Results 1 to 19 of 19

Thread: The most aggressive nation in the last 100 years

  1. #1
    Decadent Charlatan Aquagraph's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Continental Vinnland
    TIM
    OmniPoLR
    Posts
    3,967
    Mentioned
    126 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default The most aggressive nation in the last 100 years

    Discuss.
    “I tell you, freedom and human rights in America are doomed. The U.S. government will lead the American people in — and the West in general — into an unbearable hell and a choking life. - Osama bin Laden

  2. #2
    Robot Assassin Pa3s's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Germany
    TIM
    Ne-LII, 5w6
    Posts
    3,648
    Mentioned
    46 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Well, the German nation was the main antagonist of the "free world" (+Soviet Union) in two world wars, but they had much less colonies and imperialist tendencies in general compared to other nations (mostly, however, because they were too slow and not because they felt it's wrong).
    „Man can do what he wants but he cannot want what he wants.“
    – Arthur Schopenhauer

  3. #3
    Glorious Member mu4's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Mind
    Posts
    7,966
    Mentioned
    568 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    From my knowledge of history I have to divide the last 100 years into 3 periods.

    Post cold war
    USA
    Russia
    China

    Cold war Era
    USSR
    US
    UK
    France

    WWII and before
    Germany
    UK
    France
    Russia
    Japan
    USA

    Aggregating the last 100 years together ignores the various regime changes that have occurred.

  4. #4
    Robot Assassin Pa3s's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Germany
    TIM
    Ne-LII, 5w6
    Posts
    3,648
    Mentioned
    46 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

     
    Wilhelm II. and Hitler definitely wanted the two wars, there's no doubt about that. However, it's true that the USA had a favourable position of the "hero nation" without actually losing too many people and resources. Instead, their economy benefited from a increased weapon production – right after the financial crisis of 1929 – just like the other major nations which took part in the wars. (Many reasons helped Hitler to rise to power, but the huge economical improvement after his takeover was one of the most important ones.) Much more so in and after WWII, since the USA could produce bombs and help to rebuild everything after the war was over (see Marshall Plan), without ever losing any of their own cities.

    This gave the nation a huge boost which indeed paved the way for the USA's role as the #1 world power. The German leaders tried to achieve that, too, except that they took up the role of the aggressor and did not have powerful friends or allies. The USA finally lost their good image once they battled the Soviet Union and got involved in several nasty proxy wars.


    Seriously though, In my opinion, most nations are more or less equally aggressive. It really depends on the ability to be powerful. Just because a nation is small and weak doesn't mean that it's less aggressive. Similar to the opportunity that makes the thief, it also opportunity that makes the warmonger and imperialist.
    „Man can do what he wants but he cannot want what he wants.“
    – Arthur Schopenhauer

  5. #5
    Glorious Member mu4's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Mind
    Posts
    7,966
    Mentioned
    568 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pa3s View Post
     
    Wilhelm II. and Hitler definitely wanted the two wars, there's no doubt about that. However, it's true that the USA had a favourable position of the "hero nation" without actually losing too many people and resources. Instead, their economy benefited from a increased weapon production – right after the financial crisis of 1929 – just like the other major nations which took part in the wars. (Many reasons helped Hitler to rise to power, but the huge economical improvement after his takeover was one of the most important ones.) Much more so in and after WWII, since the USA could produce bombs and help to rebuild everything after the war was over (see Marshall Plan), without ever losing any of their own cities.

    This gave the nation a huge boost which indeed paved the way for the USA's role as the #1 world power. The German leaders tried to achieve that, too, except that they took up the role of the aggressor and did not have powerful friends or allies. The USA finally lost their good image once they battled the Soviet Union and got involved in several nasty proxy wars.


    Seriously though, In my opinion, most nations are more or less equally aggressive. It really depends on the ability to be powerful. Just because a nation is small and weak doesn't mean that it's less aggressive. Similar to the opportunity that makes the thief, it also opportunity that makes the warmonger and imperialist.

    I pretty much agree with this. Althrough I don't think countries are equally aggressive but man is still man, Japan and UK have always been driven towards aggression due to the resource issues within their island countries. There are a lot of geographic factors as well as various cultural traits that arises.

  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    2,934
    Mentioned
    80 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Both parties are on the same side... the people have an illusion of choice. They are under control the entire time, being led along. I wish I could convince everyone to become libertarian, but that isn't gona happen. So fuck it, not worth discussing

  7. #7
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    TIM
    SLE/LSE sx/sp
    Posts
    2,489
    Mentioned
    76 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    No such thing as nation, we are all one as part of the global human race.

