What Movies Have You Seen Lately?

Quote: Pacomartin

In contrast we have a maxim from the 1990s that "No two countries with McDonalds have ever gone to war" implying that conquest was at odds with the economic globalization of the first world.

Globalization is much older than that. China and Rome enjoyed a thriving trade for centuries, though they never really met (the trade was handled by intermediaries, usually with Persia in some form in the middle).

Anyway, it was common to trade with one's neighbors, and to invade and conquer them as well. One does not preclude the other. How much trade existed between France and Germany in 1939?

What has changed, largely, is culture and ideology. In particular I'd point to popular sovereignty as the crucial factor. It's not that trading partners don't make war on each other, but that liberal democracies don't make war on each other.

Look at a recent period like the XIX Century. All wars in Europe were between similar countries (with exceptions like the Dutch Republic vs Spain). The wars against revolutionary France started off differently, but by the time Napoleon took over, ti was all monarchies battling each other for dominance.

Now look at the XX Century. WWI was a coalition of empires against two strong liberal democracies (for all that GB was an empire in its own right, domestically it was a liberal democracy) and the odd empire out (Russia). WWII in Europe Was between totalitarian regimes and democracies, and the odd totalitarian power out (which nevertheless conspired with the others earlier).

Popular sovereignty itself is not the crucial factor, I think, but rather the separation of powers and the limits placed upon the executive power. And in particular the ephemeral nature of such power. In a liberal democracy, no one person or party holds power for long. See who has been doing the conquering in the above examples: dictators like Putin and Saddam, and one-party states like China.

Quote:

My question is " Is conquest in our collective DNA?".

Skipping the literal answer that nucleic acids are all that's in our DNA <w>, I think my hypothesis above argues strongly to the contrary.

Quote: Nareed

Globalization is much older than that. China and Rome enjoyed a thriving trade for centuries, though they never really met (the trade was handled by intermediaries, usually with Persia in some form in the middle).

I suppose we could compare PAX ROMANA with "No two countries with McDonalds have ever gone to war".

It does seem more likely that a war of conquest would be less concerned with devastating the conquered country, as it would be about incorporating it's economic potential into the host country.

While I think some people wish China would conquer North Korea and turn them into a submissive vassal state, it is unlikely that China wants to be saddled with 25 million poor people. Could China take over both countries driven by a need to protect Chinese security?

Quote: Pacomartin

I suppose we could compare PAX ROMANA with "No two countries with McDonalds have ever gone to war".

I don't know. That's the era of the Five Good Emperors: Nerva, Trajan, Hadrian, Antoninus Pius and Marcus Aurelius. During that era there were no civil wars at all, which is about as long as Rome ever went without bloody internal strife. But there were plenty of rebellions in the provinces. Trajan fought the Parthians in a major war. Marcus Aurelius did likewise, though with a more limited scope. "Barbarian" incursions and raids along the Rhine and in Britain (Hadrian's wall, remember) were rife.

Though perhaps that's as peaceful as the PAX could be.

It's a bit like saying that since there has been no major conflict in the US since the 1860s, it's been at peace that whole time.

Quote:

It does seem more likely that a war of conquest would be less concerned with devastating the conquered country, as it would be about incorporating it's economic potential into the host country.

Sometimes. Often the first thing a conquering army did was loot the hell out of its conquest. In the long run, though, tribute and taxes were more lucrative.

Quote:

While I think some people wish China would conquer North Korea and turn them into a submissive vassal state, it is unlikely that China wants to be saddled with 25 million poor people. Could China take over both countries driven by a need to protect Chinese security?

I think the South Koreans would scream bloody murder if that happened, and the US, assuming a sane leadership, would strongly oppose any Chines expansion to the borders of an ally.

A solution would be a coup to oust the Kim royal family and replace it with a committed Communist Party modeled after the one in the People's republic of China, and make it a puppet state. China and the New North Korea could then say they absolutely favor reunification, as soon as all foreign troops leave the Korean peninsula. As long as Beijing took away the North's nukes, I think the South and the US would play ball.

Quote: Pacomartin

It was in fact conquest, but China and Iraq did not openly proclaim it as such.

It isn't politically correct to say that on the world stage these days. You have to make up some excuse, like we occupied this land 2,000 years ago, or they invited us in. Still a conquest is a conquest, regardless of how it is called.

