1945-2016. Great era of peace

46


We attach great importance to the word "world". But how to measure peacetime? Sometimes only a reminder of the horrors of past wars allows us to notice that we are surrounded by the world.



The forty most developed economies in the world have not fought each other for the past 70 years. Mankind has not known such a strong and long period of peace since the time of the Roman Empire. And the longer this world lasts, the stronger its foundations become. These are the general trends of the last half of the XX - early XXI centuries.

If television reports still do not inspire you with optimism, then maybe the numbers will help you to understand in what an amazing period stories we are living.

So, the forty most powerful and developed countries have not fought each other for the past seven decades. The age of those who were directly involved in the last and most terrible war, is now approaching 90 years. We have long been abandoned by all the politicians and military leaders of that era who were responsible for making decisions: Stalin, Churchill, Eisenhower ... With each passing day, fewer and fewer witnesses remain of how hell could be on earth.

In Europe, major battles did not occur in principle. The only event that was exceptional, and therefore only confirming the contrast of the epoch, was Hungary of 56. However, this lightning war in its scale and the number of casualties was not in any comparison with the events of the Second World War. Suffice it to recall that during the battles in Budapest, the number of dead on both sides was 20 times less than during the operation at Balaton (Hungary-1945).

In Asia, the largest conflict was about. Damansky (1969 g.). The “war” between the USSR and China lasted for a whole week, without going beyond the limits of the island on the r. Ussuri.

It is worth noting that all of the listed conflicts are related to 50-60. last century. In the following decades, the tendency was only to decline, and nothing like this was observed anymore.

The secret participation of military advisers, the verbal “battles” in the UN and the support of satellites in local conflicts - all this was insignificant fuss against the background of the events of the Second World War that were horrendous in scale.

The Cold War has not gone beyond the newspaper pages. In reality, its unwitting participants were strictly forbidden to use weapon. The word "interception" has become synonymous with the usual rapprochement with the plane of a "probable enemy." Any incident was worth the length of the proceedings, and incidental losses, for the most part, were due to a violation of safety precautions than by the malicious actions of a “likely adversary”.


Black Sea, 1988 year. Instead of shooting the American cruiser, the patrol ship "Selfless" for some reason decided to lean on the USS Yorktown, trying in a mild form to push the intruder out of the Soviet terrorists


Any plans for the start of the Third World, the insane “Dropshot” and the PIO remained the dreams of defective theorists, who in reality were not close to the “red button”. People of a completely different scale had access to it, and they understood that even a thin world is better than a “good” war.

The strong avoided wars with the strong.

But the strong, it happened, fought with the weak. For example, American losses in all 15 years of the war in Afghanistan were less than in one day on the beach of Utah, during a landing in Normandy in 1944.

In this example - the whole scale of modern "wars".

Korea, Vietnam, Iraq - for the sake of justice, compare these “sandboxes” with Stalingrad or the Kursk Bulge. Or at least, with the Ardennes and the storming of Okinawa.

The irretrievable losses of the USSR in nine years in Afghanistan turned out to be ten (!) Times less than in one week of the Kharkov operation (1942).

The scale and significance of local conflicts is greatly exaggerated by modern media. Now, thanks to the Internet and technology, professional reporters and amateurs are constantly posting videos from the combat zone every minute. To a certain extent, it is a pity that Youtube was not in 1941. We do not have so many cadres from that war, but even there are enough to understand how terrible that war was.



Since then, much has changed.

Strong states "projected" their power, exerted pressure and support to the allied regimes, but they did not dare to get involved in the classic all-arms battle on the ground and in the air.

War is a costly undertaking. Especially when everything has its price. A classic example is the oil wars. Oil during the XX century cost in the redistribution of 3 dollars per barrel (the equivalent of modern 30), and the supply of it exceeded the demand. Oil could be purchased in almost every corner of the world (Africa, Middle East, USSR, Gulf of Mexico, Indonesia, etc.). That is why it never occurred to anyone to equip many-thousand army and go to fight for the “black gold”, which was literally under their feet.

