This is Mur @mur2501@social.cleverlibre.org

@kranfahrer
ping received

@thor
For scandinavian cusine you need a fish frozen in ice 100 years ago

@thor Station looks empty

@thor

@thor
So what is the topic? business ideas?

@thor
is he also shy in talking to girls?

@thor
What's the chance you both end up loving the same girl?

@thor
but does he own a ragdoll cat?

@trinsec My friends from France do like to suck on frogs

@feld @freemo
Well it was a net gain for the people who make the decisions of the war.

@feld @freemo
Well the profit is for the companies who build weapons, equipments and all the military and other stuffs :)

@freemo
and in case of Afghanistan both parties made good profits :P

@feld

@feld
Yeah and that's the point. No one entered war cause it was the righteous thing to do.
Either you had a gain in it, or you were dragged into it.

Also simple economics, When others do war it is profitable for you (you can sell weapon and stuffs to them). When you get yourself into a war, obviously it's not much profitable.
@freemo

@feld
Well the United States of America had no intentions of entering the war, atleast until a tiny asian country came and blew up a whole fleet of ships in Pearl Harbor.

Also while the UN didn't existed then but League of Nations did, which is a predecessor to UN.
@freemo

@feld @freemo
Countries enter the side where they have gains, cause as you said: no government exists which hasn't done horrific atrocities.

@feld @freemo
reasons were not bad, just the one saying those reasons had a sketchy history so that ultimately put doubts on the reasons

@bonifartius @freemo
It's a similar story with India. Half of the Indian army at that time fought with the British in hopes that Britain will give independence in return. While the other half seperated and went to fight alongside Germany in hopes that they will defeat Britain.
Two ways for the same goal

@feld @freemo
Absolutely wrong? NO!!
Absolutely right? also no.
Especially when seen from perspective outside of the allies and axis in that time.
You see some of the allies until and before that time were sitting on a large number of colonies which they ruled brutally.
So from the perspective of the people of the colonies both aren't that different. One wants to rule them, the other is ruling them since hundred or more years.
This is not about justifying ideologies or actions, it's more looking at how much in mud one is

@freemo
Has there been any war where anyone side have been absolutely right?