Who Cares Who Invaded Whom?

One of the strange things about the post WWI and WWII world is the idea that one nation invading another, weaker nation, is wrong. I say this is "strange" because it is at odds with all of human history. Invading weaker nations or unincorporated territory is the work of empire. This is what expansionistic groups of people do. Humans have been trading land back and forth the whole time we have had civilization and before. Do we actually think that the ancestors of the Yamamomo tribes in the rain forests chose to live there? Of course not. No one sane chooses to live in an environment that wants to kill you and turn you into fertilizer. They were forced there by being displaced by other humans.

The barbarians whose invasions that toppled the Western Empire of Rome were themselves driven out of their areas by other barbarians headed south due to global cooling. In fact, civilizations fell world wide in that time, with all sorts of populations disruptions. Of course, Rome itself was a big conquering empire. Why were they that way? Well, early on, Rome was sacked by the Gauls. They did not like that and swore to never let the Gauls do that again. The Gauls didn't.

There are many more examples around the world in history. More powerful groups of people conquer less powerful. It is how things have always been. There is no referee to say otherwise. Now, sometimes, a big power will step in. However, this is almost always when its leaders think it is in their interests. At least the leaders' interests, if not national interest. This can help someone else. The Monroe Doctrine only worked because Britain found it in the best interests of its Empire to enforce it; there was no way the USA was going to be able to enforce it on its own.

We have been several generations from the World Wars, and we have grown used to our little bump in history. We can try to pretend that the law of the jungle does not exist, but that is self-delusion. The big and powerful nations will bully, cajole, and sometimes invade the others. It is sad. It is human. It is going to happen, just as it has happened. And while we might sometimes be able to stop it and set things right, other times that is not in the cards. China and Tibet come to mind. Or, if we want to look at older things, all of Western Europe and the conquest of the Celts and Gauls. Man, did they get screwed. It turns out, a loose collection of trading cultures just don't match up to a grinding machine of a mercantile republic. Closer to home, the Native American peoples never had a chance against the accidental contamination by crowd diseases and the far, far superior technology and technique of the West.

Eventually, no matter who wins or who loses, the world turns and things move on. The winners win and the losers lose. Eventually, those winners will fall to someone else, but it is not usually going to be to the people they beat so long ago. This is simply the way of things. I don't pass a moral judgement, but simply look at how it is.

And that brings me to my ultimate point: While it would be nice to make sure justice is done, to right past wrongs, to stop aggression from even starting, it is not always possible. Indeed, what often is called "justice" over past wrongs is simply revenge in the form of new wrongs. This leads to never ending blood feuds, and calls for things like the Reconquista to be undone. It would be calling for Istanbul to be restored to Western, Christian hands, for instance. It cannot be. There are times when we have to face these facts and move forward as best we can in a broken, flawed world.

Edited for clarity