Wars on the territory of the countries of the “third world” were fought mostly for zones of political influence. The superpowers tried to keep the opponent out of their area of ​​interest, while trying to do "wet work" at a minimum cost, by proxy. Because the "hot spots" remained just points on the map. And the army and military equipment, created to destroy all life in the upcoming superwar, demonstrated extremely low efficiency in modern-type conflicts. Where every civilian who accidentally came under fire could have been the cause of an international scandal.

The colonial wars in the traditional sense ended in 1977 year. Forty years ago (little Djibouti was the last to become independent).

More often, the weak fought the weak. Such conflicts can be divided into two categories:

- international conflicts;

- civil wars, both with and without foreign intervention.

Terrorism does not count here: a war with it makes no more sense than a war with entropy. In fact, terrorism is just a tactic, single attacks to create a "black PR" and intimidation of the population. As a result, counter-terrorism measures are the destiny of the police and special services. Rockets and Tanks to fight ideas are useless.

As for all the other “wars” of the recent past, by their tasks, scope, magnitude of the forces and losses involved, they did not even stand close to one single operation on the Eastern Front.

Combined, all armed conflicts, civil wars, and genocides of the last 70 years have claimed fewer lives than the Second World War. This is even more surprising, given the nearly threefold increase in the population of the Earth. The residents of developed countries have almost no chance of becoming a victim of armed conflict.

The epoch of the great world lasts for 70 years. And there are no real prerequisites for a reverse trend.

“Wars do not solve problems. The only solution is the industrial revolution, industry and capital. China knows how war and crisis are dangerous for its economy, and never get involved in crisis or war ”(from a speech by General Qiao Liang to graduates of the Defense University of China, July 2015).

1945-2016. Great era of peace
Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

46 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. 0
    18 October 2016 15: 11
    War is hell, but it is good for profit.
    1. +10
      18 October 2016 17: 48
      1945-2016. Great era of peace
      yah? since 1945, continuous wars, local, all kinds of internecine wars! The author ... ay !? if you are counting wars in millions of victims, then you are a finished man ... how can the horrors of war in corpses be defined? fool
      1. +2
        18 October 2016 18: 11
        Terrorism does not count here: a war with it makes no more sense than a war with entropy. In essence, terrorism is
        just a tactic, single attacks to create "black PR" and intimidate the population. As a result, counter-terrorism measures are the lot of the police and special services. Rockets and tanks are useless to fight ideas.
        really bad with brains ...
      2. +3
        19 October 2016 03: 26
        He said that there were no wars among the powerful of this world. Huge conflicts. I think it’s quite normal to compare and share large-scale conflicts and petty massacres.
      3. +3
        19 October 2016 05: 39
        Quote: Andrey Yurievich
        How can the horrors of war in corpses be defined?

        And how do you measure the horrors of war and casualties in battle? In rubles?
        Quote: Andrey Yurievich
        with 1945 of the year-solid wars, local, internecine all sorts!

        Call at least one battle equal in severity to Stalingrad, Rzhev, and the assault of Koenigsberg and Berlin.

        "internecine all sorts" - this is the entire level of knowledge of Andrey Yuryevich, and he also tries to argue and accuse the author, a disgrace
      4. 0
        19 October 2016 21: 38
        Quote: Andrey Yurievich
        if you are counting wars in millions of victims, then you are a finished man

        And how is battle different from battle?
    2. 0
      18 October 2016 19: 39
      Quote: Wend
      War is hell, but it is good for profit.

      It’s not so much a matter of profits as of losses. The owners of everything are tired of maintaining an excessive labor army, "cotton wool", "genetic trash", etc. Technology has reached the highest level and resources are limited. They started in the Arab world, then they will go to us. And only then Europe, and then the United States.
      1. +3
        21 October 2016 18: 30
        in fact, much has been written about this - the nuclear confrontation between the USA and the USSR has generated a great blessing - Atomic world

        We are all the second and third generation of children of the atomic world. If it were not for the atomic world, the whole horror of Western aggression against Eurasia could repeat itself 10 or 20 years after 1945. Europe - the West - never stopped its notorious "Drang nach Osten" - and there would be a new bloody war

        The only thing that has stopped aggressors so far is nuclear deterrence

        Therefore, allegedly "peaceful ideas" of renouncing nuclear weapons are being thrown up. In fact, banning yao will open the doors to aggression and chaos
  2. cap
    0
    18 October 2016 15: 27
    As for all the other “wars” of the recent past, by their tasks, scope, magnitude of the forces and losses involved, they did not even stand close to one single operation on the Eastern Front.

