conquest

BUT .... it is ONLY since the UN charter, that winning land in wars became unpopular "legally"

In SOME WAYS, this is an awesome idea, stop people from expanding their territory by war .... but ... it also froze in time the borders, screwing the Kurds and the Palestinians (among a trillion others)

[[ Simultaneously, the UN Charter's guarantee of the "territorial integrity" of member states effectively froze out claims against prior conquests from this process. ]]

And how do we put Yugoslavia into this framework?

which all leads ... WHAT?
"civil" wars splitting a country is "ok"??? so external forces arm one side and the other and break up countries ....

in the end, we always have might makes right ... not unless the majority are willing to CRUSH the fighting parties.

ISIS? UN could/should have landed 5 millions boots on the ground and crushed ISIS. Instead ISIS had a civil war ... right?

Taliban? Taliban controlled something like 98% of Afghanistan, effectively winning their civil war, right?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_of_conquest
eyup ... as long as we have weapons, we will have war and death