2d4chan - User contributions [en]

War

2023-03-01T18:09:11Z

2607:FB90:6CA3:5C65:D92A:F7DD:EE3E:DA5B: /* Why do we go to war? */

{{topquote|War, what is it good for?|Edwin Starr}}
{{topquote|Everything!|[[Team Fortress 2|Soldier]], replying to the upper question.}}

War, for some the be-all-end-all of civilizations, the harbinger of death to others. For thousands of years, perhaps even millions, us humans have gone to war for as long as we've been able to create weapons. Whether it be over matters of ideology, natural resources, or territory, men have fought for millennia on end for the betterment of mankind as a whole... or for their own interest.

War has been part of human society for a very long time. So long in fact that we can hardly even pinpoint when did the fashion of [[Orks|bashing someone else with a big pointy stick]] even started originally. Some even theorized that the practice of warfare is not something proper to humans, but perhaps to animals as well, as our cousins the apes have learned how to manipulate sticks and machetes. Meanwhile, ant colonies have waged a global war since time immemorial. In any case, wars have been omnipresent for a long while. So much so, in fact, that we humans have draw a lot of inspirations for our stories and cultures. War is present in our books, our ancient texts, our games, our movies, our shows, and so on and so forth.

==/tg/ relevance==
{{topquote|War in its ensemble is NOT a science, but an art. Strategy, particularly, may indeed be regulated by fixed laws resembling those of the positive sciences, but this is not true of war viewed as a whole.|[[Fulgrim|Antoine-Henri Jomini]] in his military treatise, Précis de l’Art de la Guerre (Summary of the Art of War)}}

[[Warhammer 40k|Are]] [[Warmahordes|you]] [[Wargaming|seriously]] [[Warhammer Fantasy Battle|asking]] [[Horus Heresy|that]] [[BattleTech|here]] [[Flames of War|of]] [[Team Yankee|all]] [[Beyond the Gates of Antares|places?]]

Barring any horror, mystery, civilization-building, RPG, and puzzle tabletop games, you’re more likely than not to find a tabletop game focused on war. Hell, the earliest version of modern tabletop gaming came from military war games using set miniatures pieces and military unit markers for strategists to sharpen their tactics with wargaming skills. Even their board game relatives of checkers, shogi, chess, and go all have military strategy overtones associated with them. And ironically it’s still a practice that continues to this day despite the proliferation of [[Video games|software simulations]] and [[LARP|live fire]] [[RPG|training exercises]]. Both with hypothetical scenario exercises for governments and think-tanks or private service members finding some peace and quiet from painting miniatures before marching them to war.

==War in practice==

{{topquote|Men, steel, money, and bread, are the sinews of war; but of these four, the first two are more necessary, for men and steel find money and bread, but money and bread do not find men and steel.|[[Perturabo|Niccolo Machiavelli]] in his military treatise, Dell'arte della Guerra (The Art of War)}}

{{topquote|All warfare is based on deception. Hence, when we are able to attack, we must seem unable; when using our forces, we must appear inactive; when we are near, we must make the enemy believe we are far away; when far away, we must make him believe we are near.|[[Alpharius|Sun Tzu]] in his military treatise, 孫子兵法 (The Art of War)}}

Warfare. A profession for many, an art to some. Wars can be waged by just about anyone, but they cannot be won by everyone. At the end of the day, as long as there's still conflict to be settled, [[Team Fortress 2#Sniper|someone is gonna want someone else dead]]. To maximize the chances of winning, plenty have elaborated plans of actions to conduct war in a proper manner. Any regime that had plenty of men and who knew how to use them made some pretty drastic changes in history, plenty left their mark through sheer force of will... And lethal application of weaponry.

So, you wanna wage a war, son?

==Why do we go to war?==

{{topquote|War is merely the continuation of policy by other means. We see, therefore, that war is not merely an act of policy but a true political instrument, a continuation of political intercourse carried on with other means. What remains peculiar to war is simply the peculiar nature of its means.|[[Roboute Guilliman|Carl von Clausewitz]] in his military treatise, Vom Kriege (On War)}}

{{topquote|[[Ogre#Shrek|Some of you may die, but it's a sacrifice I am willing to make.]]|Any ruler worth his crown in History.}}

BECOZ IT'Z A ZOGGIN' GUD TIME, DATZ WHY!

Okay, seriously, why do we go to war? You might have heard philosophers, politicians, artists, thinkers, or even people on the street saying that war is terrible and should be avoided at all cost. Even military officials highly suggest to not apprehend conflict at all. As it seems that War brings more bad than good. But if that is so obvious, then why do people '''still to this very day''' fight to the death? It has been a very frequent subject of debates and researches. Despite the disapproval of war as a concept, it is ever omnipresent in our media and culture. Even games! How many tabletop games do you know are based around the concept of war? Isn't that enough proof that despite the odds, there is an interest in the matter of conflict?

Over the years, many explanations for war were given, but none really serve as a definitive answer.

