It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Hanslune
reply to post by cloudyday
Its like our western concept of prisoners of war and treatment of enemy dead with respect, some other cultures considered prisoner of war non people, available for sacrifice or ill treatment and enemy bodies as lunch
Originally posted by cloudyday
I guess this is a little off topic, but I've always had a hard time understanding foreign policy and war. Like what makes a group of people mass into formations and kill each other in one spot on one day as opposed to raiding or whatever? There seem to be unspoken rules of war understood by both sides that makes war possible.
I have read that primitive warfare was designed to minimize casualties by focusing on intimidation and duels between champions. But this would limit the amount the winner could demand from the loser.
Maybe evolution is the best model. Nobody makes up the rules; they just follow the established rules and break them in minor ways. Gradually the rules evolve but they are not designed by anybody?edit on 15-3-2012 by cloudyday because: (no reason given)edit on 15-3-2012 by cloudyday because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by longjohnbritches
If you want to gather a few clues about this concept.
Check out how Shaka Zulu evolved from primative intimidation warfare to some all out down and nasty more modern warfare. He was quick to adapt.
It is all a good read anyway. Oh and how the English square was used by the French to defeat the Mamluk in Egypt. All most fasinating.