Going to war means let's ulter the economic progression

[Mame89]

War brings chaos and destruction and death. Like the OP noted, war alters the economic and social growth of both parties involved. Even when the war clearly brings forth a victor, the victor also suffers economic consequences from the war. I wouldn’t exactly say the effects is felt more on the world than in the countries actually fighting the war.

Obviously, the impact is felt in the surrounding regions and all over. Goods and services normally produced in that region and exported to various parts of the earth would be affected, drastically reduced or even stopped. Warring parties would have to conserve resources for their own citizens as the normal rate of the production of goods and services would have been reduced.

What is certain is that war is a bad action, both through physical and non-physical actions, because it will result in physical violence and blockades in both countries which will have an impact on the economy. So if a war breaks out between the two countries, of course it will not only impact the two warring countries, but also various countries in the world. War can even cause food prices in a country to increase. The impact may initially only be a small change, but if the war is prolonged it can change the world economy drastically in the long term.

Because of course war is not just a small initial change, but a significant initial change. The deployment of large amounts of military force can also result in large expenditures, as happened in the Russia vs Ukraine and Israel vs Palestine wars. However, what is clear is that war not only takes lives and physical casualties, but also has a huge impact on both countries and also neighboring countries. Apart from that, other economic burdens including the construction of refugee camps, trauma caused by war, the collapse of the economic system in both countries, and the impact of weapons radiation are quite worrying in the long term.

[btc78]

War brings chaos and destruction and death. Like the OP noted, war alters the economic and social growth of both parties involved. Even when the war clearly brings forth a victor, the victor also suffers economic consequences from the war. I wouldn’t exactly say the effects is felt more on the world than in the countries actually fighting the war.

Obviously, the impact is felt in the surrounding regions and all over. Goods and services normally produced in that region and exported to various parts of the earth would be affected, drastically reduced or even stopped. Warring parties would have to conserve resources for their own citizens as the normal rate of the production of goods and services would have been reduced.

What is certain is that war is a bad action, both through physical and non-physical actions, because it will result in physical violence and blockades in both countries which will have an impact on the economy. So if a war breaks out between the two countries, of course it will not only impact the two warring countries, but also various countries in the world. War can even cause food prices in a country to increase. The impact may initially only be a small change, but if the war is prolonged it can change the world economy drastically in the long term.

Because of course war is not just a small initial change, but a significant initial change. The deployment of large amounts of military force can also result in large expenditures, as happened in the Russia vs Ukraine and Israel vs Palestine wars. However, what is clear is that war not only takes lives and physical casualties, but also has a huge impact on both countries and also neighboring countries. Apart from that, other economic burdens including the construction of refugee camps, trauma caused by war, the collapse of the economic system in both countries, and the impact of weapons radiation are quite worrying in the long term.

Adding to what you have already mentioned, many countries would see an increase in illegal immigrants in the country. Of course they are trying to escape and if the government is not there to help them, they would do everything in their power to get away from the war as much as possible.

Countries having connections with other countries also ensure that there will be a lot of countries involved trying to help each of the country they support. Full-blown wars are messy and thus should never happen. People hoping that world war iii is to happen must stop and think about the consequences of such war.

[topbitcoin]

War brings chaos and destruction and death. Like the OP noted, war alters the economic and social growth of both parties involved. Even when the war clearly brings forth a victor, the victor also suffers economic consequences from the war. I wouldn’t exactly say the effects is felt more on the world than in the countries actually fighting the war.

Obviously, the impact is felt in the surrounding regions and all over. Goods and services normally produced in that region and exported to various parts of the earth would be affected, drastically reduced or even stopped. Warring parties would have to conserve resources for their own citizens as the normal rate of the production of goods and services would have been reduced.

What is certain is that war is a bad action, both through physical and non-physical actions, because it will result in physical violence and blockades in both countries which will have an impact on the economy. So if a war breaks out between the two countries, of course it will not only impact the two warring countries, but also various countries in the world. War can even cause food prices in a country to increase. The impact may initially only be a small change, but if the war is prolonged it can change the world economy drastically in the long term.

