War is nonsense and manipulation and there is no reason to fight?

[fredd bear]

IDK, doesn't seem so tricky.

To keep it simple.

Ask 'Qui bono?' (as a benefit to whom?)

EG The US became the most powerful nation on earth as a direct result of WW2--its 'benign'  programme of lend lease, effectively bankrupted Britain.

Also interesting to note that Japan and   Germany both recovered extremely well from  WW2. I've often wondered what might have happened had there been something like the Marshal plan in post WW 1 Germany. Would WW2 still have occurred?

The reasons  for war are seldom as simple or indeed as honest as the canon fodder are led to believe.  The Vietnam war is a  pretty good example. Better examples are the US presence in Iraq and  Afghanistan.

Didn't surprise me to learn that the US spends more on war than any other nation on earth( in dollar terms) No wonder the US is such a basket case in many areas, starting with the White House.

(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((0))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))

OT  Observation:  The US today is perhaps the clearest example of Durkeim's "anomic society" in my lifetime. That is, in  democratic , developed nations.

[Smaug]

Regarding the OP's question. For the elites war is just another option to resolve their economical disputes, increase their influence or make money. For an average person going to a war is pretty pointless unless it's how they make money for their living or it's to defend against an immediate invasion. And when you are being told to go to a war to another land 'to stop injustice', 'to help them', 'to defend your country's interest' or something like that it's a good sign you're about to get scammed for your life.

[The Grand Nudger]

We call it war when 1,000 people are involved, but the only difference between war and duel is the number of people.  The 'reasons for war" can be as simple as the reasons for a barfight.

Thing is, it's not actually some fully rational decision in either case, nor is it..in either case, an example of base savagery. Countries go to war for the same reason that I move my fenceline into what my neighbor thinks is his. It's in my interest to move my fenceline. It's in his interest to knock it down and move it back. Thankfully, we haven't started trading shots just yet.

---

-continuing along that line of thought

The reason that we haven't started trading shots, ultimately, is that it would be a poor use of our resources.  Neither of us has 999 other lives to throw away.  We're throwing away locust posts and galvanized wire - because that's what we both have alot of.  I don't actually want the things in the space between where my fence may be and where I put it, I want them to go away.  I want an empty space, a demilitarized zone, if you will, lol.  The trees keep falling towards my property.  They block my light.   He sells firewood and raises cattle.  He doesn't want the trees to go away because they give his cattle shade, and if they do go away he wants to sell them.   Neither of us will or even can cut them down for free.  Hundreds (if not thousands) of labor and fuel hours at stake.  There is no middle ground between his interests and mine.  I don't even need his waste, and he has no use for mine. If we were countries instead of individual property owners this would be the drumbeat to war.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

We call it war when 1,000 people are involved, but the only difference between war and duel is the number of people. 

Sorry, but as a military historian I roflmao at that.

[bennyboy]

Of course there's a reason for war.  It's a struggle for valuable resources which will benefit a nation and its citizens.  Let's not pretend that WWII and the following economic boom wasn't one of the best boosts for the US that any country has seen in history.

But you can't say that's the reason we fought that war. It was a benefit, but not the reason.

We fought because we didn't want our shit damaged or taken. Ultimately, all conflict is about either taking other people's shit, or preventing them from taking yours. Keep your hands of my bitch, get the fuck out of my cave-- and hey, by the way, you can leave your sister behind.

[The Grand Nudger]

We call it war when 1,000 people are involved, but the only difference between war and duel is the number of people. 

Sorry, but as a military historian I roflmao at that.    

-and when you're done rotflmoaing...you can explain the difference between war and a duel in a way that doesn't reduce to the number of people involved.  I'll be around.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

But you can't say that's the reason we fought that war. It was a benefit, but not the reason.

We fought because we didn't want our shit damaged or taken.  Ultimately, all conflict is about either taking other people's shit, or preventing them from taking yours.  Keep your hands of my bitch, get the fuck out of my cave-- and hey, by the way, you can leave your sister behind.

Welcome to Hyperfocus 101.

---

Sorry, but as a military historian I roflmao at that.    

-and when you're done rotflmoaing...you can explain the difference between war and a duel in a way that doesn't reduce to the number of people involved.  I'll be around.

Well, the USN and the USAAF don't go mano-a-mano. Or do you want to keeping dumbing it down?

[The Grand Nudger]

OFC not, but I was looking for something that -didn't- reduce to the number of people involved.