Emperor did nothing wrong you reddit cuck. I don't give a fuck about your heretical "feelings" you betrayed your own species because some dark gods tempted you with candy.
>trapped on the Golden Throne for eternity in agony, if he dies or magically gets better and tries to get up then Terra is swallowed by the Warp instantly >said Throne and the psychic beacon caused by Emp's fracturing soul is actively attracting an extragalactic threat straight towards Terra anyway >Imperium a conveyer belt unwittingly feeding souls straight to Chaos >Inquisition practically runs the Imperium with no oversight, Inquisitors toy with Chaos artifacts and daemons more than Fulgrim did with the fucking Laer blade, half of the Imperium's problems are self-caused and self-propagated
The Emperor was just the baddest warlord on Terra. If he didn't have magic genes that turn people into demigods when he puts his seed inside them, none of his plans would have worked. Most of them didn't, which is why the Imperium that was founded as a secular atheistic autocracy quickly became the most superstitious bureaucracy of frothing zealots within a century of the Emperor's not-death.
The real moral of 40k is "don't let the autist and his autist sons draft your society".
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
>or magically gets better and tries to get up then Terra is swallowed by the Warp instantly
lolwut
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
There's a reason people get mad at Magnus anon. He fucked up the Webway Project in such a way that the Emperor (or at least someone with near-peer psychic ability) HAS to be sitting on the Throne constantly or Terra will become another Eye of Terror.
Sure, just get another psyker to sit on it you might say. Thing is Malcador died sitting on it, and he only sat on the Throne long enough for the Emperor to confront Horus.
Didn't Emperor make deal with Chaos to get power (Primarchs) but then tried to cheat Chaos and didn't hold his part of the deal (bending knee to Chaos)?
IIRC, his end of the bargain was to give the Ruinous Powers a veritable playground to mess with, or causing chaos you might say. They couldn't actually do much you see, maybe mess with a few planets but there was nothing happening on a galactic scale. The Emperor was going to create an interconnected galaxy-spanning empire, with the implication that they would now have a grand playing field. Emps instead tried to bring everything into strict order as he created the Imperium. This is when they realized what he was doing and corrupted half of the Legions and their Primarchs. Not all of them, because that's part of the Great Game for them. The game's no fun if there's nobody to truly fuck with. They got what they wanted in the end, a galaxy in chaos for the dark gods to laugh at.
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
Magnus is the child that accidentally shoots his Dad's hunting gun at Grandpa's Urn because Dad never showed junior how guns work and why you should respect them.
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
>There's a reason people get mad at Magnus anon. He fucked up the Webway Project in such a way that the Emperor (or at least someone with near-peer psychic ability) HAS to be sitting on the Throne constantly or Terra will become another Eye of Terror.
Because the old story where he just got whacked for using sorcery to do a message was just too sympathetic.
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
I will be entirely fair to Magnus, given that he literally had no idea. The Emperor didn't tell anyone about his Webway project, citing that he just didn't trust them when asked, such as when Horus asked and was told to shut the fuck up and lead the Crusade as Big E fucked off to work on his project in secret.
Magnus had no way of knowing what would happen, he didn't even know what this project was. It's like your dad building a house of cards right behind a door, and when you open the door to tell dad that your older brother is trying to burn the house down, you knock it all over and dad whips you with the buckle-end of the belt.
The Emperor also just wanted Magnus to be brought straight to Terra, Horus intentionally confused the orders and told the Space Wolves to purge Prospero. I think the implication was that the Emperor was going to make Magnus sit on the Golden Throne forever instead of him, given that Magnus was probably the only psyker in the Emperor's retinue who came close to matching Big E's psychic prowess. I'm not even going to venture a guess as to whether this fate would be worse than him getting tricked into becoming a pawn of Tzeentch.
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
I know, was just poking at how the Index Astartes version had Magnus be even more sympathetic.
As for the orders getting changed that varies depending on the version (even whether or not Tutelaries are daemons depends on the version) with Inferno having Russ chomping at the bit to kill Magnus no matter how Valdor reminded him of the original orders.
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
Didn't Emperor make deal with Chaos to get power (Primarchs) but then tried to cheat Chaos and didn't hold his part of the deal (bending knee to Chaos)?
No, desperation drives innovation, fighting goat herders and losing some dude to an ied every other week won't see any innovation that couldn't have happened cheaper without the "war".