    Hence the conclusion
    "... to whom the war, and to whom the mother is dear ...."
    That's the one to whom it is dear, one question, what will you be after the nuclear war ?.
    Enough of canned food?. And water without radiation?
    Although it makes no difference. Same-sex do not breed.
    1. 0
      18 October 2016 16: 38
      and Western "politicians" have their own teacher
      "War is the continuation of politics by other, violent means" von Clausewitz
  3. +2
    18 October 2016 15: 59
    The Chinese man is certainly right .. Wars do not solve problems .. but this does not apply to everyone. "God's chosen" solve their problems by war ..
  4. +2
    18 October 2016 15: 59
    This is all, of course, good.
    And the conclusion is which of the article? Let's chop tanks, planes and rockets? Or which one?
    It seemed that, since the war on terrorism was the main thing, one could get by with hand weapons - the pistols were there, guns. Pompoviki.
    Is not it so?
    And of which, then, arms corporations are building up and ramping up production.
    Zumvolt against whom will fight? Against rampant and paddock?
    And then the railgun? Shoot the camels that karamultuks carry in the mountains?
    Oh, the author is cunning, oh, the cunning.
    ...
    ...
    Wars from the category of national-territorial move smoothly towards transnational ones. Corporations.
    Corporations are at war with each other.
    In the meantime, we live on Mother Earth and we do not have other territories, then we will strip in our own territories. Without national bindings.
    Those. wars will be - territorial. And cash.
    What we see in kind.
    ...
    Oh and the author is cunning.
    1. +2
      19 October 2016 11: 52
      In the meantime, we live on Mother Earth and we do not have other territories, then we will strip in our own territories

      If you suddenly have the opportunity to live in the future, and even more importantly to extract some resources on other planets, then I have no doubt that the struggle for the division will move there.
  5. +6
    18 October 2016 16: 05
    In 1913, too, no one believed in the war and no one expected it. And it struck so that the two empires were in ruin, a world map for an upgrade and in the land of some millions of homo voekus. In 1940, the world was already going but they were preparing for the Second World War and waiting, but did not want to. And still it struck. The world map was cut again, two empires in dust, and one was tedious. And even more millions were gone.
    Those who survived all this are almost gone, those who know the value of a bomb and a rocket in the past. And in the current half - the global crisis of the existence of civilization, decent reserves of ammunition and the ability to turn the Earth into hell in one day. So explode or what?
    There is no point in making bets; there is no one and no one to demand a win. And if you're lucky, everyone will win. But where are you lucky? ...
    1. +2
      18 October 2016 17: 50
      Correct, four empires in dust.
    2. +1
      19 October 2016 06: 14
      Quote: erased
      In 1913, too, no one believed in the war and no one expected it.

      First, absolutely everyone waited and prepared for it - read about the causes and prerequisites for the beginning of the PRC. At least for decency, before expressing an opinion.

      Secondly, this is a nuclear-free era when the war between the countries of the first world did not have those instantaneous and destructive consequences, as it would have today
  6. +5
    18 October 2016 16: 49
    "The 70 most advanced economies in the world have not fought each other in the past XNUMX years." A bold statement.
    Then where does the Cold War Victory Medal come from? (which, I agree, is not officially approved, but the fact is a stubborn thing). And if there is no "war", then where are the crowds of refugees from? and if it really is WORLD, then why has the political map over 70 changed dramatically? ("it just happened," you can tell the grandmothers on the bench, they are gullible)
    1. +1
      19 October 2016 06: 18
      Quote: AlexZora
      then where does the Medal for Victory in the Cold War come from?

      Ask those who established it. "the guys were ready." "They were near")))
      Quote: AlexZora
      And if there is no "war", then where are the crowds of refugees from?

