The Parable of Two Soldiers in a Trench

One day while teaching, Josh was asked, ”Teacher, which is more pacifying, mutual assured destruction or mutual economic dependence?”

Josh spoke thus:

Two soldiers were sitting in a trench.  An artillery shell passed loudly overhead.  The two soldiers hunched down, waiting for the explosion and the complementary earth shudder.  Afterwards, they sat waiting for the next shell.

“It’s not much of a shelling,” one soldier said.

“I think they’re finding their range,” the second soldier said, “Preparing for the regular shelling.”

“I’m not a fan of this preliminary shelling,” the first soldier said, “It’s irregular.  It keeps me on edge.”

“Would you prefer a full bombardment?” the second soldier asked.

“I’d prefer no bombardment at all,” the first soldier said.

“They’re not going to attack with no bombardment at all,” the second soldier said, “Every attack needs a preparatory shelling.”

“If it’s a shelling contest, what do they need us for?” the first soldier asked, “Why don’t our artillery and their artillery settle the whole thing between them?  Why do we have to get shelled?  This war could be settled by how many shells each side has, and who has the biggest cannons.  Soldiers are obsolete.”

“In that case, why bother with even the shelling?” the second soldier said, “If it’s a case of who’s got the biggest gun and who’s got the most bombs, can’t they just stick their cannons next to each other, and fire out into the fields?  Whoever shoots the farthest and the longest wins.”

“Theoretically, they don’t even need to shoot the guns,” the first soldier said, “It comes down to industry.  Whoever can make the most shells and guns the quickest wins.  It’s supply and demand.  Or just supply.”

“If it’s an industrial struggle, then wouldn’t we be more valuable back home, making bombs?” the second soldier said.

“Why does it have to be bombs?” the first soldier said, “Why can’t it be automobiles?  Whoever builds the most and fastest automobiles wins.”

“What use are automobiles?” the second soldier asked, “Nobody could use that many automobiles.”

“What should we make then?” the first soldier asked.

“Houses,” the second soldier said, “Houses, and bridges.”

“There wouldn’t be room,” the first soldier said, “There’s a limit to the houses and bridges a country needs.”

“A country, yes,” the second soldier said, “But the world?”

“So instead of blowing each other up, we build roads and bridges and houses around the world?” the first soldier asked.

“If we’re going to spend all that money,” the second soldier said, “Then why not put it to good use?”

“And what does the winner get?” the second soldier asked.

“The whole world gets what it needs,” the first soldier said.

“A world war everyone wins!” the second soldier said.

“If everyone wins, it’s not a war,” the first soldier said, “Somebody has to win a war.”

“In which case, better us than them,” the second soldier said. 

Another shell passed overhead, this one headed towards the enemy’s trenches.

Both soldiers shouted, “Unleash the dogs of war!”