Just FYI those chips at the bottom left are probably of the type where if you want to remove their firmware, you just shine UV rays on the exposed chip for the specified duration and intensity, and you may reprogram them... it's super old fashioned, because we can remove FW through serial lines now, but it's fun technology.
EPROMs, or erasable programmable read-only memory.
A later variant, the electrically erasable EEPROM sort of evolved into modern flash memory over the years.
The forging developments of bronze, iron, steel etc. was largely encouraged by the need to use these metals in war.
jet engines were developed in peace time, but not used until war made them necessary. Many aerial innovations like Radar were developed because of war and otherwise would’ve stayed as undeveloped white elephants. Nuclear fission reactors were developed because they directly came from atom bomb technology. Nuclear fusion reactors are unnecessary for fusion bombs, so despite being way better and safer, they still haven’t been funded to the point of working properly because there is no military incentive.
War definitely drives innovation and development faster than peace. The trick is ensuring your war does not destroy whatever’s been already built to a point that it outweighs the new inventions.
In normal peacetime we won’t. The space race was funded because of the Cold War, because having rockets that put a man in space or on the moon was a demonstration of our ICBM capabilities. If the soviets landed on the moon first then America would have funded a Mars mission, and they reckon they would have got a man on Mars by 1985. But America made the moon first, and the Soviets didn’t have the economy to get to Mars, so NASA stopped there. A great many inventions and innovations are only developed because of military applications. Without that push, Politicians would just use the excess money to build themselves bigger vanity projects and funnel funds into their families and friends ‘consultancy agencies’ and ‘thinktanks’.
>Without that push, Politicians would just use the excess money to build themselves bigger vanity projects
Without that push, landing on Mars would be considered a vanity project (still is).
In the right amount, I think the answer has to be yes.
One theory of why Europe developed so far ahead of the rest of the world was that centralised states were necessary to fund the elaborate armies that European states needed to defend themselves in their relatively conflict-ridden corner of the world. Things like public schools and public health have a military rationale that was key to getting them off the ground - they still do, in fact. What's the point in investing in education for other people? How does that help me? The answer is that weak countries get conquered by strong countries, so do you want to be the victor or the vanquished? When push comes to shove your enduring freedom will be determined by the strength of the men standing beside you, not your own effort alone - so pay for the free college and free healthcare. This "national strength" reasoning was much more prominent in ye olde days when war was less foreign.
War is destructive, so it can't continue on for too long, and I would never choose war over peace even if I knew the war would lead to "advances," because war is horrible. It's not NECESSARY for society to advance, and thus it's to be avoided at almost any price because it's so terrible. But yes, war can help advance a society.
>They have even more civilian economic rationale
Sure, but imagine you're a wealthy landowner who already has all the money you'll ever need. Do you care more about the poor people starving in the streets, or the rich fucks one country over who might come and take your stuff?
"Strengthening the state" was the non-religious, pre-human rights reason for things like public schools. It was never "build school -> better soldiers" but it was along the lines of "school -> industry -> economy -> armaments -> strong country" with the "win wars" part of it being implicit. In the early days of the modern state all policy had primarily a national strength frame around it. The civilian benefits were definitely a bonus (public schools are kind of a no-brainer) but they used to talk about "schools are good for the army" back then in a way that we just don't anymore. For example, nobody is arguing for student debt forgiveness or free college on the basis that it will generate more graduates from the defence sector.
>Do you care more about the poor people starving in the streets, or the rich fucks one country over who might come and take your stuff?
These questions, and the answers to both, are interrelated; you want to uplift the poor people starving in the streets, because they then consume more of your goods and services, are more dependent on you, AND they make better soldiers to defend your shit for you
This is the symbiosis that is the foundation of civilisation; a king who takes care of himself and nobody else is either couped (see: Africa) or has his nation conquered; a king who takes care of his people builds lasting nations
The real key is how to retain control of the populace while simultaneously giving them tools that could be turned on you >it was along the lines of "school -> industry -> economy -> armaments -> strong country" with the "win wars" part of it being implicit
I mean, you've answered your own question really. >they used to talk about "schools are good for the army" back then in a way that we just don't anymore
Oh.
