PDA

View Full Version : War Is Good


duckula
20-07-2004, 06:09 PM
For several reasons.

Reason 1:

apoggy
20-07-2004, 06:13 PM
Indeed

In the immortal, yet not so original words of duckula's MSN Nickname 'Wars Win Prizes', apparently

Spire
20-07-2004, 08:37 PM
Peace is over-rated.

duckula
20-07-2004, 09:38 PM
Reason 2:
http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/apoggy/toysforboys.JPG

Flightfreak
20-07-2004, 10:40 PM
i hope this thread is going to be lockt, i find it totaly inappropriate :mad:
there die every day thousands of people as a result of war!!
This is not a thing to make fun about!

DragonRat
20-07-2004, 11:02 PM
Well, if it's wrong, then say why you think it's wrong. This thread is proffered as partially a joke, but also to instigate and arouse the hawks and doves of this forum to a greater discussion on the reasons why war is good (and bad).

From a sociological standpoint, the human race has been ultimately defined by the outcomes of wars. To the victor go the spoils. And it is usually the victorious of wars who write the history books. It's not necessarily a good thing, that wars occur, but they are usually inevitable.

Narg
20-07-2004, 11:14 PM
Flightfreak: if it wasnt for world war 2, we would still be flying around in biplanes and the like, War is a great technology excelerator. Look at the advancements from the beginning of world war 2, to the end, its amazing.

Richard
20-07-2004, 11:25 PM
Flightfreak: if it wasnt for world war 2, we would still be flying around in biplanes and the like, War is a great technology excelerator. Look at the advancements from the beginning of world war 2, to the end, its amazing.

For a moment there I thought you said WW2 was amazing. But yes, I'll agree. As much as I would like to avoid war, it's sometimes the only option. War Is Good.

Hazzle
21-07-2004, 02:12 AM
War is part of social evolution...a necessary part. War is how we define our societal evolution, it's how we define our society...by how brutal our wars are...sorry but it's true.

Flightfreak
21-07-2004, 09:19 AM
Well, if it's wrong, then say why you think it's wrong. This thread is proffered as partially a joke, but also to instigate and arouse the hawks and doves of this forum to a greater discussion on the reasons why war is good (and bad).

From a sociological standpoint, the human race has been ultimately defined by the outcomes of wars. To the victor go the spoils. And it is usually the victorious of wars who write the history books. It's not necessarily a good thing, that wars occur, but they are usually inevitable.

At second taught, I find it idd a good idea to have a good discussion about this!


Flightfreak: if it wasnt for world war 2, we would still be flying around in biplanes and the like, War is a great technology excelerator. Look at the advancements from the beginning of world war 2, to the end, its amazing.

jep, but if we need 6miljoen Jews murdered for a bit of "progress", sorry but I think I don’t want it then!!

War is part of social evolution...a necessary part. War is how we define our societal evolution, it's how we define our society...by how brutal our wars are...sorry but it's true.

u mean that we are social evolutet? in wat way do u mean?

Narg
21-07-2004, 10:12 AM
I realize the slaghter of billions of innocent people isnt justfied just for some technological advancement, but, wars happen, and technological growth is a by product, perhaps the only good byproduct.

Nick
21-07-2004, 10:25 AM
Being that we are supposed to be the most intelligent species on the planet you'd think that we would have found a better way to work out our differences than killing each other off. I think if one is going to declare war they had better have a very good reason because in war not only do soldiers die but innocent civilians die as well, I don't see how that is a good thing.

Flightfreak
21-07-2004, 10:37 AM
Being that we are supposed to be the most intelligent species on the planet you'd think that we would have found a better way to work out our differences than killing each other off. I think if one is going to declare war they had better have a very good reason because in war not only do soldiers die but innocent civilians die as well, I don't see how that is a good thing.

This is probably the most intelligent post of this whole thread. :)

ChocolateMoose
21-07-2004, 11:22 AM
Being that we are supposed to be the most intelligent species on the planet you'd think that we would have found a better way to work out our differences than killing each other off. I think if one is going to declare war they had better have a very good reason because in war not only do soldiers die but innocent civilians die as well, I don't see how that is a good thing.

Totally agree. With the Iraq thing, the only reason Blair gave to join the war was to find WMD. And did they.........nope. Ok, good things might have come from it (i.e. Saddam being captured), but that wasn't the reason he gave. Better reason for going to war is a must.

I think its bad that quite a few countries are in the possenssion of nuclear missiles, even if theres some agreement that they won't be used.
a) If thats the case and they are in agreement over not using them, why have them?
b) More importantly, someone will one day crack and use one, and then another country will retaliate and then another....and that won't be good.

deviljet88
21-07-2004, 12:02 PM
Not everyone is rational enough for peace talks. War happens, live with it.

alby
22-07-2004, 10:19 AM
Totally agree. With the Iraq thing, the only reason Blair gave to join the war was to find WMD. And did they.........nope. Ok, good things might have come from it (i.e. Saddam being captured), but that wasn't the reason he gave. Better reason for going to war is a must.

