User blog comment:Dual Energon/What I think makes HTTYD 2 the supremely better movie./@comment-24018437-20151113155518/@comment-24018437-20151119100245

That's indeed something against the Vikings. But there is a difference between reaching on emotions, and logic. The Vikings then reacted out of instincts and emotions, not logic.

Animals in zoo's are either received from other zoo's, or more commenly just bred by that zoo. They're not domesticaded pets that can be bought, and are therefore irrelevant to the discussion. The point remains: If you want to buy a dog for your kids, and you'll see two dogs. One is old, ill, has a birth defect and can hardly move or play anynore, and mostly just sleeps. The other is young, cheerfull, active and can do all those things you want a dog to do. Most people would go for the second in practice. Sure, some people go for the first one, but they are a minority.

I'm not saying its good or bad. I'm saying that were was a reason. And in practice, that's a lot harder then you think. The war could take years and years, with thousands upon thousands of deaths. Maybe they win, maybe they don't. But after the war is won...Yeah, then what? Rule that country yourself? That sounds neat in theory, but is hard in practice and will eventually fail. Just look at Germany post-WW2, or how the Dutch ruled Indonesia. Or imagine you don't win. All those morals are useless once you're country has been burned to the ground and your people are dying because you were the one to declare war.

And of course, the question most soldiers will ask is: Why should me and my brothers bleed and die for something that doesn't concern our country? Why should we sacrice our lives and families for the sake of the troubles of someone else? This isn't an evil mentality: its an instinct to protect yourself and your allies. Or, as Stoick and Valka would say, we protect our own. If that enemy attacks them, of course they fight back. But if they aren't affected by it, most won't consider 'Its the right thing to do' as a good reason to go to war. Politicians may make the choiche, but its the soldiers who will fight and die because of that decision. War is serious business. Whatever works or sounds good in theory, is bound to go wrong in practice. Therefore, diplomacy is often the preferered choiche.

If we could all work together to bring down the enemy and make world peace, that would be great. But its a lot harder and complicated then people think. Imagine if the differant countries were families instead. One family is in trouble. Would you sacrifice the lives of your own family for the sake of that one? Most people, again, will choose to take care of their own.

Another important fact is that you sometimes simply don't have the resources to fight. Stoick didn't declare war on the Berserkers because they had much more soldiers and ships. War would be suicide. After the Dragons were trained, their chanches became better. But the Berserkers still outnumbered the Berkians, and were trained and equipped for Dragon killing. Again, war would have been an enormous risk that could end up very badly. Declaring war on an enemy you know you cannot beat for certain is one of the stupidst things you can do. There is line between taking risks and just plain stupidity. Stoick was only willing to wage war when Dagur gave him no other option, and was actually about to kill him if Hiccup hadn't intervered.

While it is obvious the HTTYD-Vikings are far from the actual Vikings (Even if you leave out the Dragons, you can find tons of reasons why they're not the same) it is important to remember they were based on their real-life counterparts and share charastics with them. Therefore, using real world examples isn't such a bad way to explain things.

I suppose I see your point about Snotlout, though he did get better in Race To The Edge in my opinion.