I wasnt in bitcoin at the time but from my understanding the block increase wasn't the main issue. It was how to do it, the big blockers wanted to increase the block size without major consensus, segwit was a solution that was more conservative bc it as a soft fork and it would increase the block space, and it would fix a bug. The war was more about control and consensus. Now my thoughts, segwit soft fork was made in a shaddy way, using no one can spend OP. It should have been an hard fork with consensus imo. Block size increase, I call BS on that we can't increase bc of nodes, segwit increased the blocksize and there was no issue, ofc we shouldn't double it yolo style, but a small increase every year or so if blocks were full would be fine. I also call BS on "security budget", not even going into this. I also call BS on never hard fork. (wtf?). BCH has some virtues in the sense that they didn't added complexity, it's clean, but they dont have LN which is very cool and solved immediate transactions.