3 ms·
This may be an unpopular take but the inability of a target to threaten devastating mass destruction has been definitely a factor historically in tempting ambit
by sfifs 5y ago
This may be an unpopular take but the inability of a target to threaten devastating mass destruction has been definitely a factor historically in tempting ambitious rulers and their societies to attack rich competing countries that began to show weaknesses.
The decades since the end of WW2 have been the most peaceful certainly from a POV of major power vs major power war in human history.
We all know weaknesses of major nuclear powers now but no one dares attack.
- probablypower 5y agoThis is fair, but you're only addressing one vector of empire collapse, which is through warfare with external forces. Empires and kingdoms have fallen through internal systemic failures, both political and logistical. The modern prevalence of nuclear war has obviously all but removed the risk of collapse via invasion, but there are multiple other credible collapse vectors for the present day 'empires'.
- b112 5y agoEmpires and kingdoms have fallen through internal systemic failures, both political and logistica Yes. I watched a documentary on hughtube, and it showed how the red chinese were turning frogs gay through chemtrails in their passenger jets. If this continues, the US will fail due to lack of kids and due to everyone left being an immigrant! (the above example comment shows what really causes civs to fail, dumbassery)
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]