*Natural resources have been a frequent one in the early days of civilization. The Euphrates river, for example, has been the theater of a metric ton of conflicts and battles over the water the river provided. And given how it was one of the only sources around in Ancient Mesopotamia, you better believe people were going to fight over it. With the first development of agriculture and infrastructures made to circumvent problems created by the river, the disputes lasted until the establishment of the first Akkadian civilization.
**Later down the line, natural resources kept being a main motivation for war; but instead of it being based on its literal rarity, most cases were economic matters. Say a country is doing a blockade on certain trades and another needs said trades to complete certain megaprojects. In most cases, negotiations were cut short in favor of a simple cut to the throat. In desperate times, men can get very violent. Or repress with a lot of violence.
**Additionally, said wars can not be just merely for seeking more favorable terms regarding resources, trade access, and political prestige at another’s expense but also conquest and annexation of land and subjugation of people inhabiting it (whether it be for labor, tax sources, or pacification of unruly neighborhoods). Even nomadic migrations of armed displaced people or nomads is a thing as seen with the Mongols and the Sea People.
* Following the "realist" political theories, war is the result of nations trying and failing to produce stability with their neighboring nations by maintaining a balance of military power with each other; often by using coercive actions to w neighbors to take their considerations into account when all other options (such as tense diplomatic negotiations, embargoes, tariffs, and blockades) are either nonviable or failed. If that does not work out (say, because one nation is believed to be [[Nazi|developing nuclear weapons]] and [[USA|we'd rather be the ones holding that particular trigger]]), war happens to try and balance it out so war can be avoided in the future. This also works with other resources; if a country is in need of water, oil or other necessities, war becomes more likely as their desperation rises (see current east-European/Russian relations).
* If you're an authoritarian regime, war is one of many ways to keep your regime propped up. This serves multiple purposes; it provides the populace with jobs in the form of industry and conscription, it directs people's negative sentiments towards an external foe and away from the state itself, and if the war is successful, gains the state prestige and resources (which are intended to not only offset the cost of the war but also grow the state's overall power). The threat of an external foe also justifies an increase in the state's power, such as cracking down on civil liberties. That being said, if the state is already unstable or overextended and you fail to make any meaningful gains, people will start questioning the legitimacy of the ruling class.
* Ideology may be a major dividing line between two opposing forces; while political ambitions and desire for power usually coincide as motivating factors, a major ideological difference can make it intolerable for two different groups of people to live with each other due to the fundamental incompatibility with their ways of life. This dividing line can be further exacerbated by ongoing bad blood between the two different factions, making long-term reconciliation difficult.
* Civil Wars usually start with some segment of the population being upset with who's in charge of the nation, be it an interest group, a socioeconomic class, or a particular head of state. This can take a number of different forms, occasionally multiple of these at once:
** Rebellion - A group of people are unhappy with the current state of affairs and want to set something on fire about it. Rebellions are, if we're defining things for categorization here, mostly just an outlet for pent-up frustration or some unbearable conditions, not a fully formed attempt to establish a new order. You don't need a manifesto, just a brick. They tend to be the prelude to something more serious.
** Coup d'Etat - The rebel faction wants to replace the current ruler. Generally, this happens as a conspiracy by military officers, government officials, the nobility, or some outside force that's gotten the ear of any of the previous three.
** Succession Crisis - more common in a [[Monarchy]]; if it's unclear on who will be the next ruler, if the heir apparent is deemed unfit to rule, or if the next in line is someone that everyone absolutely can't stand, the different claimants will fight each other for the throne.
** Secession - The rebel faction wants to splinter away from the country to form their own country. This undermines the authority of the previously united national government, leading to high tensions even if the secession itself is peaceful, and often leads to war afterwards when the seceding party throws the emperor's diplomats out a window, finds a big strong friendly nation with a vested interest in building a canal, or starts a war in a fit of jingoistic arrogance then cries about losing for the next 160 years.
** Revolution - The rebel faction wants to change the system of government entirely. These are, generally speaking, The Big Ones. Since the concept of a revolution in the modern sense, beginning in the late 18th century, revolutions hardly ever stay in one country. Power bounces around into new and unknown hands, long-established societal norms are challenged openly, and more often than not the neighbors start to get nervous about it and decide to help, quietly or in full force, one side or the other. No matter the outcome of one single revolution, in a world that has grown ever more interconnected, it's bad news for the powerful and unpopular everywhere when the barricades and banners start showing up.
** Failed State - If the central government fails altogether, local populations will start fighting each other to reestablish a new state; usually with different warlords wanting to eventually defeat the rivals and become the new ruler of the country.
*** Partition - if a country (often a buffer state) between neighbors is unstable to the point of having conflict spill over national borders, then said neighbors may consider such a state as an existential threat and should be split between each other for the sake of keeping their realms in order. Oftentimes, this means mutually agreed annexation of land at the expense of the locals (whether it be via political marriage, puppet states, or plain old forced population transfer).

War

2023-03-01T18:07:50Z

2607:FB90:6CA3:5C65:D92A:F7DD:EE3E:DA5B: /* Why do we go to war? */

{{topquote|War, what is it good for?|Edwin Starr}}
{{topquote|Everything!|[[Team Fortress 2|Soldier]], replying to the upper question.}}

War, for some the be-all-end-all of civilizations, the harbinger of death to others. For thousands of years, perhaps even millions, us humans have gone to war for as long as we've been able to create weapons. Whether it be over matters of ideology, natural resources, or territory, men have fought for millennia on end for the betterment of mankind as a whole... or for their own interest.

War has been part of human society for a very long time. So long in fact that we can hardly even pinpoint when did the fashion of [[Orks|bashing someone else with a big pointy stick]] even started originally. Some even theorized that the practice of warfare is not something proper to humans, but perhaps to animals as well, as our cousins the apes have learned how to manipulate sticks and machetes. Meanwhile, ant colonies have waged a global war since time immemorial. In any case, wars have been omnipresent for a long while. So much so, in fact, that we humans have draw a lot of inspirations for our stories and cultures. War is present in our books, our ancient texts, our games, our movies, our shows, and so on and so forth.

==/tg/ relevance==
{{topquote|War in its ensemble is NOT a science, but an art. Strategy, particularly, may indeed be regulated by fixed laws resembling those of the positive sciences, but this is not true of war viewed as a whole.|[[Fulgrim|Antoine-Henri Jomini]] in his military treatise, Précis de l’Art de la Guerre (Summary of the Art of War)}}

[[Warhammer 40k|Are]] [[Warmahordes|you]] [[Wargaming|seriously]] [[Warhammer Fantasy Battle|asking]] [[Horus Heresy|that]] [[BattleTech|here]] [[Flames of War|of]] [[Team Yankee|all]] [[Beyond the Gates of Antares|places?]]

Barring any horror, mystery, civilization-building, RPG, and puzzle tabletop games, you’re more likely than not to find a tabletop game focused on war. Hell, the earliest version of modern tabletop gaming came from military war games using set miniatures pieces and military unit markers for strategists to sharpen their tactics with wargaming skills. Even their board game relatives of checkers, shogi, chess, and go all have military strategy overtones associated with them. And ironically it’s still a practice that continues to this day despite the proliferation of [[Video games|software simulations]] and [[LARP|live fire]] [[RPG|training exercises]]. Both with hypothetical scenario exercises for governments and think-tanks or private service members finding some peace and quiet from painting miniatures before marching them to war.

==War in practice==

{{topquote|Men, steel, money, and bread, are the sinews of war; but of these four, the first two are more necessary, for men and steel find money and bread, but money and bread do not find men and steel.|[[Perturabo|Niccolo Machiavelli]] in his military treatise, Dell'arte della Guerra (The Art of War)}}

{{topquote|All warfare is based on deception. Hence, when we are able to attack, we must seem unable; when using our forces, we must appear inactive; when we are near, we must make the enemy believe we are far away; when far away, we must make him believe we are near.|[[Alpharius|Sun Tzu]] in his military treatise, 孫子兵法 (The Art of War)}}

Warfare. A profession for many, an art to some. Wars can be waged by just about anyone, but they cannot be won by everyone. At the end of the day, as long as there's still conflict to be settled, [[Team Fortress 2#Sniper|someone is gonna want someone else dead]]. To maximize the chances of winning, plenty have elaborated plans of actions to conduct war in a proper manner. Any regime that had plenty of men and who knew how to use them made some pretty drastic changes in history, plenty left their mark through sheer force of will... And lethal application of weaponry.

So, you wanna wage a war, son?

==Why do we go to war?==

{{topquote|War is merely the continuation of policy by other means. We see, therefore, that war is not merely an act of policy but a true political instrument, a continuation of political intercourse carried on with other means. What remains peculiar to war is simply the peculiar nature of its means.|[[Roboute Guilliman|Carl von Clausewitz]] in his military treatise, Vom Kriege (On War)}}

{{topquote|[[Ogre#Shrek|Some of you may die, but it's a sacrifice I am willing to make.]]|Any ruler worth his crown in History.}}

BECOZ IT'Z A ZOGGIN' GUD TIME, DATZ WHY!

