5 ms·
The willingness to fight until the end, whatever the cost, is not something you rate a priori. The thing with war is that once you have it for a certain amount
by Galanwe 6mo ago
The willingness to fight until the end, whatever the cost, is not something you rate a priori.
The thing with war is that once you have it for a certain amount of time, you create a generation of people whose kids died, wife died, neighbors and family died, you have nothing to loose anymore.
There is a critical mass of casualties upon which you effectively create a population whose sole purpose, for generations, will be to resist and harm you, and that is not dependent on culture or whatever "tourism orientation" a country is labeled.
- darkwater 6mo agoYes, but if they can annihilate or get you to surrender from the beginning, there won't be such a generation.
- psychoslave 6mo agoWith incongruous premisses, one can conclude anything. How many cases of such a total annihilation/surrender goal have been attempted in human history, and how many actually achieved it?
- darkwater 6mo agoI mean, the GP example about Venezuela and Cuba was totally on point. They are not at any degree comparable to the sentiment against the US and the west in general of some Middle-East countries. I mean, Palestinian are bound to hate to death Israel and the US for a couple generations more (and for good reasons). The same does not apply to Venezuela, even with all the Chavez/Maduro propaganda against the Evil Empire.
- deleted 6mo ago[deleted]
- corimaith 6mo ago>The thing with war is that once you have it for a certain amount of time, you create a generation of people whose kids died, wife died, neighbors and family died, you have nothing to loose anymore. You... didn't learn history from before 1945 did you?
- nixon_why69 6mo agoGuns, radio and widespread literacy change things. We're not talking about the harrying of the north here.
- stuaxo 6mo agoProbably have to be quite strong to live in Cuba in the first place.