In a conflict situation, often the greatest perspective is totally ignored and n

  1. Pearldiver profile image80
    Pearldiverposted 6 years ago

    In a conflict situation, often the greatest perspective is totally ignored and not considered....

    In War, for example, which party has the actual, overall advantage - the party with the most to lose, or the party with nothing to lose? Why.... why not.

  2. hirundine profile image60
    hirundineposted 6 years ago

    I would agree.

    Yet war, instead of diplomacy. Tells the discerning? That the so-called warring-parties are making more loot, in dispute! Than in reconciliation. I would hazard a guess? IMO War is conducted by those who rule, because peace does not sell much pop? Those who rule are not governments or even the main street banks. Although, that is a face of them both. It is obviously easy to prey on the 'ordinary joe' through taxation, interest rates, etc. Keeping it primed with war propaganda and surveillance.

    How about? Both sides are run by the same wealthy people who use the "war" for taxation, power and control over the individual? A collectivism if you will?

    More to lose? Less to lose? Using people's personality to maintain the status quo. Whipping up the ignorant, into patriotic bliss.

    The people who are peaceful are held to ransom, by people who are not. The perspective is always skewed; depending on which oar you're shackled to.

  3. diamondadvice profile image61
    diamondadviceposted 6 years ago

    The party with nothing to lose has the advantage. This is the case with most conflicts - of any nature. Psychologically speaking, if you have nothing to lose, you are more apt to risk more and take chances.