The country of Vatican City has never been to war.
Brings up the question as to where OP draws the line. If a country was established after a violent revolution, would that count if that newly established country has not yet gone to war or would the war for their independence have ruined that? Or in this case, the influence of the church getting other countries to fight.
Not sure what you’re talking about, I was not saying the Papal States were influencing other countries to fight, they were doing the fighting. The Pope was the head of state, sure they have a new name now, but the power structures and traditions have a straight line between the Papal States and current day Vatican City.
Meh IMO a country created out of the ashes of the Papal States with the same power structures is functionally the same country. But you are correct, Vatican City has not fought any wars after signing the deal with Mussolini that officially ended the Papal States.
The country of Vatican City has never been to war.
Brings up the question as to where OP draws the line. If a country was established after a violent revolution, would that count if that newly established country has not yet gone to war or would the war for their independence have ruined that? Or in this case, the influence of the church getting other countries to fight.
Not sure what you’re talking about, I was not saying the Papal States were influencing other countries to fight, they were doing the fighting. The Pope was the head of state, sure they have a new name now, but the power structures and traditions have a straight line between the Papal States and current day Vatican City.
I am saying exactly what you just reiterated. The church was the main influence, but Vatican City wasn’t a country.
Meh IMO a country created out of the ashes of the Papal States with the same power structures is functionally the same country. But you are correct, Vatican City has not fought any wars after signing the deal with Mussolini that officially ended the Papal States.