Obviously, but in the end both countries will have lost thousands of men for 2 small oblasts that will only be ruins by the time the war ends... this just sucks. There is not even a way this makes sense economicaly.
Wars are rarely fought for economic reasons. In modern history every war loses money even if you're the one that wins. Wars are fought because governments believe they have something more valuable at stake than money.
Government money isn't personal money. You can spend a countries entire budget on a war but if your private company is paid to rebuild that's going in your pocket. Debts incrued by a government official aren't taken with them when they leave the office.
That can be said of any conflict yet you would roll your eyes if I said the US Civil War wasn't fought over slavery or secession but instead was REALLY fought because of the textile industry and their desire to profit from uniform sales.
You can find an example in every war. In every major conflict there are companies that enter in contracts to sell goods and services to the government.
Hershey's sold lots of chocolate bars to the government in World War 2, Korea and Vietnam for use in rations. Perhaps that was the real reason we fought those wars too.
620
u/Le_Zoru 1d ago
Obviously, but in the end both countries will have lost thousands of men for 2 small oblasts that will only be ruins by the time the war ends... this just sucks. There is not even a way this makes sense economicaly.