Because of course war is not just a small initial change, but a significant initial change. The deployment of large amounts of military force can also result in large expenditures, as happened in the Russia vs Ukraine and Israel vs Palestine wars. However, what is clear is that war not only takes lives and physical casualties, but also has a huge impact on both countries and also neighboring countries. Apart from that, other economic burdens including the construction of refugee camps, trauma caused by war, the collapse of the economic system in both countries, and the impact of weapons radiation are quite worrying in the long term.

War can result in physical violence, blockades, and enormous economic damage not only to the countries at war but also to the international community at large. In a practical context, the conflicts between Russia and Ukraine as well as Israel and Palestine show that wars have a number of costs in terms of military expenditure as well as negative consequences for socio-economic development over time. Apart from causing loss of life and destruction of human life and material culture, war also carries a heavy economic burden for the governments involved. Therefore, war does not only have a limited impact on the conflicting parties, but also has a wider impact.

One of the negative impacts of war is increasing food prices, draining government funds, and causing many detrimental impacts such as the establishment of refugee camps, post-traumatic stress disorder, destruction of the economic system, and radiation weapons. Given this situation, society should try to find alternative solutions by avoiding war so as not to cause wider negative impacts.

[AmoreJaz]

War brings chaos and destruction and death. Like the OP noted, war alters the economic and social growth of both parties involved. Even when the war clearly brings forth a victor, the victor also suffers economic consequences from the war. I wouldn’t exactly say the effects is felt more on the world than in the countries actually fighting the war.

Obviously, the impact is felt in the surrounding regions and all over. Goods and services normally produced in that region and exported to various parts of the earth would be affected, drastically reduced or even stopped. Warring parties would have to conserve resources for their own citizens as the normal rate of the production of goods and services would have been reduced.

"No one wins a war" is a powerful reminder about the impact of war on both sides. Economic aspects on both camps are clearly influenced in this event. Whether you are the winner or the loser, both will suffer economic concerns within their jurisdiction. The aftermath is usually hard as the country seems to start from the scratch.

And the hard truth, it is the regular people who are mostly affected by this event. Like it or not, the civilians are the first ones to feel its impact because their living rely on their daily job. Lucky for those who can easily get out of their country, and find a place to temporarily stay away from chaos.

[Argoo]

Last summer, the Russian occupiers, in order to prevent the Ukrainian Armed Forces from recapturing their territories in the south of Ukraine and to prevent the upcoming expected offensive of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, blew up one of the largest hydroelectric power stations in Europe - the Kakhovka hydroelectric power station. According to the assessment of the Ukrainian government and the UN, the amount of direct damage caused to the infrastructure and assets of Ukraine due to the destruction of the Kakhovka hydroelectric power station by the Russians is $2.79 billion, and the damage is more than $11 billion.

But the law of karma, although slowly, inexorably works.
The day before, on April 5, in the Russian city of Orsk, Orenburg region, a dam broke on the Ural River. Thousands of houses were caught in the flood zone, and several thousand local residents had to be evacuated. According to Russian media, more than 4 thousand houses and more than 10 thousand residents were in the flood zone. Directly in the city of Orsk, water flooded almost 2.5 thousand houses. About 4 thousand residents were evacuated from there.
https://zn.ua/amp/WORLD/bolshaja-voda-nastihla-rf-v-orske-prorvalo-dambu-uzhe-soobshchaetsja-o-pervykh-pohibshikh.html

Now the housing and communal services sector of Russia is on the verge of survival. This winter, residents of the Moscow region were forced to warm themselves outside by fires, since the heating did not work. Instead of improving life in Russia itself, they decided to direct hundreds of millions of dollars every day to exterminate Ukrainian citizens and destroy their homes.

The irretrievable losses of Russians in this war are already approaching half a million soldiers and officers. More than 20 thousand of their tanks and armored vehicles were destroyed. Ukraine destroyed about a third of the Russian Black Sea Fleet with its weapons. Now the war has moved onto the territory of Russia itself, where military installations and everything that helps Russia wage this war are being destroyed. First of all, this applies to oil refineries. Because of this, Russia has already lost more than ten percent of its capacity, and the price of gasoline on world markets is rising.

