be a World War.
- eloff 6y agoJust read the article man. I've no further interest in nitpicking over definitions. The article talks about preparing for war with other major powers, with WWII levels of casualties.
- dmos62 6y agoI'm not commenting on the article. I'm commenting on you saying that you can't imagine a major conflict in Europe.
- eloff 6y ago> Either you're talking about a World War scale conflict or a regional conflict. "Major conflict in Europe" is by definition regional, because you've constrained it to Europe. If it doesn't involve Europe, it can't be a World War. Looks like nit picking over definitions to me. I don't see a connection to me not imaging a war between major powers in Europe. Can you make the connection for me?
- dmos62 6y agoDon't get angry. You said that you can't imagine a major conflict in Europe. That's ignorant, because Europe has never been war-free for more than a few years at a time, so I pointed that out. If you meant to say that you can't imagine something akin to WW2 or something, then just say that. Maybe you were talking about Western Europe.