Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Mr Mephisto
I suspect that modern societies are simply unable to sustain, to accept, the kinds of sacrificies that would result from a major war.
|
I'd say it totally depends on the situation. If the war is seen as unnecessary, far away and not that important to the everyday life of the people, the war will be unpopular, and every dead soldier will be one too many. However, if the war is a direct threat to the way of life of a people, they will be able to accept most sacrifices.
Two examples:
1) China invades Taiwan. The US would be able to intervene, but most Americans wouldn't want to do that. The war won't be popular, and a lot of dead US soldiers will probably mean a swift end to the war.
2) China invades the US. The US population would fight back en masse, no matter what the cost, simply because their very lives are at stake.
Some posters here seem to think that people were very different 60 or 70 years ago. They weren't - most people didn't want to fight a war in the 40s, but when they *had* to fight, they fought with all they had. They fought even though the nightmare of WW1 was still in the back of their heads. Therefore, I doubt people today (with the Vietnam war in the background) would be unwilling to fight if forced to.
One further note: before WW1, many people believed that modern society would be unable to cope with a long war, simply because it was so destructive and deadly - countries would simply be unable to pay the price (economically and in human lives). They were wrong, as four years of trench warfare proved. After that, people vowed that this should never again happen, because the world would be unable to cope with another such war. WW2 proved them wrong. Now here we are, saying the exact same things, and I hope WW3 won't be needed to prove us wrong.
