Quote Originally Posted by Emoni
I do however want to comment on your statement of non-moralistic country behavior. You made claims that it is an advantige due to invasions.
I didn't "claim" it was an advantage. Just that it influences the possibility of colonizing other countries to civilize them (not just invading for power or money, that is very different).

You claim they don't try to impose their values, yet at the same time you are missing some key factors as that they usually either attempted near total eradication of the population
What are you talking about ? What China did to Tibet ? Justly, this is because they lack moral conscience.

By no means did east-asian countries fight a "nice war" or was it "no big deal compared to western based take-overs"
That's the point. You seem to understand what I am talking about. While the West colonised also for commercial and political reasons, they often (but not systematically) tried to modernise, develop and educate colonized countries, and tried to keep good relationship with them after decolonization (with institutions such as the Commomwealth of Nations for the UK, or the various economic and educational cooperation projects between France and its former Africa colonies, etc.). Western countries also felt the moral obligation to accept millions of immigrants from former colonies, while Japan tried hard to boot them out after WWII, when they weren't necessary for the war effort anymore. Japan and the Asian countries it controlled (I won't name them colonies), still have uneasy relationships, with many Asian still bearing grudge against Japan like nothing seen with Western colonies.

So we could say that the moralistic approach incites to colonize, with the aim of civilizing and educating the locals, in addition to the struggle for power and resources (which is universal).