Okay, seriously, why do we go to war? You might have heard philosophers, politicians, artists, thinkers, or even people on the street saying that war is terrible and should be avoided at all cost. Even military officials highly suggest to not apprehend conflict at all. As it seems that War brings more bad than good. But if that is so obvious, then why do people '''still to this very day''' fight to the death? It has been a very frequent subject of debates and researches. Despite the disapproval of war as a concept, it is ever omnipresent in our media and culture. Even games! How many tabletop games do you know are based around the concept of war? Isn't that enough proof that despite the odds, there is an interest in the matter of conflict?

Over the years, many explanations for war were given, but none really serve as a definitive answer.

*Natural resources have been a frequent one in the early days of civilization. The Euphrates river, for example, has been the theater of a metric ton of conflicts and battles over the water the river provided. And given how it was one of the only sources around in Ancient Mesopotamia, you better believe people were going to fight over it. With the first development of agriculture and infrastructures made to circumvent problems created by the river, the disputes lasted until the establishment of the first Akkadian civilization.
**Later down the line, natural resources kept being a main motivation for war; but instead of it being based on its literal rarity, most cases were economic matters. Say a country is doing a blockade on certain trades and another needs said trades to complete certain megaprojects. In most cases, negotiations were cut short in favor of a simple cut to the throat. In desperate times, men can get very violent. Or repress with a lot of violence.
**Additionally, said wars can not be just merely for seeking more favorable terms regarding resources, trade access, and political prestige at another’s expense but also conquest and annexation of land and subjugation of people inhabiting it (whether it be for labor, tax sources, or pacification of unruly neighborhoods). Even nomadic migrations of armed displaced people or nomads is a thing as seen with the Mongols and the Sea People.
* Following the "realist" political theories, war is the result of nations trying and failing to produce stability with their neighboring nations by maintaining a balance of military power with each other; often by using coercive actions to compell neighbors to take their considerations into account when all other options are either nonviable or failed. If that does not work out (say, because one nation is believed to be [[Nazi|developing nuclear weapons]] and [[USA|we'd rather be the ones holding that particular trigger]]), war happens to try and balance it out so war can be avoided in the future. This also works with other resources; if a country is in need of water, oil or other necessities, war becomes more likely as their desperation rises (see current east-European/Russian relations).
* If you're an authoritarian regime, war is one of many ways to keep your regime propped up. This serves multiple purposes; it provides the populace with jobs in the form of industry and conscription, it directs people's negative sentiments towards an external foe and away from the state itself, and if the war is successful, gains the state prestige and resources (which are intended to not only offset the cost of the war but also grow the state's overall power). The threat of an external foe also justifies an increase in the state's power, such as cracking down on civil liberties. That being said, if the state is already unstable or overextended and you fail to make any meaningful gains, people will start questioning the legitimacy of the ruling class.
* Ideology may be a major dividing line between two opposing forces; while political ambitions and desire for power usually coincide as motivating factors, a major ideological difference can make it intolerable for two different groups of people to live with each other due to the fundamental incompatibility with their ways of life. This dividing line can be further exacerbated by ongoing bad blood between the two different factions, making long-term reconciliation difficult.
* Civil Wars usually start with some segment of the population being upset with who's in charge of the nation, be it an interest group, a socioeconomic class, or a particular head of state. This can take a number of different forms, occasionally multiple of these at once:
** Rebellion - A group of people are unhappy with the current state of affairs and want to set something on fire about it. Rebellions are, if we're defining things for categorization here, mostly just an outlet for pent-up frustration or some unbearable conditions, not a fully formed attempt to establish a new order. You don't need a manifesto, just a brick. They tend to be the prelude to something more serious.
** Coup d'Etat - The rebel faction wants to replace the current ruler. Generally, this happens as a conspiracy by military officers, government officials, the nobility, or some outside force that's gotten the ear of any of the previous three.
** Succession Crisis - more common in a [[Monarchy]]; if it's unclear on who will be the next ruler, if the heir apparent is deemed unfit to rule, or if the next in line is someone that everyone absolutely can't stand, the different claimants will fight each other for the throne.
** Secession - The rebel faction wants to splinter away from the country to form their own country. This undermines the authority of the previously united national government, leading to high tensions even if the secession itself is peaceful, and often leads to war afterwards when the seceding party throws the emperor's diplomats out a window, finds a big strong friendly nation with a vested interest in building a canal, or starts a war in a fit of jingoistic arrogance then cries about losing for the next 160 years.
** Revolution - The rebel faction wants to change the system of government entirely. These are, generally speaking, The Big Ones. Since the concept of a revolution in the modern sense, beginning in the late 18th century, revolutions hardly ever stay in one country. Power bounces around into new and unknown hands, long-established societal norms are challenged openly, and more often than not the neighbors start to get nervous about it and decide to help, quietly or in full force, one side or the other. No matter the outcome of one single revolution, in a world that has grown ever more interconnected, it's bad news for the powerful and unpopular everywhere when the barricades and banners start showing up.
** Failed State - If the central government fails altogether, local populations will start fighting each other to reestablish a new state; usually with different warlords wanting to eventually defeat the rivals and become the new ruler of the country.
*** Partition - if a country (often a buffer state) between neighbors is unstable to the point of having conflict spill over national borders, then said neighbors may consider such a state as an existential threat and should be split between each other for the sake of keeping their realms in order. Oftentimes, this means mutually agreed annexation of land at the expense of the locals (whether it be via political marriage, puppet states, or plain old forced population transfer).

War

2023-03-01T18:02:58Z

2607:FB90:6CA3:5C65:D92A:F7DD:EE3E:DA5B:

{{topquote|War, what is it good for?|Edwin Starr}}
{{topquote|Everything!|[[Team Fortress 2|Soldier]], replying to the upper question.}}

War, for some the be-all-end-all of civilizations, the harbinger of death to others. For thousands of years, perhaps even millions, us humans have gone to war for as long as we've been able to create weapons. Whether it be over matters of ideology, natural resources, or territory, men have fought for millennia on end for the betterment of mankind as a whole... or for their own interest.

War has been part of human society for a very long time. So long in fact that we can hardly even pinpoint when did the fashion of [[Orks|bashing someone else with a big pointy stick]] even started originally. Some even theorized that the practice of warfare is not something proper to humans, but perhaps to animals as well, as our cousins the apes have learned how to manipulate sticks and machetes. Meanwhile, ant colonies have waged a global war since time immemorial. In any case, wars have been omnipresent for a long while. So much so, in fact, that we humans have draw a lot of inspirations for our stories and cultures. War is present in our books, our ancient texts, our games, our movies, our shows, and so on and so forth.

