Topic: War: who benefits and how! - page 2. (Read 1865 times)

I am 100% always an advocate for peace but to answer the question arms manufacturers, defense contractors &  the military industrial complex often profit financially from war.

Political leaders benefit by diverting attention away from domestic issues or rallying support. It’s crucial to note that certain individuals or industries may reap short term gains but the overall costs & consequences of war can be devastating for societies, economies & individuals.

The toll on human lives, infrastructure & the long term impacts on peace and stability far outweigh any potential benefits.

Finally. I was waiting for anyone to mention the third party/ies. Admit it or not there will be a third party that will take the opportunity to gain something as chaos from war happens. It is a golden opportunity to gain without losing, to earn something without risking too much. Hence, I agree with you on that point.

In terms of simple logic, the beneficiary in a war can be:
1. The country that started the war and won. as a result of the victory it gained for example new land, resources, population. However, such wars were more characteristic of the Middle Ages, where the size of the country, population and resources played an important role. In today's world, it is more likely to benefit from a change of government in the country that has been subjected to aggression, to a loyal and favorable to the aggressor.
2. any third party that uses the conflict for its own benefit. Whether purposefully or as a "by-product" of its some involvement in a war on one side of the conflict.
This could be - profitable buying up of assets or resources. In today's situation, this is for example done by China and India in their relations with the aggressor country, Russia
It can be the benefit of a "boost to the economy".  For example, the financing and development of the military-industrial complex of the countries of the anti-Rashist coalition, which, in order to help the country subjected to aggression, are increasing the production of weapons, ammunition, etc.

War is something that causes a lot of losses, but on the other hand war provides many advantages, countries that have a supply of food, daily needs, to weapons for war certainly get a lot of benefits from war, of course it is not easy to be able to supply to countries that are at war because it will impact the enemy country will try to break the supply chain.

It is true that the war between Russia and Ukraine is causing damage to many countries worldwide, but not all, there are still countries that profit by selling weapons and energy to allies at exorbitant prices or have the opportunity to create an economic crisis to export inflation. Not only Russia and Ukraine suffered losses, but many other countries also fell into the same situation, but besides that, there were also some countries that benefited, so they did not want the war to end soon.
If war didn't bring any benefit, people wouldn't have maintained it for thousands of years.

War can never bring peace to any country but war always causes unrest to every country. In order to maintain the peace of your country, you must make a peace agreement without war. The Russia-Ukraine war has been going on for almost a long time, and the outcome of this war has not gone in favor of either country. Due to the war between the two countries, the common people are in a lot of fear and many common people have already lost their lives. The impact of the war in Russia and Ukraine has directly affected the economy of various countries. Almost every country had economic relations with Russia, but due to the war, Russia's relations with many countries were damaged, as a result of which they could not export or import goods from different countries. The war between Russia and Ukraine has affected many countries around the world. Due to the war in these two countries, the prices of fuel oil or raw materials of different countries have increased so the war must be stopped.

You are missing something here and what you wrote is totally incorrect. None of the countries that are involved in a war benefit. Is it for the money lost or the casualty recorded? Is it of the sanctions, diseases and famine causes or famine that would still linger for years because of the war? None of them has a single thing to benefit from but losses and destruction.

And it might surprise you that those people and countries that benefit might be external. This is because even if such countries engaging in war could produce their weapons, they might run short of it or other raw materials which they will need to import from other countries, thereby benefiting external countries that have nothing to lose.

What you say is just the thoughts of ordinary people like us, but politicians, they have different thoughts, even they will risk everything to achieve their goals. Moreover, sometimes war occurs but is not what the two warring parties want, but it can be manipulated by a third party to create a war in favor of the one pulling the strings behind it. In my opinion, every war has a division of interests between great powers, those countries that do not have a powerful army but are becoming warring parties are just chess pieces for the great powers to take advantage of to distribute benefits.

Throughout the history China always pushed others to go into war and that’s what they are doing till date. They will never ever be friends with anyone because they play safe. They play that way because of the same authority based administration which is deep rooted in them since very long. They just following the divide and rule strategy which used to be famous from British empire.

If they do war they are doing this for business purpose only. They know they have biggest supply chain in the world. If world needs anything in the war situation then it’s china that cha manufacture and they can do it on mass level.

Everything is tricky these days.

I agree that countries that benefit the most are countries that don't join the war but they get income from selling their merchandise to countries that are in conflict, but sometimes this also triggers conflict for countries that supply their goods because they are considered supporters.
Yes, of course there are negative and positive sides to the position of war, but the advantaged position in the position of the warring countries is the victorious country, because they will get the spoils of war and expand the territory of their territory.

War benefits different groups, but its overall impact is highly destructive. Some entities that historically gained from war include arms manufacturers and the military-industrial complex, profiting from increased weapon demand. Resource-rich nations or corporations can exploit conflicts to control valuable resources, securing economic advantages. Certain political leaders may use war to consolidate power or divert attention from internal issues. Additionally, wars can create opportunities for profit through post-conflict reconstruction efforts, benefiting some businesses. Geopolitically, countries might engage in war to expand influence or protect allies, potentially enhancing their position in the world order. However, it is essential to recognize that these benefits often come at an immense cost: loss of human lives, displacement of populations, destruction of infrastructure, and long-lasting psychological trauma. Pursuing peaceful resolutions and investing in diplomacy remains a crucial path towards a more stable and just global community.

Yes, of course the winner gets benefits. However, if you scale the benefits and loss, you'll find yourself wondering if the benefits found are even worth the loss accumulated. Recovery, as you said will take years and the mark it will leave will be remembered for good.