Well, that's because the fall of the USSR created a totally unprecedented peace that we squandered, anon. Think about it: after WW2, the "civilised" nations created the United Nations to pretend that conquest was a thing of the past; nuclear deterrence enabled the enforcement of this mindset. The Cold War kept people on their toes but even so peacenik movements were rampant, because "surely the Soviets can't be all that bad, my government must be pulling a trick". Then the Berlin Wall came down, and we defeated even that "dubious" enemy, amirite? What was there left to do but disarm? We've apparently solved world peace, on a macro level.
On the subject of >student debt forgiveness >free college
It's pure political manoeuvreing, to get the young adult / do gooder / social democrat vote.
Insulating people from the consequences of their shitty decisions never turns out well.
what would life be then without war? its horrible, a fucking horrendous, filthy thing, but lets be honest, civilization was progressed by the fact we, as humans, have hated each other enough to kill one another in droves.
When your busy with the bayonet, you think of what else the bayonet could be. It could be a chisel, yes? that chisel could conjure up a great building, no? that building could house to protect prior knowledge gained, surely?
>One theory of why Europe developed so far ahead of the rest of the world was that centralised states were necessary to fund the elaborate armies that European states needed to defend themselves in their relatively conflict-ridden corner of the world.
Akshually Europe was much more decentralized than rest of the civilised world. First European centralized super state (France) formed in 17th century when progress was on steady rise in Europe
I have opinion that division and fragmentation of the Europe was catalyst that kick started progress on Europe but not other places. Huge developed states were common before especially in Asia. But their centralisation became their failure. Asian type despotism funnel all GDP to worshiping state and "Great Dear Leader". That suppresses initiative, meritocracy, and promotes bootlicking "yes men" society.
Europe been devided limited tyranny of autocrats and if some merchant or entrepreneur had conflict with the state they could just cross state lines hundred miles away and start over from clean sheet living in the same society, same language, same land etc. Read biographies of Italians during Renaissance, how they were city states hopping. This will not work with giant Asian tyrannies like Russia, China or Ottomans.
often yes but it's not as simple as one causes the other. for society to advance it requires innovative technologies and ideas to be embraced rather than discarded. a society that is comfortable with little to no external pressures will see less innovation because it simply isn't necessary, a society that is fighting for it's life will more easily discard old values and traditions in exchange for anything that will help it see another day.
plagues and pandemics tend to also be a cause of societal change due to the double effect of killing off older generations that may be stuck on old ideas and causing a trauma in the remaining population that leaves it with a desire to not repeat mistakes
>plagues and pandemics tend to also be a cause of societal change due to the double effect of killing off older generations that may be stuck on old ideas and causing a trauma in the remaining population that leaves it with a desire to not repeat mistakes
Maybe I'm projecting too much about my own country, but I haven't really gotten a sense of that after COVID. Then again, due to lockdowns and other things, not that many elderly died given the situation.
Covid is just the most recent example and had far fewer deaths both in total and percentage wise than the previous pandemic - the Spanish flu. I think if there's to be any big changes from COVID they'll become more apparent as gen z & alpha become politically active and enter positions of power
Lots of resources go into arms development especially in times of war, this cripples societies during peace but insures their continued existence during a defensive war.
Offensive wars are the greatest evil of mankind and I wish world leaders had the balls to enforce peace via decapitation strikes.
war being an accelerator is retard cope
its a massive waste of resources, energy, and young mens' lives
and for what? land? ideology?
only a species as stupid as ours still participates in 'war'
not surprising however considering we routinely dig up the rarest minerals on earth only to throw them in a landfill only months later
Alot of things designed for military uses end up having great applications overall, like highways, lasers, the internet, ect. It spurs innovation. That being said, actual warfare rather than the buildup TO a war doesn't advance anything.
It depends.
That one mostly just stuck society in a death spiral with a plan built on misconceptions.
Emperor did nothing wrong you reddit cuck. I don't give a fuck about your heretical "feelings" you betrayed your own species because some dark gods tempted you with candy.
Man thought he could make a deal with Chaos and come out ahead.
NTA but big E did come out ahead.
Needing to be bailed out by the Eldar repeatedly after your dream comes crashing down ain't much of a win.