==/tg/ relevance==
{{topquote|War in its ensemble is NOT a science, but an art. Strategy, particularly, may indeed be regulated by fixed laws resembling those of the positive sciences, but this is not true of war viewed as a whole.|[[Fulgrim|Antoine-Henri Jomini]] in his military treatise, Précis de l’Art de la Guerre (Summary of the Art of War)}}

[[Warhammer 40k|Are]] [[Warmahordes|you]] [[Wargaming|seriously]] [[Warhammer Fantasy Battle|asking]] [[Horus Heresy|that]] [[BattleTech|here]] [[Flames of War|of]] [[Team Yankee|all]] [[Beyond the Gates of Antares|places?]]

Barring any horror, mystery, civilization-building, RPG, and puzzle tabletop games, you’re more likely than not to find a tabletop game focused on war. Hell, the earliest version of modern tabletop gaming came from military war games using set miniatures pieces and military unit markers for strategists to sharpen their tactics with wargaming skills. Even their board game relatives of checkers, shogi, chess, and go all have military strategy overtones associated with them. And ironically it’s still a practice that continues to this day despite the proliferation of [[Video games|software simulations]] and [[LARP|live fire]] [[RPG|training exercises]]. Both with hypothetical scenario exercises for governments and think-tanks or private service members finding some peace and quiet from painting miniatures before marching them to war.

==War in practice==

{{topquote|Men, steel, money, and bread, are the sinews of war; but of these four, the first two are more necessary, for men and steel find money and bread, but money and bread do not find men and steel.|[[Perturabo|Niccolo Machiavelli]] in his military treatise, Dell'arte della Guerra (The Art of War)}}

{{topquote|All warfare is based on deception. Hence, when we are able to attack, we must seem unable; when using our forces, we must appear inactive; when we are near, we must make the enemy believe we are far away; when far away, we must make him believe we are near.|[[Alpharius|Sun Tzu]] in his military treatise, 孫子兵法 (The Art of War)}}

Warfare. A profession for many, an art to some. Wars can be waged by just about anyone, but they cannot be won by everyone. At the end of the day, as long as there's still conflict to be settled, [[Team Fortress 2#Sniper|someone is gonna want someone else dead]]. To maximize the chances of winning, plenty have elaborated plans of actions to conduct war in a proper manner. Any regime that had plenty of men and who knew how to use them made some pretty drastic changes in history, plenty left their mark through sheer force of will... And lethal application of weaponry.

So, you wanna wage a war, son?

==Why do we go to war?==

{{topquote|War is merely the continuation of policy by other means. We see, therefore, that war is not merely an act of policy but a true political instrument, a continuation of political intercourse carried on with other means. What remains peculiar to war is simply the peculiar nature of its means.|[[Roboute Guilliman|Carl von Clausewitz]] in his military treatise, Vom Kriege (On War)}}

{{topquote|[[Ogre#Shrek|Some of you may die, but it's a sacrifice I am willing to make.]]|Any ruler worth his crown in History.}}

BECOZ IT'Z A ZOGGIN' GUD TIME, DATZ WHY!

Okay, seriously, why do we go to war? You might have heard philosophers, politicians, artists, thinkers, or even people on the street saying that war is terrible and should be avoided at all cost. Even military officials highly suggest to not apprehend conflict at all. As it seems that War brings more bad than good. But if that is so obvious, then why do people '''still to this very day''' fight to the death? It has been a very frequent subject of debates and researches. Despite the disapproval of war as a concept, it is ever omnipresent in our media and culture. Even games! How many tabletop games do you know are based around the concept of war? Isn't that enough proof that despite the odds, there is an interest in the matter of conflict?

Over the years, many explanations for war were given, but none really serve as a definitive answer.

*Natural resources have been a frequent one in the early days of civilization. The Euphrates river, for example, has been the theater of a metric ton of conflicts and battles over the water the river provided. And given how it was one of the only sources around in Ancient Mesopotamia, you better believe people were going to fight over it. With the first development of agriculture and infrastructures made to circumvent problems created by the river, the disputes lasted until the establishment of the first Akkadian civilization.
**Later down the line, natural resources kept being a main motivation for war; but instead of it being based on its literal rarity, most cases were economic matters. Say a country is doing a blockade on certain trades and another needs said trades to complete certain megaprojects. In most cases, negotiations were cut short in favor of a simple cut to the throat. In desperate times, men can get very violent. Or repress with a lot of violence.
* Following the "realist" political theories, war is the result of nations trying and failing to produce stability with their neighboring nations by maintaining a balance of military power with each other; often by using coercive actions to compell neighbors to take their considerations into account when all other options are either nonviable or failed. If that does not work out (say, because one nation is believed to be [[Nazi|developing nuclear weapons]] and [[USA|we'd rather be the ones holding that particular trigger]]), war happens to try and balance it out so war can be avoided in the future. This also works with other resources; if a country is in need of water, oil or other necessities, war becomes more likely as their desperation rises (see current east-European/Russian relations).
* If you're an authoritarian regime, war is one of many ways to keep your regime propped up. This serves multiple purposes; it provides the populace with jobs in the form of industry and conscription, it directs people's negative sentiments towards an external foe and away from the state itself, and if the war is successful, gains the state prestige and resources (which are intended to not only offset the cost of the war but also grow the state's overall power). The threat of an external foe also justifies an increase in the state's power, such as cracking down on civil liberties. That being said, if the state is already unstable or overextended and you fail to make any meaningful gains, people will start questioning the legitimacy of the ruling class.
* Ideology may be a major dividing line between two opposing forces; while political ambitions and desire for power usually coincide as motivating factors, a major ideological difference can make it intolerable for two different groups of people to live with each other due to the fundamental incompatibility with their ways of life. This dividing line can be further exacerbated by ongoing bad blood between the two different factions, making long-term reconciliation difficult.
* Civil Wars usually start with some segment of the population being upset with who's in charge of the nation, be it an interest group, a socioeconomic class, or a particular head of state. This can take a number of different forms, occasionally multiple of these at once:
** Rebellion - A group of people are unhappy with the current state of affairs and want to set something on fire about it. Rebellions are, if we're defining things for categorization here, mostly just an outlet for pent-up frustration or some unbearable conditions, not a fully formed attempt to establish a new order. You don't need a manifesto, just a brick. They tend to be the prelude to something more serious.
** Coup d'Etat - The rebel faction wants to replace the current ruler. Generally, this happens as a conspiracy by military officers, government officials, the nobility, or some outside force that's gotten the ear of any of the previous three.
** Succession Crisis - more common in a [[Monarchy]]; if it's unclear on who will be the next ruler, if the heir apparent is deemed unfit to rule, or if the next in line is someone that everyone absolutely can't stand, the different claimants will fight each other for the throne.
** Secession - The rebel faction wants to splinter away from the country to form their own country. This undermines the authority of the previously united national government, leading to high tensions even if the secession itself is peaceful, and often leads to war afterwards when the seceding party throws the emperor's diplomats out a window, finds a big strong friendly nation with a vested interest in building a canal, or starts a war in a fit of jingoistic arrogance then cries about losing for the next 160 years.
** Revolution - The rebel faction wants to change the system of government entirely. These are, generally speaking, The Big Ones. Since the concept of a revolution in the modern sense, beginning in the late 18th century, revolutions hardly ever stay in one country. Power bounces around into new and unknown hands, long-established societal norms are challenged openly, and more often than not the neighbors start to get nervous about it and decide to help, quietly or in full force, one side or the other. No matter the outcome of one single revolution, in a world that has grown ever more interconnected, it's bad news for the powerful and unpopular everywhere when the barricades and banners start showing up.
** Failed State - If the central government fails altogether, local populations will start fighting each other to reestablish a new state; usually with different warlords wanting to eventually defeat the rivals and become the new ruler of the country.
*** Partition - if a country (often a buffer state) between neighbors is unstable to the point of having conflict spill over national borders, then said neighbors may consider such a state as an existential threat and should be split between each other for the sake of keeping their realms in order. Oftentimes, this means mutually agreed annexation of land at the expense of the locals (whether it be via political marriage, puppet states, or plain old force population transfer).