      Economy
      Everyone wants to live like in Europe
      Quote: AlexZora
      then why the political map for 70 has changed dramatically?

      Fighting, as in Stalingrad, while not observed

      The political map is changing not only by military means,
  7. Ren
    +7
    18 October 2016 17: 47
    And I was only confused by the phrase
    [/ quote] a single operation on Eastern front. [quote]
    .
    In the Second World War, only united Europeans could talk about this front ...
    1. 0
      18 October 2016 20: 32
      When discussing the results of WWII, when comparing the actions of the USSR and allies, etc. anyone could say that. Including me for example hi
    2. +1
      20 October 2016 14: 48
      I also had a bit of a cut in the eyes ...
  8. +2
    18 October 2016 18: 23
    But what about the war in Vietnam ???? Not a word at all.
  9. +2
    18 October 2016 18: 41
    1945-2016. Great era of peace

    Peaceful ?? !!! Well, the author has bent, hundreds of wars, millions of dead, several countries have been tomahawks wiped into powder. And is this called a peaceful era? It is time for the Stalin Strait to be built between the Atlantic and the Pacific Ocean at the place of the evil empire. am
    1. 0
      19 October 2016 06: 20
      Quote: Sergey333
      Well, the author bent, hundreds of wars, millions perished

      In sum for 70 years - less than in the Great Patriotic

      Fact
      1. +1
        19 October 2016 12: 42
        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
        In sum for 70 years - less than in the Great Patriotic

        And the inhabitants of Songmi have no more or less difference, they were killed by THEY. There is no difference for the residents of the bombed cities of Yugoslavia that they didn’t have such battles as in Stalingrad, they know that they were killed by THEM!
        1. 0
          19 October 2016 19: 27
          of universal human history do not care about these victims, they are too insignificant ... Rough? yes, it is possible, but this does not change the fact that everything is known in comparison, and in comparison with WWII it’s just children's games ...
        2. 0
          19 October 2016 21: 41
          Quote: Fitter65
          And the inhabitants of Songmi are no more or less, they were killed.

          What is cheap demagogy?
  10. +2
    18 October 2016 19: 02
    Something is wrong with the author! Found a peaceful era! Yes, even a human sacrifice considers. A million there, a million here! 100 here. Potatoes do not need to be distorted.
    1. +2
      19 October 2016 05: 40
      Quote: Grishka the Cat
      Found a era of peace! Yes, even human sacrifice considers

      How can we otherwise distinguish the world from war? ??

      Cat Grishka, brain with a teaspoon
  11. 0
    18 October 2016 20: 30
    Quote: erased
    two empires in dust

    Russian, German, Austro-Hungarian, Ottoman - completely in ruin, the British, although it won, greatly lost its position on a global scale. Two empires, yes. Some of us are at odds with either history or arithmetic and verbal counting. laughing
  12. +1
    18 October 2016 21: 33
    I think that reason will prevail over base feelings. Reason + modern technology. Recently, information has passed about the new invention of American physicists. They created a new nanomateoyal based on carbon nanotubes, first patented by our compatriots (alas, ah), combined with copper, which literally synthesizes ethyl alcohol from the air. When it goes on an industrial scale, the issue of oil production will die by itself.
    And here it will cover us with a copper basin, because seeing Medvedev’s dull look on TV, nothing more comes to mind.
    1. 0
      18 October 2016 23: 41
      a pittance to all these inventions and inventors ... real revolutions are done quietly and without straining ...
    2. 0
      20 October 2016 08: 47
      Quote: guzik007
      combined with copper, which literally synthesizes ethyl alcohol from the air. When it goes on an industrial scale, the issue of oil production will die on its own.

      Well, my friend, such a garden is to be fenced in terms of ethyl alcohol, the technology has been worked out for a long time and is quite traditional, it is unlikely to be violated :-) And about oil production, it’s also not entirely clear, for example, Audi made a plant for the synthesis of diesel fuel using sunlight, from the air :-)
  13. +1
    18 October 2016 22: 25
    Custom article.
  14. 0
    19 October 2016 01: 20
    How did an article by an unknown author get into ANALYTICS?

