1. Have an Interesting Snippet to Share : Click Here
    Dismiss Notice

A State Of War, Not War Is The Norm Now.

Discussion in 'Snippets of Life (Non-Fiction)' started by HariLakhera, Jan 8, 2023.

  1. HariLakhera

    HariLakhera Platinum IL'ite

    Messages:
    2,032
    Likes Received:
    2,273
    Trophy Points:
    283
    Gender:
    Male
    A state of War, not War is the norm now.

    (This article is influenced by the book ‘ 1949-1984’ by George Orwell.)

    It is a foregone conclusion that in today’s war, no decisive victory is possible. Russia - Ukraine war is a burning example. In the past wars were fought to gain power by way of expanding land area or possessing more dangerous weapons. Now. Land boundaries are officially or otherwise recognized with minor abrasions here and there.

    Now the State of War is more important than the war itself. All that is needed is an excuse for war, knowing fully well that that will never happen.

    Take for example Indo-Pak relations. After partition in 1947, there have been two wars-1965 and 1971 and none can be called decisive. Pakistan got divided but India gained no land mass. Both countries are not aspiring to grab land from each other to gain power and so they are investing in new and latest weapons.

    The excuse for war between the two countries since partition has been Kashmir. 1965 war was for Kashmir but no one gained. Kashmir still remains the excuse keeping both countries in a state of war.

    Similar is the position in another state of war-like situations in the world. The big powers-America, Russia, and China are always in a state of war. So are North and South Korea and some European countries.

    The question, therefore, arises about whose interest is served by the state of war mania. Your guess is mine. 99% of the population gains nothing from this. The remaining 1 % is the politicians and weapon manufacturers. This keeps them relevant, powerful, wealthy, and safe. In a state of war, the decision-makers in power and in opposition have all the security. Those active in the security of the country on land, in the sky, and on the sea suffer the most.

    There is no solution for this as because if the solution for one excuse is found, there will be another excuse. Those in power or waiting to be in power will keep the countries in a constant State of War.

    The net result is, as always has been, a society with classes-Higher, Middle, and Lower.

    This world is what it was and will be what it is.
     
    rgsrinivasan and Thyagarajan like this.
    Loading...

  2. Thyagarajan

    Thyagarajan Finest Post Winner

    Messages:
    10,136
    Likes Received:
    10,968
    Trophy Points:
    590
    Gender:
    Male
    The status of comity of Nations analysed in depth in terms state of war. Indeed war is only begins in the mind of nd continue to dwell there for perpetuity. This the status of the world after decades of summits for disarmament & rapprochement. It helps gallop the inflation the world over and push down more from middle to lower middle and lower middle to poor and poor to abject poverty. The UNO can never prevent war but proclaim pandemic.
     
    HariLakhera likes this.
  3. HariLakhera

    HariLakhera Platinum IL'ite

    Messages:
    2,032
    Likes Received:
    2,273
    Trophy Points:
    283
    Gender:
    Male
    In a way, UNO has no specific power to stop even a localized war. They have no army of their own or no opinion of their own. Yet, it is like a head of the family, whom all respect but listens to by none.
    With nuclear weapons widely available in each big country and lessons of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, no one dare start a war on a full scale. Nuclear weapons have forced self-restraint. Now there are other problem-drones. A day will come when all wars will be fought by drones and fighter pilots will become redundant.
    Again. the common man will suffer.
     
    Thyagarajan likes this.
  4. rgsrinivasan

    rgsrinivasan IL Hall of Fame

    Messages:
    10,289
    Likes Received:
    9,982
    Trophy Points:
    540
    Gender:
    Male
    @HariLakhera,
    Thanks for sharing an interesting perspective. It did remind me of "State of Fear", a novel by Michael Crichton.
    I wish we live by the boy scout principle of leaving things better that they were, when we inherited / picked them. -rgs
     
    HariLakhera and Thyagarajan like this.
  5. HariLakhera

    HariLakhera Platinum IL'ite

    Messages:
    2,032
    Likes Received:
    2,273
    Trophy Points:
    283
    Gender:
    Male
    I wish the same but I am a victim of circumstances, at the same time.
     
    Thyagarajan likes this.
  6. Viswamitra

    Viswamitra Finest Post Winner

    Messages:
    12,706
    Likes Received:
    22,828
    Trophy Points:
    538
    Gender:
    Male
    Dear Hari Sir,

    War strategies fail because it is not drawn with various components that are essential for a successful war. Even after almost many decades, one can't predict whether the WWI and WWII were successful or not, even though it produced the results.

    The critical elements that need to be studied are:

    1) The clear cut objective of the war with measurable results. For example, invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq were emotional than a clear cut objectives. It wasted a lot of time, money and of course ruined relationship with many countries. A good example is 1971 war to liberate Bangladesh and war with Iraq to liberate Kuwait.

    2) Study of the opposition strength at length before venturing into war - Many times, the countries go to war without properly understanding the strength of the opposition and the support they have from other countries. Russian war against Ukraine and the US war in Vietnam are good examples.

    3) Timeline - Every war should be conducted with a timeline and can't be for an indefinite period. There are many examples for this.

    4) Cost - Every war should have a budget and unlimited commitment of money is the best way to waste invaluable resources for unproductive purposes. However, if it is for self-defense, then, there is no scope for a budget.

    5) Trust worthy alliances - If the involvement is for self-defense, there has to be a trust worthy alliances established to provide the equipment required to fight the war.

    6) Human resources - Every deployment of human resources should be done with utmost care and diligence. Many countries do use a young population for this purpose and therefore, deployments should be done with extraordinary care.

    It is also my view, having NATO like alliances are futile as it drags many countries into a war situation because of the way the agreement is drawn. Every country should have the freedom to study the nature of war before deploying its own resources.
     
    Thyagarajan and HariLakhera like this.
  7. HariLakhera

    HariLakhera Platinum IL'ite

    Messages:
    2,032
    Likes Received:
    2,273
    Trophy Points:
    283
    Gender:
    Male
    Dear Shri Viswa,
    Very sound analysis. There are so many issues involved before a country openly declares war against another country. In my opinion, full-scale war is a thing of the past because most countries have the reach, directly or indirectly, to nuclear and chemical and now biological weapons. The basic reason is that in such a war no one will be the victor.
    But at the same time, keeping another country under subjugation with fear of war is the new trend. This is a state of war. This is happening all over the world. China may not enter a full-scale war with India but will keep the state of war alive 24/7 because all said and done, India is still not in a position to match their power.
    Another issue is in times to come, humans will have less and less role to play. Drones will replace fighter planes and pilots in across the border wars.
    My moot point is humans will keep fighting for one reason or the other. That is their basic nature.
     
    Viswamitra and Thyagarajan like this.

Share This Page