[Marvelockg]

There is so much to war than just killing and distructions of house and properties. It's always easy to start but when it will finally end is what only time will tell. Even after a full blown war has come down, the effect of the war continues for years and years to come. Even inter communal crisis doesn't just end after there is cease fire or reduction in the killing of individuals, hatred builds up and it takes almost a long time before the economy of the nations at war gets restored back to normal.

The properties that have been destroyed in the Russia and Ukraine war can't be fixed up five years after the war. Even with the intervention of international organisation, it will take time before the two nations recovers economically from the war.

[Zoomic]

War brings chaos and destruction and death. Like the OP noted, war alters the economic and social growth of both parties involved. Even when the war clearly brings forth a victor, the victor also suffers economic consequences from the war. I wouldn’t exactly say the effects is felt more on the world than in the countries actually fighting the war.

Obviously, the impact is felt in the surrounding regions and all over. Goods and services normally produced in that region and exported to various parts of the earth would be affected, drastically reduced or even stopped. Warring parties would have to conserve resources for their own citizens as the normal rate of the production of goods and services would have been reduced.

"No one wins a war" is a powerful reminder about the impact of war on both sides. Economic aspects on both camps are clearly influenced in this event. Whether you are the winner or the loser, both will suffer economic concerns within their jurisdiction. The aftermath is usually hard as the country seems to start from the scratch.

And the hard truth, it is the regular people who are mostly affected by this event. Like it or not, the civilians are the first ones to feel its impact because their living rely on their daily job. Lucky for those who can easily get out of their country, and find a place to temporarily stay away from chaos.

You are right. Truly, no one wins a war. Even though agreements may be reached and fair conditions given after the war, it will take years to rebuild the economies of these affected countries into its old state and even better.  It is worrisome knowing that public funds which would have been useful in financing capital projects that would have brought about developments and better standards of living for the people, is being used to finance war. Economic restructuring in both countries will take years to achieve, social and political lives will be affected, and the citizens will have to endure for years till the countries are able to recover all that have been lost to some extent. War indeed alters Economic progression, therefore if any country should choose war over a peaceful settlement,  then they should be prepared to deal with life after the war.

[Reatim]

In a practical context, the conflicts between Russia and Ukraine as well as Israel and Palestine show that wars have a number of costs in terms of military expenditure as well as negative consequences for socio-economic development over time. Apart from causing loss of life and destruction of human life and material culture, war also carries a heavy economic burden for the governments involved. Therefore, war does not only have a limited impact on the conflicting parties, but also has a wider impact.

I remember when the Russian and Ukrainian conflict first broke out, the prices of gas rose exponentially. We all know that if a country is a primary source of a specific commodity and they go into a war, other countries might not get the appropriate amount of commodities then the prices of those goods in other countries will increase which basically lead to other goods increasing.

Wars would play out domino effects that is why UN should do their best to stop or better yet prevent these wars from breaking out. A war in today’s time is much more destructive considering how connected everyone is now due to globalization.

[lixer]

The emergence of war is has adverse effects for global peace;adverse global  economic effects including extreme poverty,unemployment,inflation,food shortages,deglobalization and unfavorable environmental factors.

For the global economy, fuel and food shortages caused by the war are exacerbating post-pandemic inflation that had already reached multi-decade highs in most of the world. War us a global threat and it reduces the world's economic progess to a zero level.
 War is affects our lives,there's withdrawal of economic and financial activities,leaving us with no choice to suffer insignificantly.

Wars leave deep traces in the country’s economy during and after the war, as well as social and physical consequences.Even after the war,it takes a lot time and effort for some countries and finally recover from the loss and decline in the global sectors.

Yeah, the effects are global even if there is only two countries who are fighting for each other. One cause would be is the sanctioning of one country involved in the war. It's funny or contradictory when they say that war gives/restores peace when in fact it can also cause more disturbances.

