The next escalation in the Russia-NATO conflict won't be conventional warfare but an expansion of the current "shadow war." This involves asymmetric tactics like cyberattacks, destroying undersea cables, using drones in allied airspace, and funding vandalism of critical infrastructure to divide and destabilize European allies from within.

An act of aggression can become so popular domestically that leaders feel compelled to see it through, even if initially intended as a negotiating tactic. The Argentine junta found the Falklands invasion was "the most popular thing they'd ever done," trapping them in a conflict they couldn't easily abandon.

A current US military doctrine involves intentionally starting conflicts with limited force, knowing the resulting instability will spread to allies. This compels them to "share the burden" of US national security interests, effectively forcing their involvement in conflicts they might otherwise avoid.

A population can be habituated to war through gradual escalation. By starting with seemingly small, contained "lightning strikes," each subsequent step feels less shocking. This incremental approach can lead a nation into a major conflict without a single decisive moment of public debate or consent.

Historically, rising and ruling powers don't stumble into war directly. Instead, their heightened distrust creates a tinderbox where a seemingly minor incident involving a third party (like the assassination in Sarajevo pre-WWI) can escalate uncontrollably into a catastrophic conflict.

Unlike wars where a nation is attacked first (e.g., Pearl Harbor), "wars of choice" lack the sustained public support needed for a long conflict. The aggressor has a political weak point, which adversaries exploit to win a war of attrition, not battlefield victories.

In warfare, claiming a deceased or incapacitated individual is the new leader can be a brilliant strategic move. It stymies the enemy, who has no one to target, while allowing a hidden group to issue directives under the guise of the dead leader's authority.

Leaders create simplified, emotionally resonant narratives for public consumption that mask the messy, complex, and often ugly truths behind their actions. The real "why" is rarely present in the official story.

A government's inability to answer basic questions like "Why now?" during a military action is perceived as incompetence. This defensive communication signals a lack of conviction to adversaries, encouraging them to simply endure until American political will collapses.