This is a rather
complicated way of stating that
war is a
negative sum game. The total
wealth and
output of both sides will always be lower afterwards. In less
interdependent days, the
victor could sometimes still come out
ahead economically. Now, with the
interdependence of the
modern world, that is impossible. God bless
free trade; it's the best
enforcer of
world peace in
history.
After a discussion with Uberfetus, I'd like to expand on my point a bit. War is, in the modern world, always an economic loss. However, that does not mean war is never justifiable. There are times when the alternatives are worse, such as when national survival is at stake or when one side is behaving in a genocidal or otherwise monstrous fashion. There are certainly things worse than war, and in that sense a war can have a winner. Otherwise, war is a losing strategy.