The ethical question of war has many aspects and elements. One element is the morality of collective action. The legal authority for war is a form of collective action that may not reflect the desires of the people. It may also be an elite’s attempt to satisfy its own interests. Other elements of the ethical question of war might include the morality of violence, the role of individuality in war, and the need to defend one’s homeland.

New weapons and technological advances were heralded as transformative throughout history. In the classical era, new weapons and decisive battles were identified as change agents. However, with the industrial revolution and the development of technologies in the modern era, evaluations focused on specific weapon systems and methods of transportation. Powered flight was considered an agent of change in the nature of war. As technological advances in warfare advanced, a greater number of people could be mobilized to fight the enemy.

One way to calculate WAR is to divide players into categories by their WAR. While WAR is not a perfect metric, it is an effective way to separate groups of players. For instance, two players who are worth 6.4 WAR will not be separated from each other. On the other hand, two players worth 6.1 WAR will be considered roughly equal. Hence, the calculation of WAR is a guideline, not a precise measure.

Economic competition is another factor that causes war. Many people attribute war to economic competition. For example, Hitler invaded the Soviet Union during World War II. Economic competition is often promoted by left-wing activists. These people argue that wars serve the interests of the wealthy. This argument does not hold water. While economic competition is a powerful driver, it is not the only factor in war. So, how does economic competition influence war? Ultimately, it is up to the people.

In the end, war is a political act, and its goal is to impose the will of a nation on its enemies. However, this definition has several limitations. It is difficult to determine if war is necessary. It involves political calculus and cost-benefit analysis. Furthermore, it can vary according to available means and strategic vision. So, we can never know how much power an enemy can possess. However, it is always best to seek out international cooperation and not simply to declare war.

When there is a just cause, war can be justified by economic progress. The pre-industrial world wars were fought over precious metals and livestock, while modern wars are fought over resources to produce goods. In fact, the Second World War killed sixty million people directly and indirectly. That is three per cent of the world’s population. The environmental costs of war are often overlooked, resulting in a lower proportion of just cause. And it’s also harder to justify war and satisfy proportionality when the cause isn’t just.

When civil war or insurgency persists, there may be a long period of low military activity. Fighting may cease when political demands are reconciled and the combatants realise that waging war is futile. A cease-fire, meanwhile, is an agreement between the combatants to halt hostilities while negotiating. But it’s important to note that a cease-fire does not necessarily mean the end of the war.