yeah whats his name again?

one is for survival on a national level

Ed gein

Vietnam was a battlefield game

Oh, I tend to agree with MA that war is two nations fighting on scale. War does not need to be officially declared to still be war

the other is for interests on the national level

@Laucivol Scale is irrelevant.

but to a soldier, there is no difference

Wait the actor played something recently

he always is the one doing the fighting either way

War, DOES need to be officially declared for it to be considered a war, else it's a conflict.

There are battles and skirmishes, but a series of them war make.

That's why the Falklands isn't considered a war.

No weez in real war there are no rules

Tell that to the fighting folks.

Because it was never declared by either.

ted levine

You mean, total war. @Tato

thats who jessica janiv reminds me off

true; it's a nuance i guess. point is, i think there MUST be a cost otherwise it becomes normalized

I mean actual war

Weez is an essentionalist while lauci is looking at it functionally

Total war is what you're describing. @Tato

Just to help you communicate lol

Not modern understanding of war

At this point Weez is arguing for official (benefit and political based) definition rather than practicality.

if the sons and daughters of politicians had to fight each time they used military force?

Where the end of the nation is a possibility.

"uuuuh blaire.... it puts the LOTION ON ITS BACK"

we'd see ALOT less invasions

You can have a war and not have the end of the nation.

what do ya think stopped Vietnam?

@svarozhyc You beat me to expressing it. XD

Yes weez thats how it operates in modern system

And back in World war 2

And in World war 1...

The draft began targeting the upper middle class; 1 yr later? US leaves

But war is not an event its a state u can be in war on personal level even

ex: jihad

true, which is why i said i guess it is a nuance thing