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    White
    TIM
    FSE
    Posts
    715
    Mentioned
    62 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mfckr View Post
    If I had to pick one for the C20th, I'd vote the USSR. The following isn't a complete list of their military involvements by any means:

    1916-1931 Basmachi Revolt in Russian Central Asia
    1917-1921 Russian Civil War
    1918-1919 Soviet-Lithuanian War
    1919-1920 Latvian War of Independence
    1920 Soviet-Polish War
    1920 Red Invasion of Persia
    1920-1921 Red Occupation of Mongolia
    1921 Kronstadt Rebellion
    1929 Soviet Invasion of Manchuria (China)
    1936-1939 Spanish Civil War
    1938 Soviet-Japanese Clash on Manchurian Border (Lake Khasan)
    1939 Soviet-Japanese War over Mongolia
    1939 Soviet Occupation of Eastern Poland
    1939 Soviet Occupation of Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania
    1939-1940 Winter War (Invasion of Finland)
    1940 Soviet Occupation of Bessarabia, N. Bukovina
    1941-1945 World War 2, Invasion of Germany (Soviet Occupation of Eastern Europe)
    1944-1949 Latvian Partisan War against Soviet Occupation (Latvia Annexed)
    1944-1952 Lithuanian Partisan War against Soviet Ocupation (Lithuania Annexed)
    1945 War with Japan
    1953 East German Uprising
    1956 Hungarian Rebellion
    1968 Warsaw Pact Invasion of Czechoslovakia to terminate Prague Spring
    1969 Sino-Soviet Border Clash
    1979-1988 Soviet Occupation of Afghanistan
    1990 Osh Riots, Kyrgyzstan
    1991 South Ossetian Rebellion (Secesion from Georgia)
    1991 Communist Coup d'Etat
    I would agree with this, although China is a close second.

    (assuming the definition includes aggression towards other independent nations as well as internally towards it's own citizens, including those of satellite states?)

  9. #9
    Robot Assassin Pa3s's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Germany
    TIM
    Ne-LII, 5w6
    Posts
    3,648
    Mentioned
    46 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mfckr View Post
    1921 Kronstadt Rebellion
    RIP last remnants of the social revolution.
    „Man can do what he wants but he cannot want what he wants.“
    – Arthur Schopenhauer

  10. #10
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    TIM
    LSE
    Posts
    18,006
    Mentioned
    162 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    France.

  11. #11
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    2,934
    Mentioned
    80 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Right now the USA is starting a war in Syria

  12. #12
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    TIM
    LSE
    Posts
    18,006
    Mentioned
    162 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Request for account ban so you can stop it, crazed.

  13. #13
    bolong's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    626
    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    But hold on, what do you mean by aggressive?

  14. #14
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    2,934
    Mentioned
    80 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Absurd View Post
    Request for account ban so you can stop it, crazed.
    Meaningless.

  15. #15
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    TIM
    LSE
    Posts
    18,006
    Mentioned
    162 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by crazedratfugue View Post
    Meaningless.
    Typical response from the most gay, I mean aggressive nation in the world. Same meat, different gravy.

  16. #16
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    2,934
    Mentioned
    80 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    More gayness huh?

  17. #17
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    TIM
    LSE
    Posts
    18,006
    Mentioned
    162 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by returnofxenu View Post
    More gayness huh?

  18. #18
    Decadent Charlatan Aquagraph's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Continental Vinnland
    TIM
    OmniPoLR
    Posts
    3,967
    Mentioned
    126 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sssonyyy View Post
    But hold on, what do you mean by aggressive?
    I let that open by purpose. Here are some good measures: Arming and aiding violent factions, sending troops, shows of strength (gathering naval vessels on international waters, nuclear testing [North-Korea}, paramilitary policing policies [NYC]), threats (threatening to close trade agreement don't usually weigh much), (most) non-interventionist attitudes (trading is not interventionism), military bases abroad, military prison camps, all violations of non-aggression principle (yes, even heavy taxing and imprisoning non-violent drug users is violent). Please suggest more.
    I'd put emphasis on actions done abroad because domestic aggression is more complex and subtle, although we can often agree on domestic genocides executed by the state is aggression (even that maybe hidden though).
    “I tell you, freedom and human rights in America are doomed. The U.S. government will lead the American people in — and the West in general — into an unbearable hell and a choking life. - Osama bin Laden

  19. #19
    bolong's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    626
    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Aquagraph View Post
    I'd put emphasis on actions done abroad because domestic aggression is more complex and subtle, although we can often agree on domestic genocides executed by the state is aggression (even that maybe hidden though).
    I agree. To define aggression in terms of whole countries, it would have to be external actions that threaten other countries. This rules out places like North Korea that may treat its own people terribly, but isn't really a threat to anyone living outside North Korea. But then this leaves very obvious countries that have already been mentioned: U.S., U.K., France, Germany, Japan, U.S.S.R.

    I think it would help to narrow the time frame. Too much has happened in the past 100 years. If you take the two world wars and the aggressive build up to it by Germany and Japan, then those two should be the most aggressive, but looking at the two countries today it doesn't seem fair to still stick them with that label. There were also tons of countries who won independence from the major powers during this time period, usually after some kind of bloody conflict. But does this count as aggression? The colonized countries were fighting for freedom, the colonizers were fighting to protect what was "theirs."

    And say you do narrow it down to the past 50 years, and exclude cases of countries gaining independence, then the winner is the U.S., definitely.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •