What nation goes: "Hey neighbor, you wanna kill a bunch of each other's soldiers and use a bunch of resources and pollute the earth? Maybe we can also kill some innocent babies while bombing hospitals for funsies?"

Wars are usually fought because one nation (or group) wants what the other has. If a side could get exactly what they want, there wouldn't be a war over it.

Wars are about taking: land, people, resources, revenge.

There's nothing consensual about it

[–] TotallyHuman@lemmy.ca 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

This would indeed result in no more war, at all. I fail to see the problem. (Besides that it wouldn't work, of course -- but it's a nice fantasy.)

[–] SiriusCybernetics@lemmy.ca 1 points 11 months ago (2 children)

That’s my point. My view is an international law about consent to war would be a good thing. Generally speaking, most countries deserve territorial sovereignty and shouldn’t have someone fucking around with them. I don’t think the “want what the other has” justifies wars. Corporations can do that well enough…

[–] rosymind@leminal.space 2 points 11 months ago

There are laws against breaking into people's houses, but it still happens. Just because someone proclaims something illegal doesn't mean it just stops happening. That's just not how the world works

[–] interolivary@beehaw.org 1 points 11 months ago

This idea just begs the question of how exactly do you think international law works