War

2023-03-01T16:04:55Z

2607:FB90:6CA3:5C65:D92A:F7DD:EE3E:DA5B: /* War in practice */ there, last quote of the 4 most popular classical military authors

{{topquote|War, what is it good for?|Edwin Starr}}
{{topquote|Everything!|[[Team Fortress 2|Soldier]], replying to the upper question.}}

War, for some the be-all-end-all of civilizations, the harbinger of death to others. For thousands of years, perhaps even millions, us humans have gone to war for as long as we've been able to create weapons. Whether it be over matters of ideology, natural resources, or territory, men have fought for millennia on end for the betterment of mankind as a whole... or for their own interest.

War has been part of human society for a very long time. So long in fact that we can hardly even pinpoint when did the fashion of [[Orks|bashing someone else with a big pointy stick]] even started originally. Some even theorized that the practice of warfare is not something proper to humans, but perhaps to animals as well, as our cousins the apes have learned how to manipulate sticks and machetes. Meanwhile, ant colonies have waged a global war since time immemorial. In any case, wars have been omnipresent for a long while. So much so, in fact, that we humans have draw a lot of inspirations for our stories and cultures. War is present in our books, our ancient texts, our games, our movies, our shows, and so on and so forth.

==/tg/ relevance==
{{topquote|War in its ensemble is NOT a science, but an art. Strategy, particularly, may indeed be regulated by fixed laws resembling those of the positive sciences, but this is not true of war viewed as a whole.|[[Fulgrim|Antoine-Henri Jomini]] on his military treatise, Précis de l’Art de la Guerre (Summary of the Art of War)}}

[[Warhammer 40k|Are]] [[Warmahordes|you]] [[Wargaming|seriously]] [[Warhammer Fantasy Battle|asking]] [[Horus Heresy|that]] [[BattleTech|here]] [[Flames of War|of]] [[Team Yankee|all]] [[Beyond the Gates of Antares|places?]]

Barring any horror, mystery, civilization-building, RPG, and puzzle tabletop games, you’re more likely than not to find a tabletop game focused on war. Hell, the earliest version of modern tabletop gaming came from military war games using set miniatures pieces and military unit markers for strategists to sharpen their tactics with wargaming skills. Even their board game relatives of checkers, shogi, chess, and go all have military strategy overtones associated with them. And ironically it’s still a practice that continues to this day despite the proliferation of [[Video games|software simulations]] and [[LARP|live fire]] [[RPG|training exercises]]. Both with hypothetical scenario exercises for governments and think-tanks or private service members finding some peace and quiet from painting miniatures before marching them to war.

==War in practice==
{{topquote|[[Ogre#Shrek|Some of you may die, but it's a sacrifice I am willing to make.]]|Any ruler worth his crown in History.}}

{{topquote|Men, steel, money, and bread, are the sinews of war; but of these four, the first two are more necessary, for men and steel find money and bread, but money and bread do not find men and steel.|[[Perturabo|Niccolo Machiavelli]] in his military treatise, Dell'arte della Guerra (The Art of War)}}

Warfare. A profession for many, an art to some. Wars can be waged by just about anyone, but they cannot be won by everyone. At the end of the day, as long as there's still conflict to be settled, [[Team Fortress 2#Sniper|someone is gonna want someone else dead]]. To maximize the chances of winning, plenty have elaborated plans of actions to conduct war in a proper manner. Any regime that had plenty of men and who knew how to use them made some pretty drastic changes in history, plenty left their mark through sheer force of will... And lethal application of weaponry.

So, you wanna wage a war, son?

==Why do we go to war?==

{{topquote|War is merely the continuation of policy by other means. We see, therefore, that war is not merely an act of policy but a true political instrument, a continuation of political intercourse carried on with other means. What remains peculiar to war is simply the peculiar nature of its means.|[[Roboute Guilliman|Carl von Clausewitz]] in his military treatise, Vom Kriege (On War)}}

{{topquote|All warfare is based on deception. Hence, when we are able to attack, we must seem unable; when using our forces, we must appear inactive; when we are near, we must make the enemy believe we are far away; when far away, we must make him believe we are near.|[[Alpharius|Sun Tzu]] in his military treatise, 孫子兵法 (The Art of War)}}

BECOZ IT'Z A ZOGGIN' GUD TIME, DATZ WHY!

Okay, seriously, why do we go to war? You might have heard philosophers, politicians, artists, thinkers, or even people on the street saying that war is terrible and should be avoided at all cost. Even military officials highly suggest to not apprehend conflict at all. As it seems that War brings more bad than good. But if that is so obvious, then why do people '''still to this very day''' fight to the death? It has been a very frequent subject of debates and researches. Despite the disapproval of war as a concept, it is ever omnipresent in our media and culture. Even games! How many tabletop games do you know are based around the concept of war? Isn't that enough proof that despite the odds, there is an interest in the matter of conflict?

Over the years, many explanations for war were given, but none really serve as a definitive answer.

