bentflame ([personal profile] bentflame) wrote2009-03-09 01:23 pm

(no subject)

Is it really that unheard of for a major world-wide war to last one hundred years? How long to wars on your worlds last?

OOC: Sensitive topic warning- this thread with Minerva ([livejournal.com profile] corkscrewcurls) involves discussion of genocide and the Holocaust.

[identity profile] thricedeadwind.livejournal.com 2009-03-10 01:33 am (UTC)(link)
My response would answer your second question, though not the first.

To thus I would state; not unheard of, yet unusual.

Usually, one nation runs out of funds or people before a span of one hundred years would pass.

[identity profile] peoplesprincess.livejournal.com 2009-03-10 01:33 am (UTC)(link)
The losing side doesn't surrender before that happens?

[identity profile] thricedeadwind.livejournal.com 2009-03-10 01:35 am (UTC)(link)
Even in your own arrogance, I assume you are cognizant of the pride possessed within even losing soldiers and governments.

[identity profile] thricedeadwind.livejournal.com 2009-03-10 01:39 am (UTC)(link)
Perhaps it would be more politic to state you view your actions as infallible, your country invincible, and the defeat of your enemies as inevitable?

[identity profile] peoplesprincess.livejournal.com 2009-03-10 01:43 am (UTC)(link)
That point of view is based on both experience and evidence, not arrogance.

[identity profile] thricedeadwind.livejournal.com 2009-03-10 01:46 am (UTC)(link)
As you would not disagree with my own choice of words, allow my self to disagree with your view it is backed with experience and evidence.

One can view their actions as well-thought and wise, yet still fallible. One can view their country as powerful and of superior force, yet not invincible. The defeat of an enemy is never inevitable, for the pride of a losing soldier may dictate they would fight to the last man.

If you see the battle as already won, your self does possess arrogance.

[identity profile] peoplesprincess.livejournal.com 2009-03-10 01:47 am (UTC)(link)
It's not already won. Is the win inevitable? Yes. But it's not over yet, and we're hardly relaxing.

[identity profile] thricedeadwind.livejournal.com 2009-03-10 01:49 am (UTC)(link)
Those were claims I had not made. Surely, you would think all is at its readiness, as you think your forces are invincible.

It is little wonder you would think all armies would merely surrender.

[identity profile] peoplesprincess.livejournal.com 2009-03-10 02:01 am (UTC)(link)
"Merely"? No. Only when their forces have been completely depleted and all hope driven from them will they surrender.

[identity profile] thricedeadwind.livejournal.com 2009-03-10 02:03 am (UTC)(link)
I cannot stress the importance of never underestimating your opponent.

Or the will of subjugated people below your throne. Conquered peoples rarely remain conquered.

[identity profile] peoplesprincess.livejournal.com 2009-03-10 02:07 am (UTC)(link)
I'm not underestimating them. I know exactly what my opponents are capable of. Don't try to give me military advice.

We'll see.

[identity profile] thricedeadwind.livejournal.com 2009-03-10 02:10 am (UTC)(link)
As you say.