War affects progress but those who will go back to zero are only the countries who are totally destroyed. If the war is so severe, then yeah it will leave a deep trace but it makes us feel proud too once we stand up again. It makes us to feel stronger than ever, though It is still better if there will be no wars because not all are strong enough to withstand it.

[Synchronice]

War worsens life for average people, sometimes for rich people too but I think that nothing changes for elites and to my mind, war makes them even richer. Just think about what happens in Russia-Ukraine war, the USA send aids to Ukraine but somehow they can't find the traces of billions of dollars, they are lost. How is that possible? My answer is that someone got richer and that's why billions got somehow missed.
Now let's talk about the economic decline. Yes, it declines when big countries have a war because workforce is in war instead of in their daily jobs, the land becomes damaged via rocket and other attacks, it's getting harder, expensive and riskier for locals to live, to work, to farm. And on top of that when your countries (EU and the USA) spend billions of dollars as an aid, for sure there will be an economic problems and high inflation.

[Argoo]

I think your first part is very meaningful because you said that a nation doesn't want to be in war. That implies an important differentiation because often it is not the people who want the war, but the government for ideological reasons. I don't know how many Russian civilians really want the war in the Ukraine, but if I had to guess I think it is not that many. Losing your children while you don't even know or never understand what it was good for, that can't be in the interest of the civil population. So the "nation" usually doesn't want war, while the leading apparatus of that nation might force it go to war.

For Putin’s Russia, the war they started with Ukraine has now reached the scale of a struggle for its own survival. They initially hoped for a quick military operation within a few weeks, but in practice, Ukraine put up unexpectedly tough resistance and ruined all the Kremlin’s plans. Stopping aggression for Putin and his regime means the collapse of this regime and practically physical death for Putin himself. They cannot agree to this and we actually see a further escalation of hostilities.

On the other hand, for Ukraine it is also a struggle for its existence, because Russia wants to destroy Ukraine as a state and Ukrainians as a nation. Any attempts to freeze the conflict or establish an interim peace just to stop the war will lead to larger losses as Russia replaces its significant losses in manpower and equipment and begins a new phase of hostilities. Therefore, only victory of one of the parties is possible here. At the same time, a Russian victory will mean the beginning of an offensive by authoritarian states against weaker states around the world, because international agreements and laws will no longer be valid, and terror will begin throughout the world.

The Russians themselves could stop the war by overthrowing their aggressive government led by Putin. But over the two-year period of military operations against Ukraine, about 70 percent of the population consistently supports this war of aggression. Therefore, the only way out of this situation is the complete military and economic defeat of the Russian aggressor; there are no other options for establishing lasting peace in this region.

[pinggoki]

War has always been associated with altered economic progression for citizens who then become victims of the harsh economic realities they will have to face as a result of crisis. But there are some people and companies that benefit and are not really affected whenever there is a crisis for instance, the manufacturers of guns and ammunitions, pharmaceutical supplies as well and relief materials are always in profit.

That will depend though, if your country is the one that's been directly affected by the war or the epicenter of a war then you're definitely going to see an alteration in your economy as resources are being diverted to the parts of the economy that will help in support of the war, natural resources mostly will be the most affected as need for oil, metals, and land is a big deal in a war, it's a really scary time to be in it but if you're like the country of USA where you're far from the ravages of war, your economy that manufactures weapons is definitely going to be benefiting a lot in those events, the money you'll be getting out of the countries that will buying weapons from you and the money that will trickle in and the R&D of your weapons will be getting to the highest numbers, it's definitely a two side of the coin situation, you either are on the economy that's struggling or getting all the prosperity out of this war.

[Fortify]

I see this that lets go to war means let us ulter the existence of certain economic progression. Apart from death of people both soldiers and the civilian, it take back the system backward from the party in the war but the effect is more on the people not in the fighting, the world at large. It is effect more on the world as it increase inflation and reduce the living of the people of the world if the countries have major contribution for the world economy.

The effect of war include rising inflation, extreme poverty, increasing food insecurity, deglobalization, and worsening environmental degradation. All the effect here are what we see in the Ukraine and Russia war, example is inflation that is affecting different country in their economy because products going out from Ukraine like wheat or corn leaving out there in small quantity and expensive. Russia is not supplying energy to Europe neighborhood and that slow access to production in the region there and causing life to be difficult.