>trapped on the Golden Throne for eternity in agony, if he dies or magically gets better and tries to get up then Terra is swallowed by the Warp instantly
>said Throne and the psychic beacon caused by Emp's fracturing soul is actively attracting an extragalactic threat straight towards Terra anyway
>Imperium a conveyer belt unwittingly feeding souls straight to Chaos
>Inquisition practically runs the Imperium with no oversight, Inquisitors toy with Chaos artifacts and daemons more than Fulgrim did with the fucking Laer blade, half of the Imperium's problems are self-caused and self-propagated
The Emperor was just the baddest warlord on Terra. If he didn't have magic genes that turn people into demigods when he puts his seed inside them, none of his plans would have worked. Most of them didn't, which is why the Imperium that was founded as a secular atheistic autocracy quickly became the most superstitious bureaucracy of frothing zealots within a century of the Emperor's not-death.
The real moral of 40k is "don't let the autist and his autist sons draft your society".
>or magically gets better and tries to get up then Terra is swallowed by the Warp instantly
lolwut
There's a reason people get mad at Magnus anon. He fucked up the Webway Project in such a way that the Emperor (or at least someone with near-peer psychic ability) HAS to be sitting on the Throne constantly or Terra will become another Eye of Terror.
Sure, just get another psyker to sit on it you might say. Thing is Malcador died sitting on it, and he only sat on the Throne long enough for the Emperor to confront Horus.
IIRC, his end of the bargain was to give the Ruinous Powers a veritable playground to mess with, or causing chaos you might say. They couldn't actually do much you see, maybe mess with a few planets but there was nothing happening on a galactic scale. The Emperor was going to create an interconnected galaxy-spanning empire, with the implication that they would now have a grand playing field. Emps instead tried to bring everything into strict order as he created the Imperium. This is when they realized what he was doing and corrupted half of the Legions and their Primarchs. Not all of them, because that's part of the Great Game for them. The game's no fun if there's nobody to truly fuck with. They got what they wanted in the end, a galaxy in chaos for the dark gods to laugh at.
Magnus is the child that accidentally shoots his Dad's hunting gun at Grandpa's Urn because Dad never showed junior how guns work and why you should respect them.
>There's a reason people get mad at Magnus anon. He fucked up the Webway Project in such a way that the Emperor (or at least someone with near-peer psychic ability) HAS to be sitting on the Throne constantly or Terra will become another Eye of Terror.
Because the old story where he just got whacked for using sorcery to do a message was just too sympathetic.
I will be entirely fair to Magnus, given that he literally had no idea. The Emperor didn't tell anyone about his Webway project, citing that he just didn't trust them when asked, such as when Horus asked and was told to shut the fuck up and lead the Crusade as Big E fucked off to work on his project in secret.
Magnus had no way of knowing what would happen, he didn't even know what this project was. It's like your dad building a house of cards right behind a door, and when you open the door to tell dad that your older brother is trying to burn the house down, you knock it all over and dad whips you with the buckle-end of the belt.
The Emperor also just wanted Magnus to be brought straight to Terra, Horus intentionally confused the orders and told the Space Wolves to purge Prospero. I think the implication was that the Emperor was going to make Magnus sit on the Golden Throne forever instead of him, given that Magnus was probably the only psyker in the Emperor's retinue who came close to matching Big E's psychic prowess. I'm not even going to venture a guess as to whether this fate would be worse than him getting tricked into becoming a pawn of Tzeentch.
I know, was just poking at how the Index Astartes version had Magnus be even more sympathetic.
As for the orders getting changed that varies depending on the version (even whether or not Tutelaries are daemons depends on the version) with Inferno having Russ chomping at the bit to kill Magnus no matter how Valdor reminded him of the original orders.
Didn't Emperor make deal with Chaos to get power (Primarchs) but then tried to cheat Chaos and didn't hold his part of the deal (bending knee to Chaos)?
While war can accelerate development, the damage that it does to civilisation far outstrips it.
The solution is to fight on foreign soil with low casualties, then. Hmm, sounds like a certain nation..
No, desperation drives innovation, fighting goat herders and losing some dude to an ied every other week won't see any innovation that couldn't have happened cheaper without the "war".
>innovation that couldn't have happened cheaper without the "war".
wat? we created mine-resistant vehicles due to dozens of guys dying, in war, it would be THOUSANDS of guys.
As long as that war doesn’t happen on your soil, yes.
Just FYI those chips at the bottom left are probably of the type where if you want to remove their firmware, you just shine UV rays on the exposed chip for the specified duration and intensity, and you may reprogram them... it's super old fashioned, because we can remove FW through serial lines now, but it's fun technology.
No idea that was a thing. That's really cool! What were they called?
