Since Practically All Wars in Human History Have Been Started by...

1. 80

   Aficionadaposted 13 years ago

   MEN, perhaps we should just get rid of all of them, wipe the slate clean, and start all over again.  Hm?  Maybe men were just a bad experiment, and it's time for the human race to evolve to something better - more knowledgeable, more compassionate, more humane.
   
   Well, sorry to toss out a grenade and run, but it's way past my bedtime here.  I'll leave it to the Europeans and Aussies to duke it out, and I'll check back after the sun comes up here.    

   replyreport
   1. 0

      Vari786posted 13 years agoin reply to this

      I'm all for evolution, but what exactly are you suggesting? Should we evolve into a species that is asexual? Personally, sex is too much fun to give up!

      replyreport
   2. 61

      Dave Mathewsposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      If we were to kill off all men, then how would the human race replenish itself?
      
      Since all sin in the world began with EVE are we to kill off all women because she goofed up? I think not.
      
      It's about time you used that lump on your shoulder, you call a head, for something more than a place to hang a hat or cap.
      
      Aficionada of nothing!
      
      Brother Dave.

      replyreport
   3. 0

      ryankettposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Women are equally capable of starting wars! Cleopatra, Boudicca, Zenobia, Queen Elizabeth, Margaret Thatcher (well didn't necessarily start one, but was easily provoked), Matilda.
      
      Put a woman in charge and they will be just as likely to start a war. That said, I do think that there should be more gender equality in governments worldwide. America is yet to have its first female leader, we had one - but she ended up being seriously hated.

      replyreport
      1. 60

         VENUGOPAL SIVAGNAposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         Cleopatra did not start any war.... It was Julius Caesar who came to annex Egypt during his eastern campaign. Cleopatra just surrendered.
         
         Margaret Thatcher 's response to Argentina's capture of Falklands was unnecessary and could have been avoided.  For a barren island with just 2000 inhabitants having  some sheep and goats, it is not a fitting bet for her. Nine large warships... some aircraft carriers and hundreds of men armed with missile, just to capture an island where its inhabitants had not even a pistol in their hands...!    For her foolish act, she provoked China, which demanded that the same Argentine formula (annexing a nearby island, owned by a faraway country) will be applied in Hong Kong. And UK lost control of Hongkong in 1-7-1997. 
         
         In another part of the globe, taking a cue from that episode, Burma tried to annex some islands in Andamans, owned by India in 1982. The then Prime Minister Mrs.Indira Gandhi had to go there and ensure that the islands were reverted to Indian control. The place where she declared that Andamans will always be Indian is now called Indira Point. 
         
         The India Pakistan war of 1971 can be taken as the most decisive war in modern history, started by Mrs. Indira Gandhi.

         replyreport
   4. 0

      Stevennix2001posted 13 years agoin reply to this

      then wouldn't that kill the human population, as you need men and women together to procreate.  Unless your saying cloning should be used to remedy this. 

      replyreport
   5. 0

      just_curiousposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      I think you're on to something there.  We've easily got enough in the sperm banks to procreate for quite a while.

      replyreport
2. 58

   PeppermintPaddyposted 13 years ago

   That's not a good idea since men are people too and women aren't perfect. In fact, there are women willing to start wars.

   replyreport
3. 48

   paarsurreyposted 13 years ago

   Why were not you handling the affairs in the past? Were you incapable?
   
   You were all along with the men.

   replyreport
4. 73

   Diane Insideposted 13 years ago

   Maybe there would be less war, Women are better at backstabbing, talking behind their backs. Being two faced, I know I am a woman, and it would be interesting to see what a woman would do in office. 
   
   I still think they are capable of starting a war, they would just be more sinister about it.

   replyreport
5. 78

   skyfireposted 13 years ago

   Based on the popular sockpuppet drama threads on hubpages i can safely say that- "All the sockpuppet wars are started by females"......So MEN are awesomely ethical... 

   replyreport
6. 48

   paarsurreyposted 13 years ago

   Why were not you handling the affairs in the past? Were you incapable?
   
   You were all along with the men.

   replyreport
7. 64

   Greek Oneposted 13 years ago

   If the world was ruled by women, there doomsday clock would inch closer to midnight once each month.
   
