I'm feeling extra rational, somewhat inspired, and a little pedantic this morning, so here we go,
I think it's simply about space control and a war "because the other side is hostile".
Whether or not you have any real objections, if the other side is shooting you shoot back. When both sides have that mentality a war ensues. The objective, simply put for both sides, was to get the shooting to stop on your terms. Neither wanted to proposition a peace, because in a cynical childlike manner, you've admitted defeat.
Broad objectives were defined; capture the enemy capital, kill as many as possible, take control over territory, etc. These "objectives" were just ideas that the Terrans and Vasudans thought would end the war. When your ultimate objective is just to stop the war on your terms, there's no real "territorial" objective that will win. Capturing a major planet's industry (like Earth) would certainly help your case, but there's no guarantee.
Reminds me of some parts of the First World War really (prior to the entrance of the US)...Both sides are fighting hard for the advantage so that when, eventually, both economies wear down YOUR army is just a tiny bit ahead and can dictate the terms of the peace.
Just to clarify:
In scientific terms, we define their dyadic dispute with audiences costs (domestic - the cost they incur in terms of approval ratings at home, for backing down during a war) and rewards (what each side gains from forcing each other to capitulate, obtaining specific objectives during the war, etc.) The thing about most wars is that they go from being arguments to military conflicts because each side isn't exactly sure what the limits of the other is. War is usually a last resort as war is ****ing costly, in lives and resources. Wars usually end when a side drives up the cost of the war higher than the cost of peace.
Also note that while war starts as a failure to come to an agreement, war doesn't terminate all communication. I'm pretty sure I remember reading in the reference bible that the two sides had had diplomatic talks but they were inconclusive. Meaning, diplomats still try to figure out how to come to a compromise, but neither side is willing to pay the domestic / audience costs for what they'd get - what they'd receive in a truce is too little for how much **** they'd get at home. There are plenty of politics behind the scenario that probably weren't inserted into the universe because of time constraints in production, yet more likely because reading political babble would bore people to death when all they want to do is play a game where they can shoot things in space.
I brought this up mainly because you implied that carrying on war, or not coming to a peace agreement is child-like. There's a perfectly rational reason for why a war like this could carry on for so long. So long as you consider mass destruction and the death of thousands of people rational if used to satisfy a society's needs, it checks out scientifically. Note, rational doesn't mean moral or appropriate.
Another point of clarification: What I said about each side in the T-V war being uncertain of each other's capabilities and limits checks out specifically when the Shivans enter into the conflict. At this point, after observing that the Shivans are vastly superior, out for blood, and don't prefer any one side over the other, the domestic costs for peace between the Humans and Vasudans were then lower than the cost of total annihilation, which is why they came to a truce and subsequent alliance. Again, pretty obvious.
The war started because of the Terran's being completely unaware of the importance of the 'conversation'. The Vasudans got pissed, and all negotiations broke down. Frankly, I think the Vasudans are pricks for being so instantly offended. It's like finding an acorn on the ground in the woods, leaving it, then getting angry because you see a squirrel running off with it the next day.
Yeah. And World War 1 was entirely Gavrilo Princip's fault.
[mobius]You're assuming that the Vasudans are pretty much like Terrans, and therefore don't start a war because of a misunderstanding.
The Vasudans couldn't imagine how long the war would have devastated T-V space - they wouldn't have started it, otherwise. Please note how the Vasudans were the ones who asked for a cease fire - what does it suggest?
Oh, no one expected World War One to be that dramatic, and Austria surely wouldn't have started it so easily.[/mobius]
But the Vasudans are pretty much like the Terrans. They just live in the desert, eat funny things, and speak a confusing-ass language from the back of their throats. Actually, that sounds kind of familiar... GG Volition with precognitive abilities. Seriously though, it states in the reference bible that they're really not supposed to be that dissimilar from another. Without looking it up myself, I believe it was something to the effect of the two sharing very similar origin stories. This is a story of
human conflict: a war between humans and a race of people who while being from somewhere else, and looking a little different, also act like humans.
Bear in mind that the Vasudans were, quite obviously, completely alien. I'd wouldn't rule out xenophobia as a factor for the war starting, on both sides.
Wrong. See above. "Completely alien" would be a good way to describe the Shivans. Or Starfish. Or that black **** in Spiderman 3 that becomes Venom. Vasudans are about as alien as Cairo, which I guess is a slight matter of perspective, but only really to the ignorant.
I don't know if I'd say that they were happy that the Shivans showed up. But oh well. It's an interesting topic. Highly plausible to say that both sides were trying to take out the other's homeworld. That's just what people do in war, they attach some arbitrary meaning to a location and assume the enemy will collapse the minute they take t. I.E. when the French invaded Russia in 1812 their big objective was Moscow and the mentality was "Oh we take Moscow we end the war blah blah blah". Which is silly but the point is it's not at all implausible that the Terrans' big goal in the T-V war was to take out Vasuda Prime.
That's one of the neatest things in the Freespace canon for me by the way. The whole notion of how important Earth is to the GTA, without Earth they have such a hard time during Reconstruction whereas the Vasudans are able to make a huge comeback.
Again, the "capitals" of Earth and Vasuda come attached with not only physical value (industrial capability, food, supplies, other potential spoils of war) they also tend to be the seats of ruling governments. Obviously, if you can control a state's capital (and thus its ruling government) you can eliminate their opposition leadership to you and force them to capitulate to your demands. If you're all up in their population's business, killing and raping and pillaging, like one usually is when they're at someone's capital if things don't go how the invader likes, then the costs of war begin to far exceed the domestic costs of peace.
This is why Napoleon invaded Moscow. He only failed because he was in such a rush to get there, and the Russians didn't play rationally - they burned their own **** down to the ground to deny Napoleon any gains. Then again, maybe the Russians acted super-rationally.
The interesting thing about the Vasudans is that they were said to have had extra-effecient methods of logistics and organization (somehow attributed to their being a desert-dwelling, possibly nomadic society) which helped them survive the destruction of Vasuda Prime. Though this is sort of contrasted by the fact that they have a parliament and a dynastic monarchy for leadership, which are incredibly centralized.
Capturing the other races home world would have destroyed their morale (effectively winning the war possibly) but the Germans and the English tried that approach in world war 2 by simply bombing each other capital cites (and others) to destroy each others moral...it didn't work. Even still whoever won the T-V war still lost...badly.
You're right, kind of. I'd point you to Hiroshima and Nagasaki though, which worked out pretty well (in terms of conflict resolution.) I think in the case of the English and Germans, bombing capital's didn't stop the war because they didn't bomb enough. I'm not going to say London was a safe place to be in 1942, but it also wasn't burned to the ground. Neither was Berlin. Dresden on the other hand...
