You're both wrong. Many people subscribed to each belief.
The economists, globalists and industry people believed that it could never happen. The military, nationalist and political folks figured it would be inevitable, or at very least if it happened they had to win.
Many people subscribed to the argument of the economists and globalists in more democratic countries because it was a comforting illusion the people in the more militaristic autocracies, believed it was inevitable, and incidentally were the nations that hold the most culpability for WW1, Germany, Russia, Austro-Hungarian empire.
Wait a minute why is all of my description starting to sound terribly and horribly familiar to what is going on now?
Seriously those that will continue to posist that war will not come are foolish and don't realizing that the first steps are already in progress with the information war being waged right now through cyberspace.
Note I don't want a war to happen and think it will be horrible and terrible, but all the elements are in place for it to happen. A shifting balance of power into a multipolar world, multiple nations either facing decline or ascendancy, realpolitik becoming the norm in international relations, it all looks very grim unless some very wise, peace loving and capable leaders emerge on the world stage soon.
Or, like the UK, the days of Russian empire are over and the new bi-polar world will be the NATO/India/AUNZ/Asia vs China/Africa.
So another Cold War for the 21st Century if we continue to rely on a mercantilist attitude in a world where networking is more important than some trade links.
No the cold war required a bipolar world for it's stability with MAD being the keystone that held the arch together. That was the only way for it to be stable and why we didn't have a massive war, with all actions being confined to small proxy wars.
We are in a multi-polar world now, Trump pointed out and many people are starting to agree, about whether or not the US really should be so closely aligned with Europe, NATO will probably stick around but it might not be enough. Meanwhile India has happily agreed to buy all the Russian oil that Europe isn't, which is done to spit in the face of the sanctions imposed on Russia. The mutli-polar world right now is US, India, China, EU, and Russia which is still a regional power, each of which have different interests.
The problem is China and the EU are facing huge demographic shortfalls in the next 30 years that will pose existential threats to their society, Russia is in the same boat. The EU is having this problem addressed to a certain extent through immigration but the nationalistic racist attitudes of the Chinese people make this a less palatable option for them. It is likely that the demographic cliff is going to continue to stress Chinese society to the breaking point until it snaps and begins an international incident that could quickly escalate to a global war. The best thing the US could do to preserve it's interests is do whatever we need to to schmooze up to India and cement an alliance with them, as they represent the best regional challenger to China and if they end up on the side of the CCP will cause huge problems as at that point a Bejing-Delhi alliance will be able to exert control over 1/3 > of the world's population. (This assumes they will be able to control all of Southeast Asia through soft and hard power)
it seems that only our instutions, or big chunks of the whole global trade system, want this war; but this this point, a lot of those systems are automated by rules and regulations and a overly complicated network that become inentelligible to the people 'running' it.
nobody that is alive and sentient (in the traditional sense) wants a war... and yet, we all see it looming.
Sounds a lot like how the assassination of the heir appearant of the Austro-Hungarian Empire led to the UK declaring war on Germany for marching through Belgium.
No one wanted the war, many knew it would be horrible, and yet it led to the most nightmarish collective human experience in human history.
The economists, globalists and industry people believed that it could never happen. The military, nationalist and political folks figured it would be inevitable, or at very least if it happened they had to win.
Many people subscribed to the argument of the economists and globalists in more democratic countries because it was a comforting illusion the people in the more militaristic autocracies, believed it was inevitable, and incidentally were the nations that hold the most culpability for WW1, Germany, Russia, Austro-Hungarian empire.
Wait a minute why is all of my description starting to sound terribly and horribly familiar to what is going on now?
Seriously those that will continue to posist that war will not come are foolish and don't realizing that the first steps are already in progress with the information war being waged right now through cyberspace.
Note I don't want a war to happen and think it will be horrible and terrible, but all the elements are in place for it to happen. A shifting balance of power into a multipolar world, multiple nations either facing decline or ascendancy, realpolitik becoming the norm in international relations, it all looks very grim unless some very wise, peace loving and capable leaders emerge on the world stage soon.