Russia is a major supplier of fossil fuels, especially to Europe. Disruptions to supplies of these commodities are driving up prices.

The degradation of environment is also there if war happen and this is major effect on agricultural produce leading into the food shortage and insecurities around that.

There are many negative effect of war but no profit and  rebalancing fiscal priorities could prove quite challenging even in advanced economies.

War, at least in the modern era, is often being waged by sad old men who want to cling on to power - but maybe that has always been the case. Looking at Russia, Putin is trying to build his legacy right now as Russia has not progressed at all since he took power so many decades ago. However he will not succeed and has hobbled it further in his final years. It does have the most damaging effect on the direct warring parties, but as we see with this war on the edge of Europe - many things spiked in price near the start and supply chains were heavily disrupted, which caused prices to go up all over the world. The richest countries are affected for sure, but the poorest countries around the world often suffer even worse. The sooner these unnecessary wars end the better for all of us.

[Argoo]

War, at least in the modern era, is often being waged by sad old men who want to cling on to power - but maybe that has always been the case. Looking at Russia, Putin is trying to build his legacy right now as Russia has not progressed at all since he took power so many decades ago. However he will not succeed and has hobbled it further in his final years. It does have the most damaging effect on the direct warring parties, but as we see with this war on the edge of Europe - many things spiked in price near the start and supply chains were heavily disrupted, which caused prices to go up all over the world. The richest countries are affected for sure, but the poorest countries around the world often suffer even worse. The sooner these unnecessary wars end the better for all of us.

Do you want to say that Russia’s war on the territory of Ukraine is a war on the outskirts of Europe? Actually, in the Ukrainian Carpathians there is a sign that says that this is the geographical center of Europe.

Yes, Putin wanted to go down in history as the great collector of the lands of the former USSR and the creation on their basis of something similar to a new empire. But all his plans were disrupted by Ukraine, which offered strong resistance to Russian aggression. The bloodiest large-scale war since World War II is already in its third year. Putin has already been prepared for the role of the second bloodthirsty Hitler, who will be cursed not only in Europe and other civilized countries, but also over time in Russia itself, which he brought with his war to economic collapse and impoverishment, and possibly to its collapse.

[Ozero]

The war that Russia imposed on Ukraine will certainly have a very bad impact on the integrity of its economy and civil infrastructure. The population will drop greatly not only because of those killed in this war, but also because of the large number of people who migrated to other countries, some of whom will remain there forever. Many cities and other settlements were destroyed to the ground.
But among this sheer negativity there are also some positive aspects. Strong support from other countries is expected for the restoration of Ukraine, and high-rise buildings will be built taking into account new technologies and their placement will be different, taking into account changing needs. Ukraine will move from large energy generation facilities to a network of smaller ones; they will already have a much lower percentage of the use of coal and gas as energy sources. Support for the introduction of alternative energy sources, including by citizens in their private homes, will be much more powerful.
The current Russian aggression has revealed many vulnerabilities against missile and bomb attacks, and this will be taken into account in further planning for industrial development. Some of the production, especially for military purposes, will be underground.

I won’t predict what will happen to Russia. I hope it will become the same as today's North Korea for the next few generations.

[justdimin]

The war that Russia imposed on Ukraine will certainly have a very bad impact on the integrity of its economy and civil infrastructure. The population will drop greatly not only because of those killed in this war, but also because of the large number of people who migrated to other countries, some of whom will remain there forever. Many cities and other settlements were destroyed to the ground.
But among this sheer negativity there are also some positive aspects. Strong support from other countries is expected for the restoration of Ukraine, and high-rise buildings will be built taking into account new technologies and their placement will be different, taking into account changing needs. Ukraine will move from large energy generation facilities to a network of smaller ones; they will already have a much lower percentage of the use of coal and gas as energy sources. Support for the introduction of alternative energy sources, including by citizens in their private homes, will be much more powerful.
The current Russian aggression has revealed many vulnerabilities against missile and bomb attacks, and this will be taken into account in further planning for industrial development. Some of the production, especially for military purposes, will be underground.

