Horizon209
Active member
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2021
- Messages
- 20
- Points
- 43
What do you think about this concept? Do you agree or not. I want to incorporate this into my novel to be a little more realistic.
No it’s rather that military technology is dispersed out into the populace through the demilitarization of soldiers who got adjusted to new gadgets and these new gadgets are readapted into civilian products.True. A lot of inventions or modifications of those that we now use today are part of conflicts and adversity.
Like how canned food was developed because of Napoleonic Wars. Rocket (Missile) technology was researched (or further developed, given that the British army have the Congreve during the Napoleonic Wars, and before that, the Mysore Empire) because of Nazi Germany. And the most recent, the Internet, brought forth by the US Army's desire to have an efficient way to share interdepartment and interbranch information during the Cold War. (Please correct me in these if I'm mistaken)
While peace is 'ideally' good, there are a lot of instances in human history that peace led to the stagnation and eventual decline of a nation, a country or an empire.
I remember that saying: "Good men create good times. Good times create bad men. Bad men create bad times. And bad times create good men."
I think it fits that concept.
Just have it be the ideology of some warmongering neo-con like George Bush juniorWhat do you think about this concept? Do you agree or not. I want to incorporate this into my novel to be a little more realistic.
Still though, one can't deny that these inventions, or at least, the concepts came from conflict. And I'm not only talking about militaristic conflicts.No it’s rather that military technology is dispersed out into the populace through the demilitarization of soldiers who got adjusted to new gadgets and these new gadgets are readapted into civilian products.
You still don't get it. I'm using war as a buisness to get elected!I think "War is Business" sounded better.
There's far more cases in history where war led to the immediate destruction of nations, lol. A peaceful decline over time sounds more fun than getting bombed into oblivion right now.While peace is 'ideally' good, there are a lot of instances in human history that peace led to the stagnation and eventual decline of a nation, a country or an empire.
I don't fully agree. War can be a great wake up call for a stagnating nation, but peace =/= stagnation. There's these things that people like to call 'Golden Ages' where nothing-bad* is happening and events are still progressing rapidly.What do you think about this concept? Do you agree or not. I want to incorporate this into my novel to be a little more realistic.
Golden ages are real. Example post ww2 America, rome during the five good emperors, roaring 20sThere's far more cases in history where war led to the immediate destruction of nations, lol. A peaceful decline over time sounds more fun than getting bombed into oblivion right now.
I don't fully agree. War can be a great wake up call for a stagnating nation, but peace =/= stagnation. There's these things that people like to call 'Golden Ages' where nothing-bad* is happening and events are still progressing rapidly.
There's two reasons why war seems to be good for progress. The first is that the advancements are highly visible. You can look at a machine gun and clearly see how much more advanced it is in its role than an older type of gun.
The second is propaganda. If you come up with a cool-new-thing, everyone will be happy about it. And since there's lots of things to upset you, learning about cool-new-thing will help alleviate how upset you are. The same advancements are being made all the time, there's just less reason to care about them.
if you call monkes killing each other with bigger sticks progress, sure. i call monkes not killing each other at all progress, for such a state is in direct opposition to our animilistic natures. if the bombings of hiroshima and nagasaki are progress then fuck it i wanna regress.
BOOOOOOO!For example, significant cultural progress, like the abolition of slavery, can only be made when poeple have time to reflect and realise thier mistakes, not when they are already short of manpower and blided by their potential doom.
I don't think I'm comparing the number of cases between peacetime and wartime downfall of nations. I just said that there are a lot of cases. LolThere's far more cases in history where war led to the immediate destruction of nations, lol. A peaceful decline over time sounds more fun than getting bombed into oblivion right now.
BOOOOOOO!
It is more like struggle creates progress, while idleness is ultimately destructive. If things aren't getting better they are getting worse. Everything is in flux. War is merely a method for countries to struggle and improve. Long periods of peace create decadence, hedonism, and gluttony. There is no greater struggle, and opportunity to change than in war.