@evan @JessTheUnstill @mpjgregoire
Legitimacy in the plain English sense of the word, something like "morally valid", is something that is earned in the eyes of every individual, not claimed by force.

Legitimacy in the sense of according to the law as defined by those who would execute it, well that is taken.

Don't mistake the latter for the former. Don't mistake law for justice.

I'm a fan of the notion that the purpose of a system is what it does.

@quinta era ora. Per il resto, mi piacerebbe che si portasse avanti questo progetto (lascia perdere il titolo, che non ho scritto io e che non ha nessun senso 🤣)

https://www.agendadigitale.eu/sicurezza/privacy/il-destino-dellopen-technology-fund-dopo-i-tagli-di-trump-lue-puo-salvarlo/

@JessTheUnstill @mpjgregoire so, the claim to legitimacy is just having enough firepower to enforce tax collection? That seems pretty Hobbesian.

@aud @SnoopJ I'm personally of the mind that war is the failure case of civilization, and a lot of things have to go wrong for it to happen. Violent conflict never starts with ", and now there is war". Wars are something we should collectively and universally be ashamed of.

@aud @SnoopJ ok I'm reliably informed in another reply thread that Saddam Hussein got executed etc so that's like 1 conflict where one of the top level objectives in the Quest Log got checked off (disregarding you know everything else about that war). I knew I was forgetting something.

@SnoopJ@hachyderm.io @aeva@mastodon.gamedev.place (which is, you know... I feel like I am agreeing 100% with all your positions and morals here, if I'm not mistaken?)

@aeva@mastodon.gamedev.place @SnoopJ@hachyderm.io ah, yeah, no, you're right, sorry. I knew that wasn't what you're asking (re: Halliburton)... my actual answer to your question was there (I think, or at least, I tried to, anyway), which was "no, none of them".

I get that "victory" is a subjective thing but I'm pretty sure I'd say basically all of the military actions the US has taken (that I can think of) have been failures, and usually not because of unit strength or combat tactics but because of completely misguided reasoning and long term planning. Even Bin Laden: yeah, he's dead. And.. what did that actually accomplish? etc, etc. I'm not crying any tears over him or anything, but... well, he wasn't exactly in power or capable of much by that point.

I think a lot of things are likely to involve, or end in, violence, but I am also highly suspicious that it is capable of achieving "victory" except in very specific circumstances. This probably starts touching on "just war" theory and all that, now that I think about it.