The human race seems destined to use war as a means for solving differences between cultural, religious and commerce issues rather than negotiating compromises to avert it.
Politicians and leaders around the world show a resolve to draw lines in the sand (as it were) and promote hostility to forward their agendas. Could we seek a resolve first to eliminate war as the option and put our minds to work to peacefully find a solution? Or are we a species doomed to self destruct because of our aggresive predisposition?
How could we justify our Military Spending then?
Wars generally cloak the greater objective, which throughout history has tended to be the further growth of territory, and/or religion.
I agree with you and as a matter of fact I can't think of one war that was not started for monetary gain. Maybe someone will know otherwise.
Wouldn't it be great if the next time we find ourselves set up to enter another war we just said no? Find another solution and don't bother us again until you do.
The bravada and chest thumping alongside the patriotic vitriol is getting too much play and to speak up against this behavior brands you traitorous and weak.
I am not for war but no matter what I will always support our troops!
No one likes wars, but one has to be prepared for wars. Your intentions might be good, but you can't take potential enemies for granted and get lulled into complacency!!
What it someone declared a war, and no one showed up?
Of course that'll never happen, there will always be someone who's looking for a fight, and there will always be someone to give it to them. America thought they were fighting for noble principles in Vietnam, and look how that worked out. Korea too, for that matter. The American Revolution was fought for more than money, though of course that had its part to play. Who was it that said "war is just diplomacy by other means"?
And your right about military spending, but while we can be cynical about that, most of the major inventions of the 20th century have come directly from military R&D. TV, the internet, Jeeps, all that came from the military's need to innovate.
We, humans that is, are not really a peaceful species, then again no carnivore is. We have learned over centuries to solve our problems with violence. But I feel, with no research to support this, that it has come from an inability to communicate. Language barriers and gaps in communication, I think, leads to misunderstanding that culminates in fighting. I hope that's the case because it means that the better we get at communicating, especially cross-culturally, which we improve on everyday, the less we have to fight to get our point across.
So I guess an apathetic attitude towards finding a solution is the answer to this question. I don't know who said it but "by refusing to make a choice therein lies the answer".
I understand that we seem to gravitate towards the darker side of our nature albeit through life experiences, loss of innocence or more prurient endeavors but are we not to evolve beyond our lesser traits?
True that great strides have been made in medicine and technology due to wars but can't that be said if the space program as well?
It would take a ground swell of support from all over the world and a commitment to see that it is carried out.
I would think that due to it's obvious effect towards self preservation our intellect would require this to be a top priority. But then again why does a diabetic eat that candy bar?
I always HOPE that we'd find a means to an end with any situation without war or violence.
We have brains for a reason, and humanity CLAIMS to be so superior. To many, it's an insult to even classify us as animals.
Yet, I think we are more bestial.
It really annoys me to see our gift of brain matter go to waste. It is so easily twisted or we find excuses to act out on desires, and emotions.
I always like to think before I act but that almost sees taboo.
To even just minimize violence, I think a lot of people need to start THINKING...and thinking for themselves. Questioning morals, opinions, etc., and drawing personal conclusions instead of following a pack. Yet, for most it's just easier to follow what is comfortable...or their nature. Less work.
War will always be around to some degree and violence is an indelible mark on humanity. Superior species indeed...
Oh, it's not a total waste mind you. Many species feed on our brains after we croak. Some even feed on a live brain. Nature does not waste anything.
Haha, not arguing there. But, it's annoying that nature would model us such an intricate mechanism so it's sad when a parasite gets more use out of it than its intended owner.
He-he, I am not that sure. I don't pretend to know nature's ways, and we as well might have been created as a food for scavengers. Which might explain our propensity to self-destruction.
In our drive to distance ourselves from other animals, Human beings forget that we are by nature a predatory species.However unlike most other species we have turned that instinct inward towards ourselves. It would be nice to imagine a world without war but I personally believe that it's a fantasy. I have often preached tolerance and patience in this forum but I know better then many that there are things which must be done regardless. There are those who seek only to watch the world burn, and to do nothing only adds you to the list of casualties. All war whether supposedly about faith, or protection is ultimately about one thing and that is spreading power. Bin Laden wants more power, as do we in America, and those in other nations.
Until such time as mankind is presented with an external threat that forces us to come together in the name of mutual survival then we will still war with ourselves. As long as there are people there will be war. The only thing that will change will be those we war against.The true sadness being that in order to combat real evil even good people must engage in evil things. So then who wins in the end?
I wonder if the general population knows of the devastating effect war has on the families of those killed. I really think it has a lot to do with the goverment censorship of the dead returning to the US. Granted, now the press is allowed to show some of this but I would think thatmuch more of it should be shown to us all.
Giving me a number of injured or killed in action doesn't quite have the impact of showing the casket coming off the airplane in Dover. The families voices telling us what it is like and what they have lost is a rare interview we get to see. I guess if you don't see the devastation you don't even have to get numb to it.
True dat, Rhamson. Even better would be to show graphic documentary from the battlefields, much more impact I think.
The governments cannot bring peace to the people, so the people must bring peace to their governments.
ralwus I agree completely. I find it very progressive to at least have the privilege of being heard in this medium and finding even though we all come from so many different backgrounds and beliefs we can find some common ground.
What we are doing now by talking to each other is what our government fears the most.
You know what you hear more from our politicians is the expense and how they can get more funding to escalate the war. What a screwed up backward way of looking at the cost.
Whoops! I had better reiterate that I do support our troops before I get flamed for some anti-military sentiment. You know some people can't distinguish between supporting the troops (monetarily) with I really support the effort of getting them home to save their lives.
Oh yea! I forgot to mention that I support my country despite not condoning these wars. I hope that quells any misunderstandings.
It is possible to support our troops, yet be opposed to the governments use of our troops. I, for example, believe that our military should only be used to protect the territorial integrity of the US. Any other use of our troops is a bad idea. It gets us involved in the world as it's policeman, and the rest of the world tends to resent that.
War is diplomacy by other means. Nation states engage in diplomacy and only they can fight wars. Hobble nation states and you hobble their war making capability.
Let us not forget the innocent civilians who often suffer the the most during wars. Anywhere from 100,000 to 1,000,000 civilians have died during the conflict in Iraq. It has also been reported that there are 5 million orphans as a result of the war - nearly half of the country's children.
by Susan Reid5 years ago
Bush era = "Support our Troops"Bachmann era = "F our Troops"Michele Bachmann has yet another brilliant idea! Let's cut off the veterans!Of all the programs to even contemplate cutting, how could...
by Holle Abee6 years ago
Why?? And yes, I know most conservatives support this, but I do not. How many weapons and soldiers do we really need to protect ourselves? Aren't the rest just "overkill"? The left screamed about Bush's...
by Stump Parrish6 years ago
Seems to me that we are about to increase our military presence in two more areas of the world. That we don't have the money to run our country won't stop those who make money supplying our military from increasing...
by Grace Marguerite Williams2 years ago
Obama administration? Why? Why not?
by kerryg6 years ago
Alan Grayson is one heckuva BAMF. I doubt this will get passed, but it's a fascinating idea.Grayson's speech:Mr. Speaker. Today I introduce H.R.5353: the "War Is Making You Poor Act." The "War Is Making...
by GNelson4 years ago
The following is from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute:1,630 Billion - Total estimated military spending in 2011 698 Billion - Total estimated U.S. military spending in 2011...
Copyright © 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.