    GENTLE MODERATORS - article in OPINIONS !!!!!!

    And in general, LORD MODERATORS, recently there has been a mess in your Kingdom - NEWS are very late and confuse the headings ANALYTICS and OPINIONS!
  15. 0
    19 October 2016 08: 40
    In Asia, the largest conflict was about. Damansky (1969 g.). The “war” between the USSR and China lasted for a whole week, without going beyond the limits of the island on the r. Ussuri.

    Vietnamese for such a bright idea could beat the author. From 700 thousand to 1,5 million dead according to various estimates.
    Article in the furnace.
    1. 0
      20 October 2016 10: 03
      Quote: Alex_59
      Vietnamese for such a bright idea could beat the author. From 700 thousand to 1,5 million dead according to various estimates.

      Since when did Vietnam become a superpower

      The USSR and China fought each other only once, a week in Damansky. All right said
  16. +2
    19 October 2016 12: 34
    In Europe, major battles did not occur in principle. The only, exceptional and therefore only confirming the contrast of the era event was Hungary of the 56th year.

    This, according to Aftar, it turns out since 1945 there was one war in Europe, and even the USSR spent that, right? And Yugoslavia in 1999, is that what happened? Did the boys play the war? Or are they exceptional, they don’t make a denyuyuzhku, they gave Russia to water Russia !!!!
  17. +1
    20 October 2016 08: 38
    Vietnam, Korea, Iraq, Afghanistan - sandboxes. Well, well, tell it to the Vietnamese, the Koreans, the Iraqis and the Afghans.
    1. +1
      20 October 2016 10: 02
      Why should they say something

      Everything is relative. In sum, the losses in all conflicts are less than in the Great Patriotic
  18. 0
    20 October 2016 11: 04
    What kind of world does the author write about? How is it that economies are not at war? Another "strange" article. The same Vietnam, our full support, all weapons, this is not a war of economies. And Afghanistan? There it was already the other way around with Vietnam. And the Americans pumped grandmothers with weapons and supplies for the boudylays, and ours not only fought, but even built there. As well as in other local wars. Just as economies do not fight. There would be a stronger economy in Argentina ( and this is the new weapon and the navy and the air force), who knows whose Falklands (Malvins) would be now. Lord, where did EGEShnikov start publishing in such numbers. The site has become spoiled compared to at least two or three years ago. One grunt or fairy tales like the present article. There is practically no good analysis. The illiteracy of many authors is simply horrifying. It feels like people did not go to school.
  19. 0
    20 October 2016 14: 57
    It seems that the author wrote everything correctly, but the conclusions? He says that for 70 years there has been no big war - which means that its probability is less and less. And I say that yes, for 70 years there has been no war, BUT - that means its probability is greater!
    Let's face it. What, people in the past 70 years have become somehow better, cleaner thoughts? What, human greed was canceled? Has the thirst for power disappeared somewhere? Are rulers more philanthropic? Throughout history, one cannot find a period of a couple of decades, so that no massacre begins. So what are the reasons for her not to start again? In my opinion, this is nothing more than a matter of time.
    And the fact that no one needs a war, etc ... so that's how to say it. Peoples and countries - yes, they do not need it. But the powerful of this world, who have long been not associated with either peoples or countries, but exist "everywhere and nowhere," and no one really knows by their names, for them total slaughter may very well be needed. Recall even the same "golden billion", or the same granite stone somewhere in the States, on which someone's "covenants" about a maximum of 500 million of the world's population are written ... And the fight against fertility under the auspices of the UN (family planning, UNICEF)? And what about juvenile life? What about gay marriage? Doesn't it all add up to a picture where certain forces are clearly trying to at least limit population growth? But they may want and cut it! And what is the best means for this? Well. So the author is right in stating the facts, but somehow I cannot agree with his conclusions ...
    I, for example, have only two questions: when will it turn loose (and in what form and scale)? and will it really be a war BETWEEN certain centers of power, and not a provoked massacre directed by ONE center of power for the sake of a banal extrusion of excess human material?
  20. 0
    21 October 2016 16: 32
    . We sat, tryndindely, parted ...

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"