WWI started one hundred years ago today. No matter how historians may relate its battles, events and heroes, it probably remains humanity’s most gross obscenity – even its armistice carrying with it the seeds for WWII.
Like the current Hamas-Israeli war, WWI was fought over land and territory. Like the current Ukraine civil war it was fought over shifting power allegiances and boundaries. Although they should be, wars are rarely commonly seen in terms of who wants to ‘own’ what land.
Their beginnings are usually born of hard times and rationalisations for going to war over land. That proponents for war should be locked together in a room until an agreement has been ironed out is a great idea when considered against the alternative, the mass slaughter of human life, but then I guess there is always the position of the armaments industry, the military and the 0.1% to consider?
This does strike me as a very similar period to that leading to WWI & WWII, but I’m basically an optimist on the point (believe it or not), and I think we will be able to avert WWIII.
Of course, it will need popular (not populist) intervention in politics and the people giving the 0.1% their marching orders politically, on the basis that the 99.9% matters more than they do. They’ve gone too far on this occasion, IMO.
I’m not impressed, however, by those who say we can’t have a war “because we’re nuclear now”. So, if weapons of mass destruction can’t be used, what’s all the fuss about?
WWIII isn’t far away. Started in Washington, supported by Canberra and blessed by our Media.
Our youth with HEC’s debt will be drafted to fight and those who oppose will be jailed as terrorists.
Those youth with the surname of Abbott, Hockey or Rhinehart will be exempt from fighting.