Why did historians run out of good names to give wars after WW1?

>>1631833
>Banana Wars
What in the actual fuck were they thinking?

mostly because we now identify wars by the region they were primarily fought in. The Vietnam War, The Korean War, the Iran-Iraq War, the Biafra War, the Yugoslav Wars, and so on.

There were many "great wars" in the past because of lack of historians and shortsightedness of human memories.

>banana wars
Because banana industry/companies had high stakes in national politics.

>>1631833
Because a lot of the dramatic war names carry political overtones.

Hell, we downgraded actually. You can legitimately call something a war years after it ended. But when it's happening it's a "crisis" or "incident,"

>>1632158
>You can legitimately call something a war years after it ended. But when it's happening it's a "crisis" or "incident,"
Ah yes, just like the Syrian crisis and the Donbass Incident

>>1632158
Nah it's only a crisis if it was like a year or a few months something.

But if it drags, the media is forced to call it a war.

>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syrian_civil_war