BF2S Forums The bear has reawoken.

jord wrote:

FatherTed wrote:

People play this Georgia thing down, bear in mind WWI started for the British over Belgium and the BEF

We learned lessons, we've all advanced and grown up, etc.

Yeah, right.  We are so much better now than 60 or 6000 years ago?  There is always a feeling that the newer generation is somehow more advanced, more reasoned than a previous generation, because you can look back into history (with professors and books condensing information and making it easy for you to find), see the mistakes and issues that led to war in the past, and be able to avoid it in the future.

The sad fact is that it seems man's nature tends more toward war than toward peace.  In all of recorded history, there are less than 500 years where there was not a war or civil conflict somewhere in the world.

Or is the advancement you are thinking of the wide-eyed view of warfare that occured after WW1?  Also known as "The Great War," and "The War to End All Wars?"  They thought then that the cost of war was so terrible that no one would be crazy enough to make war again.  That view lasted about 20 years.

jord wrote:

imortal wrote:

jord wrote:

We learned lessons, we've all advanced and grown up, etc.

Yeah, right.  We are so much better now than 60 or 6000 years ago?  There is always a feeling that the newer generation is somehow more advanced, more reasoned than a previous generation, because you can look back into history (with professors and books condensing information and making it easy for you to find), see the mistakes and issues that led to war in the past, and be able to avoid it in the future.

The sad fact is that it seems man's nature tends more toward war than toward peace.  In all of recorded history, there are less than 500 years where there was not a war or civil conflict somewhere in the world.

Or is the advancement you are thinking of the wide-eyed view of warfare that occured after WW1?  Also known as "The Great War," and "The War to End All Wars?"  They thought then that the cost of war was so terrible that no one would be crazy enough to make war again.  That view lasted about 20 years.

Yeah we are "better" than 60 or 6000 years ago. War crimes are down, as is torture and the like. As religion dwindles and science and reason take over more and more society gets better. Obviously I'm talking about first world countries here and not the Middle East/Africa.

Also, we haven't had a war on the scale of WW2 because of the weapons we created then, ya know. That little thing that both Russia and Europe have here called Nuclear missles.

Yes, we do take a much dimmer view on the whole rape and pillage concept.  We have even developed a series of rules to help regulate civilized conduct during these conflicts.  But we have not yet advanced (if we ever) to the point where conflicts are no longer inevitable. 

As for nuclear weapons.  Because they ARE so powerful, they are in a catagory all of their own, warfare wise.  Since the release of them has so many horrendous outcomes, they are viewed as a weapon of last resort.  A way to "take my enemy with me."  The byproduct of this is that it would be stupid to press a nuclear power into such a corner without offering them a non-military solution.  The reason for the entire cat-and-mouse fo the Cold War was that neither the US nor the USSR wanted to press another nuclear power into open warfare, for fear the other side might launch.  That is much the same reasoning that the machine gun caused after WW1.  The cost of direct warfare would be too much.  Then, once each side learns to adjust to the new weapons, and develops tactics and strategies incorperating them, they no longer hold the stark terror they did at first.  As long as the nuclear nations of the world adopt a "I won't use them if you don't" viewpoint, then being a nuclear power does not offer any great advantage other than being less likely to being driven into a corner and killed.