I think its bad that quite a few countries are in the possenssion of nuclear missiles, even if theres some agreement that they won't be used.
a) If thats the case and they are in agreement over not using them, why have them?
b) More importantly, someone will one day crack and use one, and then another country will retaliate and then another....and that won't be good.

a. deterent -- mutually assured destruction

Elijahfan
22-07-2004, 04:26 PM
war is good, all life and history is defined by it, not matter how horrible it is. even if people cant accept it or like the idea of it, it comes from human nature and the problem of not being able to solve things diplomatically. greed, lust, envy...and most of all power are the causes of war, it's funny that most people are against it but that all the traits for war are found in everyone, even if they dont want to admit it. all that most people can do is hope it doesnt come close to home or doesnt affect their lives.

but i do salute those willing to go to battle. it's hard facing the fact that you might not come back and truly fighting for a cause, though some soldiers lose faith and see things differently after combat.

and in the iraq war, i'm against bush, even if saddem is evil, we need hard evidence first to go to war. not war then look for the evidence for the reason when went to war. plus bush is a major moron. just plan stupid. and his VP, cheney told a senator (?) on the house floor to go fuck himself. hilarious!

DesignatedJerk
22-07-2004, 07:40 PM
well you know the old saying. if you want peace you must prepare for war.

I feel this hold's true.

Kelsey
22-07-2004, 08:08 PM
WMDs aside...

Why I Support the War in Iraq
We were able to "free" Iraq from Saddam Hussein's rule. People and critics can go on and on about how we went to war with an innocent country, yet remember the videos and images of the villages and people Saddam gassed and slaughtered? No, we have not found WMD, however we have found 500+ mass grave sites, and most importantly, we have found Saddam. The people itself were innocent, exactly...

Now for the typical American response: I know people who are serving in Iraq right now, and they are people who I have grown up with, and who I love. No matter what the reason, I'll support my friends and the troops who are representing my country overseas.

Why I Don't Support the War in Iraq
I don't think the plan to go to Iraq was completely thought out - at least not well enough to go ahead and do it. One of the goals was to find Saddam and rid him of his powers, but what about after that? Now we have the Kurds, Shiites, and Sunnis ready to kill each other off to gain control of the country. I know what I would do, but what does the government plan to do, since this isn't just going to be a quick fix that will go away in a couple years.

I also don't think that the war in Iraq should have been America's main focus after 9/11. We wanted to get back at someone (though I guess that's part of the problem and miscommunication, there wasn't a specific country to get back at), so we should have gone after Bin Laden, and that should have been our main focus. So I don't agree with where Washington's focus was in the year following September 11.

That's just my opinion, of course.

Hazzle
23-07-2004, 12:08 AM
well you know the old saying. if you want peace you must prepare for war.

I feel this hold's true.

I agree. Machiavelli said "War should be the only study of a prince." And y'know what? He was right. He also said:

"Rome remained free for four hundred years and Sparta eight hundred, although their citizens were armed all that time; but many other states that have been disarmed have lost their liberties in less than forty years."

Thus all great political entities have retained liberty only through force of arms. Jefferson also said "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." In order to protect freedom bloodshed is sometimes necessary.

On Iraq and pre-emptive war, see Churchill.

"If you will not fight for the right when you can easily win without bloodshed; if you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly; you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a small chance of survival. There may even be a worse case: you may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves."

The point is that if action wasn't taken against Iraq, the time WOULD come when the entire region would be a danger to the western world and we'd have had a world war on our hands. Which would've cost far more lives and might've been an attempt in vain.

Chairman Mao had amazing things to say about war...read them and understand why war is a necessary thing.

"We are advocates of the abolition of war, we do not want war; but war can only be abolished through war, and in order to get rid of the gun it is necessary to take up the gun."

In order to secure peace, one must destroy all one's enemies, render them impotent and incapable of waging war. When this is achieved, peace is feasible. Otherwise human nature will dictate war will always take place.

Perhaps Teddy Roosevelt said it best, "If I must choose between righteousness and peace, I choose righteousness."

Some will say the war was not righteous...so I will end with this.

"To wage a war for a purely moral reason is as absurd as to ravish a woman for a purely moral reason."
-- Henry Mencken

Liam
23-07-2004, 10:53 AM
This, ladies and gentlemen, is the single best thread I have ever seen.

Why? There has been the occasional intelligent post (Kels, Haz et al, I applaud you) *and* there has been pictures of toys for the boys. Mraw.

Ranman
08-10-2005, 09:26 PM
Funny that people who think war is good
are not the ones on the battlefield
and being shot at

duckula
08-10-2005, 09:39 PM
They think its great too. Just ask them.

Hazzle
08-10-2005, 10:16 PM
They think its great too. Just ask them.

It's true

http://www.sighost.us/members/Hazzle/war_is_good.jpg

deviljet88
08-10-2005, 11:17 PM
Very true.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v149/deviljet88/dead_us_soldier.jpg

Hazzle
09-10-2005, 12:15 PM
Very true.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v149/deviljet88/dead_us_soldier.jpg

See? Even the dead ones love it!