h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

With the end of the second world war, Europe realsied the need for fedralisation in terms of trade, politics and economic endeavour.

The idea of free trade and a lasting peace is compelling, and dismantling european cooperation would undermine the massive gain in economic stability which has been the lasting legacy of the conflict.

However, the cold war that followed the fall of fascism became the excue for the terrifying notion of limited nuclear conflict, and the idea that such a future war could be limited or survivable.

The demonisation of the soviet bloc gav the pentagom almost unlimited scope to arma and equip its allies with ever more terrifying weapons. These were ultimately shown to be out of all proportion to the true threat from the East, as wwitnessed by the decline and the fall of soviet style eastern bloc communism.

Ultimately the repositioning of the world post communism meant that the countries who lost out in the short term, such as Britain and France, in the regeneration sponsored by the Marshal plan could gain from an expanded and economically vibrant trading bloc which is the modern Europe.

Redefining political alliances and the notion of soverainty has alos made us less insular and me aware that the world does nopt end on our shores. Instead we now have opportunities for travel and trade that would have seemed impossible even thirty years ago.

This all very true, and the economic and political stability of France and Britain when compared to Russia shows that in the long-term that they and the rest of Europe was the true victors of the war.

When comparing Europe to the US, it's a lot more tricky to see if in long-term who gained more. What we can say that in the present climate of terroism and Islamic extremisim, the moral victory the Britain won coupled with the 'relatively'peaceful breakup of the Empires, means that Europe has more goodwill around the world than America has at present.

Quite so. The other important factor in all of this is that the notion of winning and losing in all of this is in fact a throwback to the old accusatorial ideas that one power would emrge triumphant. intellectually the legacy of he two world wars has much more to do with the distruction of the confidence in the old political system to give us the tools to create new alliances

You've made a good point there. The two world wars finally put the end to old world order and the idea that it was alright for civilised countries to go to war for economic or political gains. The political and human costs of the conflict would out-weigh any gains.

In the end I think the true victors was western democracy and its people, as war has finally become unacceptable to its people! Yet, the true losers is developing world, since it is now harder for the western democracies to undertake conflict interventions. Since 1945, no western democracy has gone to war against another, but the developing world has seen constant and sustained conflict and destruction!

It's enough to keep you up all night!

The other point is that the nature of conflict has changed. Wars are now put on a legal footing, such as the Gulf War. This has changed them to the status of a police action, as though the fighting of the conflict was justified by serving as a punishment for offending against the moral order.

This world policeman approach has led to a series of anomalies. One such anomaly would be the fact that Zimbabwee goes unpunished whilst iraq has the full might of the West fall upon it. Equally there is another problem with taking the moral high ground. Do we have the legitimacy to ignore the international borders and take action against those countries that we just dont like?

Foul regimes are everywhere, so at what point to we take up arms against a sea of troubles and by opposing end them? The answer is not clear. nor is the mechanism of checks and balances which would keep the human rights and the legal framework intact?

Are there workable solutions to these dilemnas? I think that we should be told.