The Future Of War

Discussion in 'The Thunderdome' started by Steve C., Feb 27, 2012.

  1. Steve C.

    Steve C. Banned

    In short, there hasn't been a war amongst emerged industrialized economies since the 1940s.

    Current Balance of Power: U.S. with China, Japan, Euro, Russia, Brazil, India, Aussies, Canadians, as mid-level powers.

    Future: U.S., China, and India with Euro, Japan, SE Asia, unified Korea, Russia, Brazil, Aussies, Canadians as mid-level powers.

    Have we reached a point where both powers have so much to lose that a war, in the classical sense, would be rendered out-of-the-question?

    What say you, Eighth?
  2. Steve C.

    Steve C. Banned

    This also could be associated with Marx's concept of historical materialism . . .
  3. JayVols

    JayVols Walleye Catchin' Moderator

    I think you are on to something. The nature of military technology makes a war on the scale of the World Wars archaic suicide. Just imagine the death toll should that happen again not to mention the economic costs. Take the global nature of economics today. A major war would disrupt economies to the degree of impotence. The efficiency of today's weapons almost guarantees death on an unimaginable scale. I mean, we can use wunderkind kids with gaming skills to pilot remote weapons and inflict death on an unprecedented scale- and with less destruction of property due to precision guided munitions (sans nukes of course). I feel that we will continue to see the smaller scale conflicts and the use of elite/covert military assests to address problems throughout the world, at least on the US side. Dulles' policy of Mutually Assured Destruction doesn't just apply to nukes anymore. With the technology available, this principle has crossed over into the conventional weapons realm as well.

Share This Page