*Natural resources have been a frequent one in the early days of civilization. The Euphrates river, for example, has been the theater of a metric ton of conflicts and battles over the water the river provided. And given how it was one of the only sources around in Ancient Mesopotamia, you better believe people were going to fight over it. With the first development of agriculture and infrastructures made to circumvent problems created by the river, the disputes lasted until the establishment of the first Akkadian civilization.
**Later down the line, natural resources kept being a main motivation for war; but instead of it being based on its literal rarity, most cases were economic matters. Say a country is doing a blockade on certain trades and another needs said trades to complete certain megaprojects. In most cases, negotiations were cut short in favor of a simple cut to the throat. In desperate times, men can get very violent. Or repress with a lot of violence.
* Following the "realist" political theories, war is the result of nations trying and failing to produce stability with their neighboring nations by maintaining a balance of military power with each other; often by using coercive actions to compell neighbors to take their considerations into account when all other options are either nonviable or failed. If that does not work out (say, because one nation is believed to be [[Nazi|developing nuclear weapons]] and [[USA|we'd rather be the ones holding that particular trigger]]), war happens to try and balance it out so war can be avoided in the future. This also works with other resources; if a country is in need of water, oil or other necessities, war becomes more likely as their desperation rises (see current east-European/Russian relations).
* If you're an authoritarian regime, war is one of many ways to keep your regime propped up. This serves multiple purposes; it provides the populace with jobs in the form of industry and conscription, it directs people's negative sentiments towards an external foe and away from the state itself, and if the war is successful, gains the state prestige and resources (which are intended to not only offset the cost of the war but also grow the state's overall power). The threat of an external foe also justifies an increase in the state's power, such as cracking down on civil liberties. That being said, if the state is already unstable or overextended and you fail to make any meaningful gains, people will start questioning the legitimacy of the ruling class.
* Ideology may be a major dividing line between two opposing forces; while political ambitions and desire for power usually coincide as motivating factors, a major ideological difference can make it intolerable for two different groups of people to live with each other due to the fundamental incompatibility with their ways of life. This dividing line can be further exacerbated by ongoing bad blood between the two different factions, making long-term reconciliation difficult.
* Civil Wars usually start with some segment of the population being upset with who's in charge of the nation, be it an interest group, a socioeconomic class, or a particular head of state. This can take a number of different forms, occasionally multiple of these at once:
** Rebellion - A group of people are unhappy with the current state of affairs and want to set something on fire about it. Rebellions are, if we're defining things for categorization here, mostly just an outlet for pent-up frustration or some unbearable conditions, not a fully formed attempt to establish a new order. You don't need a manifesto, just a brick. They tend to be the prelude to something more serious.
** Coup d'Etat - The rebel faction wants to replace the current ruler. Generally, this happens as a conspiracy by military officers, government officials, the nobility, or some outside force that's gotten the ear of any of the previous three.
** Succession Crisis - more common in a [[Monarchy]]; if it's unclear on who will be the next ruler, if the heir apparent is deemed unfit to rule, or if the next in line is someone that everyone absolutely can't stand, the different claimants will fight each other for the throne.
** Secession - The rebel faction wants to splinter away from the country to form their own country. This undermines the authority of the previously united national government, leading to high tensions even if the secession itself is peaceful, and often leads to war afterwards when the seceding party throws the emperor's diplomats out a window, finds a big strong friendly nation with a vested interest in building a canal, or starts a war in a fit of jingoistic arrogance then cries about losing for the next 160 years.
** Revolution - The rebel faction wants to change the system of government entirely. These are, generally speaking, The Big Ones. Since the concept of a revolution in the modern sense, beginning in the late 18th century, revolutions hardly ever stay in one country. Power bounces around into new and unknown hands, long-established societal norms are challenged openly, and more often than not the neighbors start to get nervous about it and decide to help, quietly or in full force, one side or the other. No matter the outcome of one single revolution, in a world that has grown ever more interconnected, it's bad news for the powerful and unpopular everywhere when the barricades and banners start showing up.
** Failed State - If the central government fails altogether, local populations will start fighting each other to reestablish a new state; usually with different warlords wanting to eventually defeat the rivals and become the new ruler of the country.
*** Partition - if a country (often a buffer state) between neighbors is unstable to the point of having conflict spill over national borders, then said neighbors may consider such a state as an existential threat and should be split between each other for the sake of keeping their realms in order. Oftentimes, this means mutually agreed annexation of land at the expense of the locals (whether it be via political marriage, puppet states, or plain old force population transfer).

Warhammer (BattleTech)

2023-03-01T00:15:54Z

2607:FB90:6CA3:5C65:D92A:F7DD:EE3E:DA5B: /* Overview */

{{disambiguation|the 'Mech from [[BattleTech]]|the weapon (and [[Games Workshop|Geedubs]]' various games under that name)|Warhammer}}

[[File:BTBlackWidow.jpeg|thumb|300px|Natasha Kerensky's Warhammer from her days as a Dragoon - arguably the most famous Warhammer in the setting.]]

The '''WHM-6R Warhammer''' is one of the most iconic [[BattleMech]]s ever put out by [[BattleTech]]. How iconic, you ask? Well, it both [[Old school|was the cover 'Mech all the way back when the game was BattleDroids]] and is considered ''the'' Heavy 'Mech of the setting.

==Overview==
The Warhammer was rolled out in 2515 by StarCorps Industries with the intent of the 'Mech being an absolute menace to other 'Mechs of the same or lower weight class. It achieved this using [[Dakka|balls-to-the-wall firepower]] while making itself hard to kill by being relatively heavy-armored. Needless to say, it did its job and went on to practically define its weight class. Back in the heyday of the [[Star League]], it was both a mainstay of their Defense Force and one of the 'Mechs selected for the Gunslinger Program.

After the collapse of the League brought everything to shit due to the Succession Wars, the Warhammer remained a mainstay since the factories to make it were still prevalent across the [[Inner Sphere]], though the rate of production was a shadow of what it once was. This also saved the design from having its original specs become [[LosTech]] like several other 'Mechs, though some of its League-era variants would meet that fate. Eventually, the Helm Memory Core would allow the Warhammer to regain its former glory, especially after the [[Clan Invasion]] made StarCorps get off their asses and start producing significant numbers of the 'Mech again, this time making variants for each of the major [[Inner Sphere|Successor States]].

Of course, the 'Mech is also found in the Periphery, with some Periphery powers making their own variants of the 'Mech. And [[The Clans]] get their own lineage in the form of IIC variants, based on OG Warhammers brought with them during Kerensky's Exodus and going up a weight class.

==Specs==
Weighing in at a chunky 70 tons, the Warhammer sits at the upper limit of the Heavy size class - any heavier and it'd be an Assault 'Mech. It's built on a StarCorp 100 chassis and powered by a VOX 280 fusion engine, the latter of which allows the 'Mech to reach a top speed of 64.8 kilometers per hour. This is in spite of its heavy protection of 10 tons of Leviathon Plus armor. The Warhammer is also noted as having an O/P 3000 COMSET communications system that, while dated by the 31st Century, is still considered reliable enough for the Mech to be able to assume a command role. An O/P 1500 ARB provides targeting and tracking, which is supported by a spotlight mounted on the left shoulder which made the 'Mech adept at night fighting. Finally, 18 single heat sinks are the standard cooling package that keeps a Mechwarrior from being microwaved by its own waste heat.

===Armament===
The standard loadout of a Warhammer as intended by the Star League focused on being an all-rounder of a damage dealer. For its main weapons, a pair of arm-mounted Donal PPCs were mounted for long-range shredding of other 'Mechs. When fired in unison, [[Anal circumference|the resulting damage was basically like if you were hit by an Autocannon/20 that somehow could nail you from dozens of meters away]]. For CQC it relies on two Martell Medium Lasers and two Magna Small Lasers, as well as a Holly SRM-6 launcher on the right shoulder which was fed by 1 ton of missiles within the right side of its torso. Finally, anti-infantry was provided by two Sperry Browning Machine Guns mounted on each side of the torso with one ton of HMG ammo split between them stored in the center of said torso.