I won’t predict what will happen to Russia. I hope it will become the same as today's North Korea for the next few generations.

Both the nations will get out of this with a lot of pain. If nothing else, both sides lost lives and while the "nations" will recover, because in 10-20-30 year time nobody would remember the political sanctions or deals that happened or anything, but the people who lost the loved ones will remember it, the mothers who lost a child will remember it, the wives that lost their husbands will remember it, the children that lost parents will remember it.

This is not just for one side, it's true for both sides and I think that is why both economy, infrastructure, and everything else will be remembered but the reality is that we are going to end up with something totally different for the individual when you think about it for sure.

[junmisakiro]

War brings chaos and destruction and death. Like the OP noted, war alters the economic and social growth of both parties involved. Even when the war clearly brings forth a victor, the victor also suffers economic consequences from the war. I wouldn’t exactly say the effects is felt more on the world than in the countries actually fighting the war.

Obviously, the impact is felt in the surrounding regions and all over. Goods and services normally produced in that region and exported to various parts of the earth would be affected, drastically reduced or even stopped. Warring parties would have to conserve resources for their own citizens as the normal rate of the production of goods and services would have been reduced.

What is certain is that war is a bad action, both through physical and non-physical actions, because it will result in physical violence and blockades in both countries which will have an impact on the economy. So if a war breaks out between the two countries, of course it will not only impact the two warring countries, but also various countries in the world. War can even cause food prices in a country to increase. The impact may initially only be a small change, but if the war is prolonged it can change the world economy drastically in the long term.

Because of course war is not just a small initial change, but a significant initial change. The deployment of large amounts of military force can also result in large expenditures, as happened in the Russia vs Ukraine and Israel vs Palestine wars. However, what is clear is that war not only takes lives and physical casualties, but also has a huge impact on both countries and also neighboring countries. Apart from that, other economic burdens including the construction of refugee camps, trauma caused by war, the collapse of the economic system in both countries, and the impact of weapons radiation are quite worrying in the long term.

In my opinion, war does not necessarily destroy economic progress. War can have a far-reaching impact on the economy. However, the problem varies depending on various factors such as the length of the war, the type of conflict faced, and the actions taken by the parties involved in the war. War could also result in an increase in global oil prices, reducing consumer appeal and prompting an economic recession. Apart from that, the huge costs of war also have a negative impact on the economies of the countries involved in the war. However, there are also situations in which war can provide a profitable boost through increased production of ammunition and weapons, labor mobilization, and post-war recovery as well as impacting demand price increases that can benefit people who have investments in valuable goods or means. held for trading and purchasing. therefore, the impact of war on economic progress can be very complex and context-dependent.

[RockBell]

There is so much to war than just killing and distructions of house and properties. It's always easy to start but when it will finally end is what only time will tell. Even after a full blown war has come down, the effect of the war continues for years and years to come. Even inter communal crisis doesn't just end after there is cease fire or reduction in the killing of individuals, hatred builds up and it takes almost a long time before the economy of the nations at war gets restored back to normal.

The properties that have been destroyed in the Russia and Ukraine war can't be fixed up five years after the war. Even with the intervention of international organisation, it will take time before the two nations recovers economically from the war.

When it comes to conflict, the first concern should be to keep people safe, because war has cost many people their lives and possessions. And how do you expect them to survive after the war when the government doesn't seem to care? I still wonder what they gain throughout the conflict because what people go through is inexplicable. So it is better to avoid conflict than to create one. We know that a lot of life's have been lost in the past years just because of war. And did anything change no nothing changed. It even got worse because any little thing that they can seat and discuss they will rather want to go to war.

People suffer from the trauma of bombings and other wartime events afterward. People become increasingly irritated when they see dead bodies on the road. Because they will be looking for justifications to justify the government's decision to wage war. I believe there should be regulations before anyone goes to war. And Russia and Ukraine both countries are stubborn and till today they have not been able to restore normalcy to those countries. What war does to the economy is worse also because they will have to set teams to safe people feeding and other sectors and all requires money.

