3 ms·
Not if we kick off WW3 as a last ditch attempt to hold on to the old order ;)
by N_Lens 18d ago
Not if we kick off WW3 as a last ditch attempt to hold on to the old order ;)
- 9dev 18d agoYou jest, but if you've ever seen a wounded animal fighting like mad for survival, I wouldn't be so confident that won't be the exact same things that's going to happen.
- desterothx 18d agoYou don't have to look into the animal kingdom, history works too. No ruling empire has fallen silently and without conflict. Changing the world order always included an aggressive transfer of power
- actionfromafar 18d agoThe British Empire dismantling wasn't exactly peaceful, but it could have been much worse. Next to India, everything else becomes a rounding error.
- graemep 18d agoIt was mostly peaceful in itself. There was a lot of conflict that followed in the wake of it as borders and power structures were settled. Just in South Asia we had the partition of India, the secession of Bangladesh from Pakistan, the Sri Lankan civil war, and various smaller separatist conflicts.
- sajithdilshan 17d agoNot to mention the whole Middle East mess is due to the British on how they drew the borders when they left
- throwaway894345 18d agoIn the case of my country, USA, we are the ones wounding ourselves. We made the conscious choice to elect a government that prefers isolationism to economic competition, and which rejected near-peer military preparedness in favor of more deadlock wars with third world middle east countries. It’s not like we were somehow victimized by the EU.
- swat535 17d agoThis unfortunately tends to happen, declining empires usually cause a lot of destruction in history on their way out.