Originally Posted by JPaul
So wars to steal property have a point, whereas wars over ideology, or wars to free oppressed people are pointless.
Let me suggest that a country A is torturing and murdering a section of it's citizens. Country B decides that this is totally unacceptable and decides to do something about it. They invade that country and depose it's regime. They then ensure that another government is put in place, assisting in this being done but keeping interference to a minimum. They then leave, with no tangible gain, in fact it has cost them a lot of assets to do it.
Anyone who thinks this is anything other than hypothetical is wrong.
Using your definition "A war with a point is one in which one side is attempting to secure money, resources, power. These are tangible things, things of value in our material world." that war was pointless. I disagree, however as is patently (and increasingly) obvious we are more different than we are similar. I am sure this is a source of never-ending joy to you.