- Politics and Social Issues»
- Politics & Political Science
WWIII: Hiding in Plain Sight
Open Conflict: A World at War
Did you know that there are MORE than 60 (Sixty) countries in the world who are openly in a war, involved in a war or openly in conflict, which is code for: we're at war.
There are roughly 196 countries on this earth (with more emerging from their civil wars everyday), 136 of whom appear to be able to be able to get along without long term fighting.
This is a serious issue in our modern world and one that no one really wants to talk about. It's open conflict that means unnecessary death and drama everyday around the world, and it's something that we as citizens of the earth, should really put our heads together and find a solution for. If so many countries can basically go unnoticed by the mainstream worlds because of their lack of fighting, than maybe we should be paying more attention to them to see what we can learn about peace.
Music is the Silence Between Notes...
A wise man once told me that music is not the notes or the sounds themselves, but the way they are arranged intricately by the silences in between the notes. It's quiet a concept when you really consider it, and when considering other matters in life (like war), it makes sense in many places.
For a very long time now, we've been studying war from a war-frame-of-mind, where we think about how we might be able to stop or prohibit ourselves and others from doing anything that might equate to violence. We're so committed to protecting everyone, that we're even willing to get violent to do.
Kind of defeats the purpose, doesn't it?
What if we looked in a different direction for a while, and then maybe another one down the road. For some reason it seems that we have this notion that there should be "one good plan" that will fit for us and the rest of the world for eternity. Yet it never works out that way, because our "plans" and laws and rules, all need to grow and evolve as we do. No dead set of rules will ever govern the living.
And they don't need to, as far as this writer is concerned. Maybe instead of taking so much action and only going backwards in our level of humanitarianism and violence, maybe it's time to stop and watch and listen to those who are not fighting constantly, to see what we can learn.
Everything you need to know, your mother already told you...
You know those times when you realize that you're doing something you're mother told you not to do when you were little? Those times when you go, "I should've listened to my mother"...
Personally, I feel that many of the conflicts and wars we get into often come about because of simple and often times stupid moments when one or both sides refuse to admit they are or at least were wrong. Take the recent upset with South Korea. American jets were practicing tactical missile launches over South Korean air space, which is what set of the South Koreans in this recent upset. It's easy enough to see that you're asking for trouble when you start playing around with things that go boom over the heads of people who already don't like you.
I wonder what would happen if we openly, officially and sincerely apologized for any misunderstandings and promised not to practice military tactics over their air space?
Of course that would all be easy enough if it weren't for the fact that our diplomatic systems are crap. Why would our government every apologize for anything? Especially after the way millions of citizens acted after Obama apologized for several of our missteps in his first term in office.
They wouldn't, and that's the point.
Even before then, anytime we've been in the wrong and admitted to it, the country throws a fit. In pride and ego and a whole bunch of other nonsense, we scare our own government into the old habit of feeling like we should be right even when we make mistakes. That's why we still have the war on drugs, the war on terrorism and several hundred military occupations around the globe. We can't admit it when we are wrong.
WWIII: Been there, done that
As sad as it is to say, it's obvious that we're already in the middle of the third world war. Sure, it may not be as bad as our favorite sci-fi authors predicted it would be, but it's still pretty bad. Included in those 60 conflicted countries is America, Canada, Britain, France, China, Russia, North Korea, Sudan, Libya, Italy, etc... etc... etc... Those are all the "super powers" and then some, who are all openly engaged in wars and conflicts with each other, others and themselves. What other conditions do we need to be qualified for a world at war?
An unused military is the strongest
It's interesting to think that any army that is actually using it's soldiers and staff in conflicts is actually weaker than armies at a stand still. That's because the whole point of an army is to fight, which results in injuries and death, which essentially uses up the most important resource of the army itself - people.
Using that same logic, it would make more sense to recall our armies and preserve our resources, instead of openly wasting peoples lives because we can't admit when we're wrong.
Though that seems to be one of those 'in a perfect world' sort of scenarios, at least until the rest of the world gets a grip and realizes that you cannot police people's problems into oblivion.