Quote:
|
I disagree. Both Germany and Japan began their wars of aggression specifically *BECAUSE* they had high debt (in the case of Germany) and few resources (in the case of Japan).
|
Fair ball but I think you are confusing the existence of debt with economic prosperity. In 1939 Germany was wealthier than it had ever been with surpluses sufficient to create a national television network, a national electronic airways system rivaling that of the USA and more sophisticated than that found in any other country, subsidized "Strength Through Joy" worker vacations, Autobahns and Volkswagen Beetles. These are not the trappings of economic weakness.
Likewise Japan had squandered much of her industrial wealth in a decade of fighting in China and military, particularly naval, expansion but had still seen a continual increase in per capita GDP through much of the Thirties. Only when the American trade embargo and seizure of Japaneses assets threatened what economic strength remained did the military junta resort to war.
Even the much maligned tactic of Appeasement as seen at Munich provided time for the Western Allies, particularly Britain, to ramp up their economies in preparation for war.
If lack of wealth causes wars, why was there peace between the economic powers during the Great Depression when wealth vanished throughout the global economy? Even Mussolini's Italy waited until economic growth had resumed before engineering a war with Ethiopia in 1935.
Resource wars are largely the subject of fiction and those that have occurred almost always have had deeper and more complex political causes lurking behind the hyperbole. My biggest concern for peace is that jingoistic paranoia, particularly with regards to the notional or imagined threats posed by the PRC might make fear of war become a self-fulfilling prophecy.
For details on the belligerent's economies in the lead up to WW2 see
The War of the World by Niall Ferguson.