In war, whichever country wins or has an advantage, that country benefits, no war breaks out without benefits. But I don't think Russia will be the biggest beneficiary because getting bogged down in war is something no country wants. Because it will slow down their economy and their country will lag behind the rest of the world, it will take them years to recover everything. The country that benefits most is the country that is not directly involved in the war but continues to sell weapons to prolong the war and they do not want the war to stop because the longer it lasts, the more weapons it sells.

The answer is very complex if it is only limited to who benefits, we can see with the naked eye that Russia comes out as the winner of the most profits. However, we must objectively assess that Russia's invasion of Ukraine has a long and complicated background to explain. What is clear is that the benefits in the war cannot be felt directly either by the country that wins the battle, expanding the influence of power and exploring Ukraine's natural resources is an advantage for Russia in the future.

However, economically the two countries spent a sizable amount of war money to carry out their mission, if it was used to develop the country it would produce significant progress. Apart from the notion that the two countries are in conflict due to the interference of other countries, I think peace is better for the two countries.

Very interesting assertion, well, or attempted justification
Can you tell me - when did Ukraine OFFICIALLY adopt legislative acts on NATO plans ?

So that you don't have to search for real information contradicting your statement, I'll give you a clue
1. in 2015-2017 it was decided to... No, not about joining NATO..... Due to the sabotage and almost complete collapse of the AFU by the previous president Yanukovych, the AFU was reorganized according to the standards of the advanced countries of the West - from the transition to weapons formats to the restructuring of the army structure itself.
2 In 2018, at the end of the year, an official document on Ukraine's plans and prospects for NATO membership really appeared.

Let me remind you that the first wave of attack on Ukraine, with the annexation of Crimea and the creation of two cloaks DNR and LNR, began in February 2014.

According to you, in a cause and effect system, cause follows effect ?

I assume that you have secret information that Yannukovych wanted to bring Ukraine into NATO in 2013, early 2014 ? Please share it here !

You are right, although I think that whether Ukraine had joined NATO or not, the conflict would have been executed sooner or later, the more land a country has, the more benefits they will have either for trade or for simple territorial expansion, joining in an organization was not going to save him from such a situation, however if I speed up the process, this would harm the Russian government, since having a neighboring country allied with its opponent is not very helpful for its military strategies but even so  I think that it is not the only reason..Or because you think that China wants to re-integrate Taiwan, it is very clear, because in addition to alienating the United States from its district, this gives it direct access to international trade and this, to say the least of the privileges they will have when achieving their mission. it is true that most wars are created to be able to sell weapons, but it is not always for that purpose, sometimes it is for strategy.

And those who often take advantage of a war will also continue to be highlighted by the media, both when the war is over and when the war is already underway so that they will only benefit temporarily. In this world there are always parties who are harmed when a party benefits from something, but if the benefits are obtained through war, of course everyone will find it easier to find out and criticize if the benefits obtained are at the expense of other people's suffering.

As a resident of Ukraine who has directly experienced everything since 2014, I will say one thing: when a crazy, inhibited, homicidal maniac aims to rob and kill you, and has prepared everything necessary for this, plus a bunch of stupid and embittered executors - to "talk" is only to prolong the agony. History knows one rule - if the aggressor is not resisted and destroyed, you will lose. Ukraine has no other option but to WIN. I hope the world has also realized that it has no options to live in peace as long as there is such a terrorist entity on the planet earth, and it must be defeated and destroyed.
I will also bring such an interesting historical observation - as soon as the USSR/Russia had real difficulties and they slipped into another bottom, the number of terrorist, active, groups, and all kinds of terrorist events - fell sharply ALL OVER THE WORLD! In this statistics you can easily see for yourself.
And I hope the cause and effect are quite clear ?
The USSR was given a chance and saved in the second world war. In the hope that the USSR would become an adequate world leader. But they were wrong... Even earlier the USSR and Muscovy were saved from starvation and riots by the West...Hoping that the USSR/Moscow would be adequate partners...They were wrong. I don't think the world wants to be wrong again.

Speaking of benefits. There is one quite proven and logical, economic "justification" for a terrorist country to attack Ukraine. In 2006-2012, the largest shale gas deposits in Europe were discovered and explored on the territory of Lugansk and Donetsk regions ! If you search history, you will be surprised that from about 2008-2010, the Kremlin started pouring huge amounts of money into the propaganda "shale gas is an earth killer". Although, if you go deeper into the issue, you will also find out that Russia produces a lot of hydrocarbons using this technology, and no problems
After the propaganda failed and Western production companies actually came to the finish line, to sign contracts for the beginning of production, came 2013/2014. As you will notice, it is the areas where the main shale gas deposits are located that are temporarily occupied by Russia. And here the "economic benefit of Russia" in this war is quite clear - to prevent Ukraine from producing and selling gas to the EU, especially since Ukraine has a well-developed gas network (gas pipelines, storage facilities), while Russia does not have it and moreover would get a competitor.
But now all the "benefit of russia" has turned into the collapse of the economy, impoverishment of the population, and the status of a pariah country

 There's this popular slants that says one man's food is another man's poison.so for the man who benefits from the poison, he will continually wish for more poison to be served for him to benefit.
  To this end it is obvious that some countries In the west and other parts of the globe are benefiting direct or indirect as a result of war among nations. Some countries aid warring nations in arms and other amenities instead of engaging both warring nations in peace talk.
Notably, the Ukraine and Russia war is another means through which some countries has identified an economic opportunity therefore choose to exploit it.

You made great points here. Those who will "benefit" from war will only live thru their attained benefits temporarily. Soon enough they will also feel the consequences of the war, which will surely last for so long. Not only that but it is something that will constantly visit them as people will keep on looking back on the happenings of the war.