[Argoo]

 I believe there should be regulations before anyone goes to war. And Russia and Ukraine both countries are stubborn and till today they have not been able to restore normalcy to those countries. What war does to the economy is worse also because they will have to set teams to safe people feeding and other sectors and all requires money.

Norms governing the civilized rules of warfare exist. This is the UN Charter. But in Russia’s war against Ukraine, it is not observed by the current permanent UN security member, the Russian Federation. Conducting wars of conquest with the aim of arbitrarily changing the internationally recognized borders of states is prohibited by the UN Charter. Russia also ignores absolutely all the rules of warfare, including not allowing representatives of international bodies to enter the territory of Ukraine it occupies, as well as to prisoners captured by Russia.

In addition, the Russian Federation is generally illegal in the UN and illegally occupies the place of its member, since no one has ever accepted the Russian Federation into the UN organization. There was no such decision and there is no such solution. After the collapse of the USSR, the representative of the Russian Federation simply informed at a UN meeting that instead of the USSR, the Russian Federation would now be in the UN. However, the Russian Federation did not have any authority to do this from the former republics of the USSR and the UN did not make any decisions on this matter.

After the full-scale military invasion of the Russian Federation in Ukraine, Ukraine raised the issue of the illegality of the Russian Federation’s presence in the UN, but the relevant UN officials do not want to discuss this issue, and any decisions regarding violation of the rules of war by the Russian Federation are vetoed by the Russian Federation itself as a permanent member of the UN Security Council.

Let me remind you that in order to end this war any day soon, Russia only needs to withdraw its troops from the illegally occupied territories of Ukraine.

[Xampeuu]

War brings chaos and destruction and death. Like the OP noted, war alters the economic and social growth of both parties involved. Even when the war clearly brings forth a victor, the victor also suffers economic consequences from the war. I wouldn’t exactly say the effects is felt more on the world than in the countries actually fighting the war.

Obviously, the impact is felt in the surrounding regions and all over. Goods and services normally produced in that region and exported to various parts of the earth would be affected, drastically reduced or even stopped. Warring parties would have to conserve resources for their own citizens as the normal rate of the production of goods and services would have been reduced.

What is certain is that war is a bad action, both through physical and non-physical actions, because it will result in physical violence and blockades in both countries which will have an impact on the economy. So if a war breaks out between the two countries, of course it will not only impact the two warring countries, but also various countries in the world. War can even cause food prices in a country to increase. The impact may initially only be a small change, but if the war is prolonged it can change the world economy drastically in the long term.

Because of course war is not just a small initial change, but a significant initial change. The deployment of large amounts of military force can also result in large expenditures, as happened in the Russia vs Ukraine and Israel vs Palestine wars. However, what is clear is that war not only takes lives and physical casualties, but also has a huge impact on both countries and also neighboring countries. Apart from that, other economic burdens including the construction of refugee camps, trauma caused by war, the collapse of the economic system in both countries, and the impact of weapons radiation are quite worrying in the long term.

In my opinion, war does not necessarily destroy economic progress. War can have a far-reaching impact on the economy. However, the problem varies depending on various factors such as the length of the war, the type of conflict faced, and the actions taken by the parties involved in the war. War could also result in an increase in global oil prices, reducing consumer appeal and prompting an economic recession. Apart from that, the huge costs of war also have a negative impact on the economies of the countries involved in the war. However, there are also situations in which war can provide a profitable boost through increased production of ammunition and weapons, labor mobilization, and post-war recovery as well as impacting demand price increases that can benefit people who have investments in valuable goods or means. held for trading and purchasing. therefore, the impact of war on economic progress can be very complex and context-dependent.

Every war certainly has a goal, for example capturing a region, and that region usually has economic potential, or at least provides future benefits for the war capital spent, so I think this has been taken into account from the start. so that if the goal is achieved then the economic potential for the perpetrators can increase, even though it sacrifices many civilians, and civilians who are victims suffer the most because of the government's ambitions