this is just a question with random countries but for example if a war with US would start against India and Russia and those 2 countries are both invading for example New York, Russia from the north and India from the south. Russia is winning and India is losing and they ask for russian help. New York is lost to the Americans but because there was little Indian troops left Russia did most of the work to kick out America from the south...The question is that like in a similar situation would russia keep the south territory or just give it over to India?
trick question. they wouldn't make it to New york, plus what would be the point, there are no New York establishments that would cripple the country in a time when factories and fuel production facilities will be original targets. History News Network::
The answer to these questions is yes. By the early part of the 20 th century it was becoming clear that territorial conquests, military intervention,
http://hnn.us/roundup/entries/11117.htmlHOME |
It doesn't work like that. If two or more states cooperate to conquer another state, they'll have an agreement amongst themselves about who gets what after the war. It doesn't matter who conquers which territory.
Mapuche Nation::
Under the same pretext of that of the Spanish of "promoting civilization and Christianity" the Mapuche people suffere territorial conquests, military
http://www.mapuche-nation.org/english/html/m_nation/main/m_nation.htmHOME |
To give you an example, Germany and Russia both invaded Poland in 1939. They had already agreed on which territory they would each annex after the operation was complete. Neither Russia nor Germany could claim anything more without breaching the treaty, regardless of who managed to conquer which parts of Poland.
your question dont make sence mate
 Where's The Advantage In Windows Genuine Advantage?
 Stocks Bounce After S&P Joins Bear Market
|
Military territorial conquest question? 
PRINT
Add to favorites