the only development i care for is a scientific and millitary development.
But other people like other kinds of development. Some people like economic development, others like educational development, development of the arts, development of profound philosophical tradition, etc. Who says that your preferred development is more important than theirs? And who says ANY of these notions are necessities that thereby obligate a person in commitment to its furtherance? There is simply no logical reason for anyone to commit to any of these things except "Well, I like that" or "well, I care for that." That is not scientific or logical. That is simply your personal desires which you project onto everyone else.
You missed the point of what I was saying which is that there is no logical reason why a state has to expand (or contract, or stay the same) by default in any situation. You simply determined that as the end goal and then made a religion out of it. But who says it's true? On what authority do you assert it thus? NONE, nadda, zilch, zero.