10-19-2024, 04:27 AM
(10-19-2024, 01:29 AM)UltraBudgie Wrote: That's sounds like a safe assumption, and I think the rest of your comment is reasonable, too.
I've just never seen a "negotiated peace" before, only things that are called that.
I grant you that the idea of peace is relative, and quite rooted in personal sincerity.
Most "negotiated" peace is really just expedient compromise... it is usually predicated on a status quo that can never be realistically maintained... hence it fails once the "decider chair" changes hands. Add to that the troubling aspect of it... such compromises are not usually a matter of "public appeal" but instead "political appeal." Politics is never a stable way to conduct "international" order... for that we would require a sense of "community" between all parties... not an optimally attainable goal.
Peace, in the idealistic sense, is an ongoing struggle... it has to be "worked for" with conscientious diligence, and an eye towards a 'mutual' future, something which seems a rarity, in my observation.