===Design Quirks===
In terms of crunch, a Warhammer has the design quirks of being Rugged(2) (not needing maintenance nearly as often as other 'Mechs do), having a Searchlight as previously mentioned, being Stable (needing more force for a melee attack to knock it down), and Ubiquitous (since factories to make parts for it are still prevalent, swapping a blown-out PPC is relatively easy).

==Variants==
Since the Warhammer's one of the oldest 'Mechs around both in-universe and out, it's accrued a long list of alternate loadouts over the years. Also, something to note is that a Warhammer variant's numerical designation does ''not'' reflect what iteration it is chronologically unlike some other 'Mech designations.
*'''WHM-4L''' - One of the 31st-century StarCorp variants, this one for the [[Capellan Confederation]] and their Shadow Lances. This 3067 'Mech completely overhauls the Warhammer to be a [[Raven Guard|sneaky fucker]]. It now uses an XL Engine, Double Heat Sinks, and Stealth Armor, while its weapons are now two ER PPCs, four Medium Pulse Lasers, and a Streak SRM-6.
*'''WHM-5L''' - Another Capellan variation introduced in 3081, though this one is in-house. The 5L utilizes plasma rifles in place of PPCs, three ER medium lasers, and a Streak SRM-4 launcher. However, the most important addition was 5 Improved Jump Jets allowing it to rocket across the battlefield with a 150-meter jump range.
*'''WHM-6D''' - A [[Federated Suns]]-favored alternate loadout introduced in 2835, this variant of the standard 6R ditches the machine guns and SRM-6 launcher in favor of 4 more tons of armor, reinforced legs, and two more heat sinks.
*'''WHM-6K''' - Another 6R mod, this time common to the [[Draconis Combine]]. It simply removes the machine guns and their ammo in favor of two more heat sinks. This was explicitly done in order to make the Warhammer's PPCs more efficient.
*'''WHM-6L''' - Yet another Capellan variant, but much older than the first two above. It swapped the Machine Guns for [[Flamer]]s, earning the 6L the nickname of the "Hot Hammer".
*'''WHM-6Rb''' - A Star League-era Warhammer used by the SLDF Royal units. No weapon changes for this one - instead, this 2599 variant upgraded to use 17 double heat sinks and ferro-fibrous armor, as well as an Artemis IV fire control system.
*'''WHM-6Rk''' - A Combine variant that's also from the days of the Star League. It uses an XL Engine and 15 double heat sinks, and has 13 tons of armor. This weight reduction brings its top speed to an abnormally high for its weight 86 km/h.
*'''WHM-7A'''
*'''WHM-7CS'''
*'''WHM-7K'''
*'''WHM-7M'''
*'''WHM-7M-DC'''
*'''WHM-7S'''
*'''WHM-8D'''
*'''WHM-8D2'''
*'''WHM-8K'''
*'''WHM-8M'''
*'''WHM-8R'''
*'''WHM-9D'''
*'''WHM-9K'''
*'''WHM-9S'''
*'''WHD-10CT'''
*'''WHM-10K'''
*'''WHM-10T'''
*'''WHM-11T'''
*'''Warhammer C'''
*'''Warhammer C 2'''
*'''Warhammer C 3'''
*'''Dual Cockpit refits'''
===Warhammer IIC===
[[File:Warhammeriic-special-concept.png|thumb|300px|Bigger, sleeker, and [[Dakka]]-ier. {{KRUMP|STILL IZN'T ENUFF!}}]]
[[The Clans]], when presented with the challenge of updating the aging Warhammer, decided to have their Warhammer variants cross the weight line and become outright Assault 'Mechs capable of going toe-to-toe with the biggest boys. Now weighing 80 tons, the beefier Warhammer IIC is built upon an SFX-80 Endo Steel chassis, powered by a Type 10 320 standard fusion engine (giving a top speed of 65 km/h), and protected by 12 tons of Forging ZM15 Ferro-Fibrous armor - protection that lets it stand up to even 100-ton Assault 'Mechs. Comms are provided by a TDWS-37 Mk 2.2 and targeting/tracking by a "Hermes" CT-44. Finally, 20 double heat sinks are more than enough to keep everything nice and chill.

This gets traded out for losing the Rugged(2) and Ubiquitous design quirks of its Inner Sphere counterpart.

*'''Warhammer IIC 1'''
*'''Warhammer IIC 2'''
*'''Warhammer IIC 3'''
*'''Warhammer IIC 4'''
*'''Warhammer IIC 5'''
*'''Warhammer IIC 6'''
*'''Warhammer IIC 7'''
*'''Warhammer IIC 8'''
*'''Warhammer IIC 9'''
*'''Warhammer IIC 10'''
*'''Warhammer IIC 11'''
*'''Warhammer IIC 12'''
*'''Warhammer IIC 13'''

==Gallery==
<gallery>
File:Batdroid.jpg|Where it all began. (Also [[Retcon|Unseen]] since the design is pretty blatantly [[Blood Ravens|"borrowed"]] from Destroid with dubious legality. [[Star Wars|And let's not get started with the original name]]...)
File:BTWarhammer.webp|A Warhammer headlining a squad of 'Mechs.
</gallery>
[[Category:BattleTech]]
[[Category:BattleMech]]

War

2023-02-28T23:48:36Z

2607:FB90:6CA3:5C65:D92A:F7DD:EE3E:DA5B: /* /tg/ relevance */

{{topquote|War, what is it good for?|Edwin Starr}}
{{topquote|Everything!|[[Team Fortress 2|Soldier]], replying to the upper question.}}

War, for some the be-all-end-all of civilizations, the harbinger of death to others. For thousands of years, perhaps even millions, us humans have gone to war for as long as we've been able to create weapons. Whether it be over matters of ideology, natural resources, or territory, men have fought for millennia on end for the betterment of mankind as a whole... or for their own interest.

War has been part of human society for a very long time. So long in fact that we can hardly even pinpoint when did the fashion of [[Orks|bashing someone else with a big pointy stick]] even started originally. Some even theorized that the practice of warfare is not something proper to humans, but perhaps to animals as well, as our cousins the apes have learned how to manipulate sticks and machetes. In any case, wars have been omnipresent for a long while. So much so, in fact, that we humans have draw a lot of inspirations for our stories and cultures. War is present in our books, our ancient texts, our games, our movies, our shows, and so on and so forth.

==/tg/ relevance==
[[Warhammer 40k|Are]] [[Warmahordes|you]] [[Wargaming|seriously]] [[Warhammer Fantasy Battle|asking]] [[Horus Heresy|that?]]

