Message from @StoneCold316

Discord ID: 758080585985032312


2020-09-22 21:35:48 UTC  

Argument 4 - Democracies redirect resources harder for war than a dictatorship.

2020-09-22 21:36:03 UTC  

Sure, we can debate ^_^

2020-09-22 21:36:10 UTC  

2. Dondemocracies really wait for due process? Iraq war/ afghan war , one of them. Forgot which.

2020-09-22 21:36:14 UTC  

later great conversation

2020-09-22 21:36:32 UTC  

Do democracies *

2020-09-22 21:37:25 UTC  

4. Once decided to go to war, very monarch like SOPs are in play to mobilize forces.

2020-09-22 21:37:28 UTC  

Even in democracies

2020-09-22 21:37:30 UTC  

More at stake: more destruction. Democracies tend to be better financially and infrastructurally than Dictatorships. So more destruction

2020-09-22 21:37:45 UTC  

Harder to repair back

2020-09-22 21:37:56 UTC  

Stake is perceived loss by decision makers, not actual quantifiable loss.

2020-09-22 21:38:18 UTC  

A 50 store building is more expensive than a 10

2020-09-22 21:38:28 UTC  

Quantifiably more expensive yes?

2020-09-22 21:38:28 UTC  

No one does a cost benefit. Otherwise a lot of wars would not have happened. No?

2020-09-22 21:38:54 UTC  

Yes

2020-09-22 21:39:43 UTC  

If Germany went to war with France, it would be more destruction than Ghana and Uganda

2020-09-22 21:40:11 UTC  

Yea. For a neutral@observer. For Ghana every little bit they have is even more important

2020-09-22 21:40:29 UTC  

See what I@mean by perceived loss?

2020-09-22 21:40:30 UTC  

Yes. You are right

2020-09-22 21:40:53 UTC  

But it can be objectively cuantified also from a neutral standpoint in terms of monetary loss

2020-09-22 21:41:10 UTC  

Like after the war

2020-09-22 21:41:36 UTC  

Sure it can - just saying that is never a factor in deciding whether to go to war or not. Or almost never I should say. Because most times - not going to war saves more resources, yet that decision is not taken.

2020-09-22 21:41:48 UTC  

So something perceived to be bigger than the perceived loss is at play

2020-09-22 21:42:19 UTC  

Yes I totally agree! That is why argument 1 i believe works

2020-09-22 21:42:38 UTC  

Because as you said not going to war saves resources

2020-09-22 21:43:03 UTC  

Example. - revenge for 9/11 in going to afghan war and fear mongering leading to belief that US sovereign land is at risk if they don’t

2020-09-22 21:43:03 UTC  

And Democracies have more than dictatorships

2020-09-22 21:43:30 UTC  

That perceived gain was bigger than the perceived loss —— what would a neutral cost benefit analyzer conclude?

2020-09-22 21:43:36 UTC  

Yea but Afganistan and Irak are not democracies yes?

2020-09-22 21:43:41 UTC  

Yes you are right

2020-09-22 21:43:59 UTC  

Afghan and Iraq didn’t decide to go to war. US did

2020-09-22 21:44:03 UTC  

Yes

2020-09-22 21:44:11 UTC  

Im talking about how decisions of war are made in the real world

2020-09-22 21:44:25 UTC  

Waging war*

2020-09-22 21:44:27 UTC  

Ah..on that topic yes

2020-09-22 21:44:48 UTC  

It’s almost never a cost benefit analysis.

2020-09-22 21:45:06 UTC  

Stone, why do Americans fear so much of Dictatorship? cause they live in a free world.

2020-09-22 21:45:28 UTC  

Is the fear justifiable by a neutral observer?

2020-09-22 21:45:45 UTC  

Dont know. But from my perspective it is unjustifiable

2020-09-22 21:45:52 UTC  

Same from my perspective

2020-09-22 21:45:57 UTC  

So we agree and can build on that

2020-09-22 21:46:24 UTC  

We can build even if we dont agree 😄