EPROMs, or erasable programmable read-only memory.
A later variant, the electrically erasable EEPROM sort of evolved into modern flash memory over the years.
Mostly not. Many of the inventions that came after wars would've come earlier, but were delayed.
Scientists will always science, but war stops them and puts them on calculating shell trajectories instead of moon orbits.
The forging developments of bronze, iron, steel etc. was largely encouraged by the need to use these metals in war.
jet engines were developed in peace time, but not used until war made them necessary. Many aerial innovations like Radar were developed because of war and otherwise would’ve stayed as undeveloped white elephants. Nuclear fission reactors were developed because they directly came from atom bomb technology. Nuclear fusion reactors are unnecessary for fusion bombs, so despite being way better and safer, they still haven’t been funded to the point of working properly because there is no military incentive.
War definitely drives innovation and development faster than peace. The trick is ensuring your war does not destroy whatever’s been already built to a point that it outweighs the new inventions.
Now imagine if we put all that effort into colonising Mars or some shit like that
In normal peacetime we won’t. The space race was funded because of the Cold War, because having rockets that put a man in space or on the moon was a demonstration of our ICBM capabilities. If the soviets landed on the moon first then America would have funded a Mars mission, and they reckon they would have got a man on Mars by 1985. But America made the moon first, and the Soviets didn’t have the economy to get to Mars, so NASA stopped there. A great many inventions and innovations are only developed because of military applications. Without that push, Politicians would just use the excess money to build themselves bigger vanity projects and funnel funds into their families and friends ‘consultancy agencies’ and ‘thinktanks’.
>Without that push, Politicians would just use the excess money to build themselves bigger vanity projects
Without that push, landing on Mars would be considered a vanity project (still is).
In the right amount, I think the answer has to be yes.
One theory of why Europe developed so far ahead of the rest of the world was that centralised states were necessary to fund the elaborate armies that European states needed to defend themselves in their relatively conflict-ridden corner of the world. Things like public schools and public health have a military rationale that was key to getting them off the ground - they still do, in fact. What's the point in investing in education for other people? How does that help me? The answer is that weak countries get conquered by strong countries, so do you want to be the victor or the vanquished? When push comes to shove your enduring freedom will be determined by the strength of the men standing beside you, not your own effort alone - so pay for the free college and free healthcare. This "national strength" reasoning was much more prominent in ye olde days when war was less foreign.
War is destructive, so it can't continue on for too long, and I would never choose war over peace even if I knew the war would lead to "advances," because war is horrible. It's not NECESSARY for society to advance, and thus it's to be avoided at almost any price because it's so terrible. But yes, war can help advance a society.
No
As a race prosper in spite of war, not because of it
>public schools and public health have a military rationale
They have even more civilian economic rationale
>They have even more civilian economic rationale
Sure, but imagine you're a wealthy landowner who already has all the money you'll ever need. Do you care more about the poor people starving in the streets, or the rich fucks one country over who might come and take your stuff?
"Strengthening the state" was the non-religious, pre-human rights reason for things like public schools. It was never "build school -> better soldiers" but it was along the lines of "school -> industry -> economy -> armaments -> strong country" with the "win wars" part of it being implicit. In the early days of the modern state all policy had primarily a national strength frame around it. The civilian benefits were definitely a bonus (public schools are kind of a no-brainer) but they used to talk about "schools are good for the army" back then in a way that we just don't anymore. For example, nobody is arguing for student debt forgiveness or free college on the basis that it will generate more graduates from the defence sector.
>Do you care more about the poor people starving in the streets, or the rich fucks one country over who might come and take your stuff?
These questions, and the answers to both, are interrelated; you want to uplift the poor people starving in the streets, because they then consume more of your goods and services, are more dependent on you, AND they make better soldiers to defend your shit for you
This is the symbiosis that is the foundation of civilisation; a king who takes care of himself and nobody else is either couped (see: Africa) or has his nation conquered; a king who takes care of his people builds lasting nations
The real key is how to retain control of the populace while simultaneously giving them tools that could be turned on you
>it was along the lines of "school -> industry -> economy -> armaments -> strong country" with the "win wars" part of it being implicit
I mean, you've answered your own question really.
>they used to talk about "schools are good for the army" back then in a way that we just don't anymore
Oh.