Barring any horror, mystery, civilization-building, RPG, and puzzle tabletop games, you’re more likely than not to find a tabletop game focused on war. Hell, the earliest version of modern tabletop gaming came from military war games using set miniatures pieces and military unit markers for strategists to sharpen their tactics with wargaming skills despite the proliferation of software simulations and training exercises. Even their board game relatives of checkers, shogi, chess, and go all have military strategy overtones associated with them. And ironically it’s still a practice that continues to this day. Both with hypothetical scenario exercises for governments and think-tanks or private service members finding some peace and quiet from painting miniatures before marching them to war.

==War in practice==
{{topquote|[[Ogre#Shrek|Some of you may die, but it's a sacrifice I am willing to make.]]|Any ruler worth his crown in History.}}

Warfare. A profession for many, an art to some. Wars can be waged by just about anyone, but they cannot be won by everyone. At the end of the day, as long as there's still conflict to be settled, [[Team Fortress 2#Sniper|someone is gonna want someone else dead]]. To maximize the chances of winning, plenty have elaborated plans of actions to conduct war in a proper manner. Any regime that had plenty of men and who knew how to use them made some pretty drastic changes in history, plenty left their mark through sheer force of will... And lethal application of weaponry.

So, you wanna wage a war, son?

==Why do we go to war?==

{{topquote|War is merely the continuation of policy by other means. We see, therefore, that war is not merely an act of policy but a true political instrument, a continuation of political intercourse carried on with other means. What remains peculiar to war is simply the peculiar nature of its means.|[[Roboute Guilliman|Carl von Clausewitz]] in his treatise, Vom Kriege (On War)}}

{{topquote|All warfare is based on deception. Hence, when we are able to attack, we must seem unable; when using our forces, we must appear inactive; when we are near, we must make the enemy believe we are far away; when far away, we must make him believe we are near.|[[Alpharius|Sun Tzu]] in his treatise, 孫子兵法 (The Art of War)}}

BECOZ IT'Z A ZOGGIN' GUD TIME, DATZ WHY!

Okay, seriously, why do we go to war? You might have heard philosophers, politicians, artists, thinkers, or even people on the street saying that war is terrible and should be avoided at all cost. Even military officials highly suggest to not apprehend conflict at all. As it seems that War brings more bad than good. But if that is so obvious, then why do people '''still to this very day''' fight to the death? It has been a very frequent subject of debates and researches. Despite the disapproval of war as a concept, it is ever omnipresent in our media and culture. Even games! How many tabletop games do you know are based around the concept of war? Isn't that enough proof that despite the odds, there is an interest in the matter of conflict?

Over the years, many explanations for war were given, but none really serve as a definitive answer.

*Natural resources have been a frequent one in the early days of civilization. The Euphrates river, for example, has been the theater of a metric ton of conflicts and battles over the water the river provided. And given how it was one of the only sources around in Ancient Mesopotamia, you better believe people were going to fight over it. With the first development of agriculture and infrastructures made to circumvent problems created by the river, the disputes lasted until the establishment of the first Akkadian civilization.
**Later down the line, natural resources kept being a main motivation for war; but instead of it being based on its literal rarity, most cases were economic matters. Say a country is doing a blockade on certain trades and another needs said trades to complete certain megaprojects. In most cases, negotiations were cut short in favor of a simple cut to the throat. In desperate times, men can get very violent. Or repress with a lot of violence.
* Following the "realist" political theories, war is the result of nations trying and failing to produce stability with their neighboring nations by maintaining a balance of military power with each other; often by using coercive actions to compell neighbors to take their considerations into account when all other options are either nonviable or failed. If that does not work out (say, because one nation is believed to be [[Nazi|developing nuclear weapons]] and [[USA|we'd rather be the ones holding that particular trigger]]), war happens to try and balance it out so war can be avoided in the future. This also works with other resources; if a country is in need of water, oil or other necessities, war becomes more likely as their desperation rises (see current east-European/Russian relations).
* If you're an authoritarian regime, war is one of many ways to keep your regime propped up. This serves multiple purposes; it provides the populace with jobs in the form of industry and conscription, it directs people's negative sentiments towards an external foe and away from the state itself, and if the war is successful, gains the state prestige and resources (which are intended to not only offset the cost of the war but also grow the state's overall power). The threat of an external foe also justifies an increase in the state's power, such as cracking down on civil liberties. That being said, if the state is already unstable or overextended and you fail to make any meaningful gains, people will start questioning the legitimacy of the ruling class.
* Ideology may be a major dividing line between two opposing forces; while political ambitions and desire for power usually coincide as motivating factors, a major ideological difference can make it intolerable for two different groups of people to live with each other due to the fundamental incompatibility with their ways of life. This dividing line can be further exacerbated by ongoing bad blood between the two different factions, making long-term reconciliation difficult.
* Civil Wars usually start with some segment of the population being upset with who's in charge of the nation, be it an interest group, a socioeconomic class, or a particular head of state. This can take a number of different forms, occasionally multiple of these at once:
** Rebellion - A group of people are unhappy with the current state of affairs and want to set something on fire about it. Rebellions are, if we're defining things for categorization here, mostly just an outlet for pent-up frustration or some unbearable conditions, not a fully formed attempt to establish a new order. You don't need a manifesto, just a brick. They tend to be the prelude to something more serious.
** Coup d'Etat - The rebel faction wants to replace the current ruler. Generally, this happens as a conspiracy by military officers, government officials, the nobility, or some outside force that's gotten the ear of any of the previous three.
** Succession Crisis - more common in a [[Monarchy]]; if it's unclear on who will be the next ruler, if the heir apparent is deemed unfit to rule, or if the next in line is someone that everyone absolutely can't stand, the different claimants will fight each other for the throne.
** Secession - The rebel faction wants to splinter away from the country to form their own country. This undermines the authority of the previously united national government, leading to high tensions even if the secession itself is peaceful, and often leads to war afterwards when the seceding party throws the emperor's diplomats out a window, finds a big strong friendly nation with a vested interest in building a canal, or starts a war in a fit of jingoistic arrogance then cries about losing for the next 160 years.
** Revolution - The rebel faction wants to change the system of government entirely. These are, generally speaking, The Big Ones. Since the concept of a revolution in the modern sense, beginning in the late 18th century, revolutions hardly ever stay in one country. Power bounces around into new and unknown hands, long-established societal norms are challenged openly, and more often than not the neighbors start to get nervous about it and decide to help, quietly or in full force, one side or the other. No matter the outcome of one single revolution, in a world that has grown ever more interconnected, it's bad news for the powerful and unpopular everywhere when the barricades and banners start showing up.
** Failed State - If the central government fails altogether, local populations will start fighting each other to reestablish a new state; usually with different warlords wanting to eventually defeat the rivals and become the new ruler of the country.
*** Partition - if a country (often a buffer state) between neighbors is unstable to the point of having conflict spill over national borders, then said neighbors may consider such a state as an existential threat and should be split between each other for the sake of keeping their realms in order. Oftentimes, this means mutually agreed annexation of land at the expense of the locals (whether it be via political marriage, puppet states, or plain old force population transfer).