Tim the turtle
Happy Mudkip
This isn't really a debate anymore. I think that it's time that this thread was brought on track. I am going to begin arguing from the point of view that I expressed earlier in the thread as the idea of an end to war seems the minority view point here so I will be taking the position of devil's advocate.
I think that there are several key ideas to the eradication of war in society.
The first of these is the development of weaponry that has the capability of annihilating a nation. The advent of the nuclear age has given several key nations an unmistakable advantage in warfare, however this is tied in with the theory of Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD). A nuclear nation cannot hope to engage another similarly equipped nation for fear of massive retaliation. Although logically we should conclude that this does not in any way stop the use of conventional warfare, as Mueller states "Escalation is a myth", it is difficult to imagine that such a conclusion is easy for a leader to make. The pressure of second guessing a nations' response to any form of warfare could all to easily prove too much of a burden to consciously decide on war. So whilst escalation as a certainty is a myth, that does not mean that it can't happen. We can see this demonstrated in history, for example although conventional warfare did break out during the Cold War, it never occured directly between two nuclear states.
The second is the spread of stable economic models that rely on a democratic system. The increasing importance of the working classes in influencing decisions cannot be overstated. As control of a nation shifts from dynastic succession to elected representatives war becomes less likely because it stops being a "gentlemen's proving ground." War in Europe prior to the 20th century was seen as a romantic sprot. Aristocratic young men would often be given the command of armies despite a lack of military understanding simply because it was deemed "proper" that they should go to war. Now that government is not decided by an aristocracy it becomes far less likely that war carries on as a traditionalist method of settling desputes, especially as the working class are less likely to support armed conflict.
Food for though for now, more to come later when I'm not hungover or at a music festival preparing to get hungover
I think that there are several key ideas to the eradication of war in society.
The first of these is the development of weaponry that has the capability of annihilating a nation. The advent of the nuclear age has given several key nations an unmistakable advantage in warfare, however this is tied in with the theory of Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD). A nuclear nation cannot hope to engage another similarly equipped nation for fear of massive retaliation. Although logically we should conclude that this does not in any way stop the use of conventional warfare, as Mueller states "Escalation is a myth", it is difficult to imagine that such a conclusion is easy for a leader to make. The pressure of second guessing a nations' response to any form of warfare could all to easily prove too much of a burden to consciously decide on war. So whilst escalation as a certainty is a myth, that does not mean that it can't happen. We can see this demonstrated in history, for example although conventional warfare did break out during the Cold War, it never occured directly between two nuclear states.
The second is the spread of stable economic models that rely on a democratic system. The increasing importance of the working classes in influencing decisions cannot be overstated. As control of a nation shifts from dynastic succession to elected representatives war becomes less likely because it stops being a "gentlemen's proving ground." War in Europe prior to the 20th century was seen as a romantic sprot. Aristocratic young men would often be given the command of armies despite a lack of military understanding simply because it was deemed "proper" that they should go to war. Now that government is not decided by an aristocracy it becomes far less likely that war carries on as a traditionalist method of settling desputes, especially as the working class are less likely to support armed conflict.
Food for though for now, more to come later when I'm not hungover or at a music festival preparing to get hungover