3 ms·
Great point. Labeling it as 'defense' instead of 'war' might be one of the more brilliant marketing tricks in the last century. No one likes war, everyone love
by giwook 6mo ago
Great point. Labeling it as 'defense' instead of 'war' might be one of the more brilliant marketing tricks in the last century.
No one likes war, everyone loves defense. Something something expanded surveillance under the guise of counter-terrorism post-9/11.
- JumpCrisscross 6mo ago> No one likes war, everyone loves defense. Something something expanded surveillance under the guise of counter-terrorism post-9/11 It was renamed after WWII. In part because smart minds realised that war between industrialised civilisations had ceased to be an accretive endeavour since sometime between Napoleon and the Kaiser.
- chrisco255 6mo agoHave you heard about the Cold War that immediately ensued after WW2 between the world's two leading industrial nations?
- Aeolun 6mo agoEveryone involved was smart enough to realize it shouldn’t go hot.
- carlosjobim 6mo agoExcept for in Korea, Vietnam, etc etc
- JumpCrisscross 6mo ago> Except for in Korea, Vietnam, etc etc I originally discussed "war between industrialised civilisations." "Korea, Vietnam, etc" were not that. The World Wars drove home the argument that direct confrontation between industrialised socieities is a lose-lose proposition. Since WWII, what I think we've been experimenting with is whether industrialised civilisations can wage war by proxy and still come out ahead. ("Ahead" here measured in relative and absolute power and wealth.) The answer appears to be no–unless you can bog down another who was stupid enough to engage without a proxy. But I don't think it was obviously no until somewhere between the Iraq War and now.
- chrisco255 6mo agoIt went hot in proxy wars. It only didn't go to total war because of threat of nuclear war and even then nuclear incidents nearly happened on multiple occasions.