Well, that's because the fall of the USSR created a totally unprecedented peace that we squandered, anon. Think about it: after WW2, the "civilised" nations created the United Nations to pretend that conquest was a thing of the past; nuclear deterrence enabled the enforcement of this mindset. The Cold War kept people on their toes but even so peacenik movements were rampant, because "surely the Soviets can't be all that bad, my government must be pulling a trick". Then the Berlin Wall came down, and we defeated even that "dubious" enemy, amirite? What was there left to do but disarm? We've apparently solved world peace, on a macro level.
On the subject of
>student debt forgiveness
>free college
It's pure political manoeuvreing, to get the young adult / do gooder / social democrat vote.
Insulating people from the consequences of their shitty decisions never turns out well.
what would life be then without war? its horrible, a fucking horrendous, filthy thing, but lets be honest, civilization was progressed by the fact we, as humans, have hated each other enough to kill one another in droves.
When your busy with the bayonet, you think of what else the bayonet could be. It could be a chisel, yes? that chisel could conjure up a great building, no? that building could house to protect prior knowledge gained, surely?
War, is progress. And a terrible one.
>One theory of why Europe developed so far ahead of the rest of the world was that centralised states were necessary to fund the elaborate armies that European states needed to defend themselves in their relatively conflict-ridden corner of the world.
Akshually Europe was much more decentralized than rest of the civilised world. First European centralized super state (France) formed in 17th century when progress was on steady rise in Europe
I have opinion that division and fragmentation of the Europe was catalyst that kick started progress on Europe but not other places. Huge developed states were common before especially in Asia. But their centralisation became their failure. Asian type despotism funnel all GDP to worshiping state and "Great Dear Leader". That suppresses initiative, meritocracy, and promotes bootlicking "yes men" society.
Europe been devided limited tyranny of autocrats and if some merchant or entrepreneur had conflict with the state they could just cross state lines hundred miles away and start over from clean sheet living in the same society, same language, same land etc. Read biographies of Italians during Renaissance, how they were city states hopping. This will not work with giant Asian tyrannies like Russia, China or Ottomans.
Wasn't the Indian subcontinent pretty politically divided, for most of its history?
Akshually
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gunpowder_empires
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mughal_Empire
Low intensity conflict has always advanced societies.
The weltkriegs have been disastrous.
We went from a plane that could barely fly more than 20m high in 1903 too landing on the moon in 1969.
You tell me.
oh my yhwh this is good goy genocide all over again
often yes but it's not as simple as one causes the other. for society to advance it requires innovative technologies and ideas to be embraced rather than discarded. a society that is comfortable with little to no external pressures will see less innovation because it simply isn't necessary, a society that is fighting for it's life will more easily discard old values and traditions in exchange for anything that will help it see another day.
plagues and pandemics tend to also be a cause of societal change due to the double effect of killing off older generations that may be stuck on old ideas and causing a trauma in the remaining population that leaves it with a desire to not repeat mistakes
>plagues and pandemics tend to also be a cause of societal change due to the double effect of killing off older generations that may be stuck on old ideas and causing a trauma in the remaining population that leaves it with a desire to not repeat mistakes
Maybe I'm projecting too much about my own country, but I haven't really gotten a sense of that after COVID. Then again, due to lockdowns and other things, not that many elderly died given the situation.
Covid is just the most recent example and had far fewer deaths both in total and percentage wise than the previous pandemic - the Spanish flu. I think if there's to be any big changes from COVID they'll become more apparent as gen z & alpha become politically active and enter positions of power
Lots of resources go into arms development especially in times of war, this cripples societies during peace but insures their continued existence during a defensive war.
Offensive wars are the greatest evil of mankind and I wish world leaders had the balls to enforce peace via decapitation strikes.
Terrible for advancing theory, fantastic for advancing application
Cold Wars can, hot wars generally immiserate the average person though.
war is fun
Depends on what it gains. It usually comes at a huge opportunity cost. Any men and materials lost could have been put to better use... likely.
war being an accelerator is retard cope
its a massive waste of resources, energy, and young mens' lives
and for what? land? ideology?
only a species as stupid as ours still participates in 'war'
not surprising however considering we routinely dig up the rarest minerals on earth only to throw them in a landfill only months later
I thought this was a Factorio screenshot at first
Alot of things designed for military uses end up having great applications overall, like highways, lasers, the internet, ect. It spurs innovation. That being said, actual warfare rather than the buildup TO a war doesn't advance anything.
Yes