What is War?

[illusion88]

What do you consider War? When would a conflict be a war? When is a war a "Humanitarian Intervention"? Any thoughts on if we are actualy at war right now?

 

[iamshady]

I thought a true armed conflict was, economically, when all sides are devoting most of their GNP and industry for war, aka Total War.

But I do think war is taking on a new role since Kosovo, more like prolonged strikes with minimal engagement with the enemy in ground-to-ground combat.

 

[GasX]

War happens when one country declares war on another.

The Gulf War was not really a war. Neither was Vietnam, Somalia, Grenada, Korea or Panama.

Repeat after me: PO LEE SSS ACK SHUN

 

[zeruty]

War
What is it good for
Absolutely nothing
Say it again
War
What is it good for
Absolutely nothing


err, sorry.... saw rush hour recently.

anyways.. i have been reluctant to call this a war
it's hardly a war if we aren't fighting a country
I guess the best word for this....would be a crusade. But I don't mean a crusade against Islam (like The Crusades), I mean a crusade against terrorism.... anyways... I just wanted to sing

 

[GasX]

I am Michael Jackson and zeruty is Tito

 

[perry]

Main Entry: 1war
Pronunciation: 'wor
Function: noun
Usage: often attributive
Etymology: Middle English werre, from Old North French, of Germanic origin; akin to Old High German werra strife; akin to Old High German werran to confuse
Date: 12th century
1 a (1) : a state of usually open and declared armed hostile conflict between states or nations (2) : a period of such armed conflict (3) : STATE OF WAR b : the art or science of warfare c (1) obsolete : weapons and equipment for war (2) archaic : soldiers armed and equipped for war
2 a : a state of hostility, conflict, or antagonism b : a struggle or competition between opposing forces or for a particular end <a class war> <a war against disease> c : VARIANCE, ODDS 3

Look at the bolded definition. Kinda makes you think we are at war.

 

[glenn1]

<< War happens when one country declares war on another.

The Gulf War was not really a war. Neither was Vietnam, Somalia, Grenada, Korea or Panama.

Repeat after me: PO LEE SSS ACK SHUN >>



Technically, "war" is a formal declaration of hostilities by one government against another. In the real world, struggle is a simple fact of existence between any two given countries, and runs along a continuum which looks something like this:

alliance/active cooperative partners ---> peaceful coexistence ---> non-violent competition ---> Military Operations other than war (MOOTW) ---> small scale contigiencies ---> low intensity conflict ---> high intensity conflict ---> major theater wars ---> wars of mass destruction.

Generally, a status of MOOTW or less is considered "peace," small scale contingiencies and LIC to be "police actions" or whatever the politically expedient term is, and HIC or above to be general conventional war. War of mass destruction is a special category, of course.

To put these in perspective, U.S. operations in the recent past can essentially be summed up like this:

Grenada: small scale contigiency
Panama: low intensity conflict
Gulf War, Vietnam: high intensity conflict
Korea: borderline major theater war
WWII: multiple major theater war

 

[illusion88]

Perry, can you post up a link on where you got that defination?

Glenn, you wouldnt consider WWII a war of mass destrucion? You would think that the Droping of the A bomb twice would add up to mass destrucion. And that is not including all the damage done besides that. What constitutes the difference between a war of mass destrucion and multiple major theater war?

 

[GasX]

Gee, Glen. Did you ever serve in the military?

 

[glenn1]

<< Glenn, you wouldnt consider WWII a war of mass destrucion? You would think that the Droping of the A bomb twice would add up to mass destrucion. And that is not including all the damage done besides that. What constitutes the difference between a war of mass destrucion and multiple major theater war? >>



Yes and no. War of mass destruction implictly assumes mass strategic use of Weapons of Mass Destruction (Biological, Chemical, or Nuclear). The fighting powers had WMD (chemical warfare) capabilities for the duration of the war, yet chose not to use them during WWII. Yes, we did drop two atomic weapons at the end of the war, but that was more of a footnote than the distinguishing feature of the war, so i would classify it as a multiple major theater war. In a sense, WWII caused as much destruction as a war of mass destruction, but that was mainly due to it's protracted length and the scope of the fighting being so large, rather than it being a true declared state war characterized by mutual usage of WMD.

In today's terms, a war of mass destruction would equate to World War 3.



<< Gee, Glen. Did you ever serve in the military? >>



LOL... of course not, whatever gave you that impression?