Quote: Nareed

I think the South Koreans would scream bloody murder if that happened, and the US, assuming a sane leadership, would strongly oppose any Chines expansion to the borders of an ally.

I think they would prefer it to the current situation. I also think US leadership would openly oppose it but quietly be happy about it.

Quote: Wizard

I also think US leadership would openly oppose it but quietly be happy about it.

I suspect that we are going to confront this situation in Taiwan with it's half trillion dollar GDP. The war for Taiwan will probably involve the loss of a few thousand lives, as many people in power in Taiwan are not opposed to a Hong Kong style relationship with China. I won't say it will be bloodless, because some factions will fight no matter what.

I doubt that the present day situation will last for another 50 years.

If China takes over the whole Korean Peninsula, I don't think it be until at least a million people die. They will argue that a Chinese takeover is required to prevent tens of millions of deaths. There are 77 million people on the Korean peninsula. A missile war will rack up massive casualties very quickly.

Quote: Pacomartin

I suspect that we are going to confront this situation in Taiwan with it's half trillion dollar GDP. The war for Taiwan will probably involve the loss of a few thousand lives, as many people in power in Taiwan are not opposed to a Hong Kong style relationship with China. I won't say it will be bloodless, because some factions will fight no matter what.

I doubt that the present day situation will last for another 50 years.

If China takes over the whole Korean Peninsula, I don't think it be until at least a million people die. They will argue that a Chinese takeover is required to prevent tens of millions of deaths. There are 77 million people on the Korean peninsula. A missile war will rack up massive casualties very quickly.

I am about 100x more worried about North Korea than Taiwan. I do think China will remain satisfied with the status quo on that. I think Taiwan is okay with it too. My prediction is there will eventually be some kind of Hong Kong deal made but where Taiwan is completely independently governed and a part of the P.R. of China in name only.

Regarding North Korea, if there is an all out war, I do hope that China or South Korea will even want what is left of it. After Iraq and Afghanistan, I want no part of the U.S. being another occupying force.

Quote: Wizard

I am about 100x more worried about North Korea than Taiwan. I do think China will remain satisfied with the status quo on that. I think Taiwan is okay with it too. My prediction is there will eventually be some kind of Hong Kong deal made but where Taiwan is completely independently governed and a part of the P.R. of China in name only.

I totally agree. I was a bit taken aback by Paco's prediction. I believe the major factor influencing the China Taiwan relationship is business these days. Lots of money is at stake and nobody on either side wants to upset that

Quote: terapined

I totally agree. I was a bit taken aback by Paco's prediction. I believe the major factor influencing the China Taiwan relationship is business these days. Lots of money is at stake and nobody on either side wants to upset that

Yep. The whole fuss is pretty much over a flag.

Quote: terapined

I believe the major factor influencing the China Taiwan relationship is business these days. Lots of money is at stake and nobody on either side wants to upset that

Many of the wealthiest men in Taiwan have factories on the mainland. Unfortunately, I don't think it can be down totally with negotiations where Taiwan simply agrees to fly the Chinese flag.

There are military considerations as well. The Yulin Naval base is up on the continental shelf.


China desperately wants to have a base on the East side of Taiwan so it's submarines can get lost in deep water right out of port. The Gagua Ridge will protect them from a lot of sonar operations.


In order to have massive military bases in Taiwan, China will have to be unequivocally the sovereign entity. It can't be a token gesture of flying a flag.

Quote: terapined

I totally agree. I was a bit taken aback by Paco's prediction.

I didn't mean to imply that it was a preferred objective. But China is not going to tolerate 10 million refugees pouring over it's border. If it goes to all out war, I think China will simply move in and take over the entire peninsula (North and South Korea)

There are economic objectives here as well. Once again China wants a controlling presence in the Japanese basin for its submarines. Right now they are trapped in the shallow waters of the Yellow Sea.


China has a hundred million people that are living in poverty in Manchuria. They perceive the link to building up the region as a passageway to the Japanese basin, and eventually international transit way via North East passageway to Europe.



China very much wants to be a seapower, and very advanced submarines are critical to dominance. They need much better bases.
Wikipedia article on the PLAN submarine force is a good start.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People%27s_Liberation_Army_Navy_Submarine_Force