   We can't take that risk

   replyreport
   1. 73

      Diane Insideposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Just to be clear there is good reason, this happens each month.
      
      Men need this to occur to them, then they would think before they say anything.
      
      In fact that is my wish. For men so start having a menstrual cyle. Ha they couldn't take it.
      
      It would be total anarchy.

      replyreport
      1. 64

         Greek Oneposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         oh trust me, any man who is in a committed relationship with a woman IS GREATLY effected by the menstrual cycle each month lol

         replyreport
      2. 60

         Woman Of Courageposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         Diane, You made a good point!

         replyreport
8. 78

   skyfireposted 13 years ago

   

   replyreport
9. 60

   GDNiemandSpeziellposted 13 years ago

   I think all war (not practically all, but all) is started by greed. I did not read all the post, so his may be too simplistic in the context of the forum.

   replyreport
10. 59

    Jaggedfrostposted 13 years ago

    Yes the love of money is the root of all evil as it has been said before... exactly like that I think.  I have often wondered if some of the wars that have been fought by men would actually have happened if women were not complicit. Whether in action or lack of action, I am not sure men can make war without women.  The fact that most western nations try to keep women off the battle field is beside the point.

    replyreport
11. 58

    Jeramiposted 13 years ago

    Just a thought.
    
      It is all women's fault.
    
       If it wasn't for women; men would still be up in the trees eating fruit and nuts. (and playing with themselves)
       We came down out of the trees for womans sake.
       
    Then the woman gave up pockets,   and said  "bring me stuff!"
       
       She then said "look at all this stuff"!   
       YOU  need a box big enough to keep it in, out of the weather, and big enough for me to sit inside and protect your stuff while you are away getting more stuff.
        And make it confortable for US.
    
        Time passes and we know the rest of the story
    
        It is now too late for man to go back up the tree. 
        They have all been cut down to build boxes for our stuff.
    
          Just kidding !   I hope you know!

    replyreport
12. 92

    habeeposted 13 years ago

    My husband fully believes that all wars were actually started because of a woman. I asked him about the US Civil War, and he responded, "Yep, some woman told her husband to get off his lazy butt and get out there and fight for states' rights and that she didn't want to give up her personal servants."

    replyreport
    1. 58

       Jeramiposted 13 years agoin reply to this

       Yep !   She really did need a lot of help in protecting and maintaining the stuff in the box.

       replyreport
       1. 60

          skipper112posted 13 years agoin reply to this

          lets get our facts right Wars are started by greed, wars make big money for the ' Rich bankers'  Wars are big buisness that is fact 100%. Religion, human rights, and many other excuses have been used , but when it comes down to the wire, Wars are started for PROFIT, just think  in WW2 we went from Bi planes to Jets in just over 4 years, some big bankers backing BOTH sides made BILLIONS, and Germany was loaned Billions as was England, the 'BIG BANKERS' just want power, and will support a War because their MONEY gives them POWER. It is time to wake up to the real cause of war's And either man or woman  in power will start any war the ' Big Bankers' want them to , because of GREED, PROFIT.!

          replyreport
          1. 60

             skipper112posted 13 years agoin reply to this

             ok it takes money to fight a war, a goverment must train more men, make more wepons everything ftom food and clothing to Guns etc, plus look after the people at home, were do you think the countries get money from?  In the case of the USA from the Federal Reserve ( which is privately owned by BANKERS) and is not part of Goverment ( look it up)  and Goverments must borrow large ammounts to pay for everything, think about it?
             Were will $MILLIONS COME FROM, INDEED BILLIONS only one way Goverments BORROW from the VERRY RICH BANKERS.
             
             And sometimes the BANKS support both sides!!!!
             Look it up , do not take my word for it, see for yourself.

             replyreport
             1. 58

                Jeramiposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                I agree completely.   All wars were fought for power and greed of the most prominent.
                
                  BUT  this is done by inciting the general public into a frenzy, often using religion and patriotism as motivation when gathering their armies.
                
                   When the people are dissatisfied in their conditions at home such as hunger and starvation they are even quicker to pick up their weapons follow a promise.

                replyreport
             2. 60

                Druid Dudeposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                Then the banks go belly up, come begging from the source their money came from in the first place, the american people bail them out, passing on the debt to their children's children, while scouting around for another conflict to start to perpetuate their lavish lifestyles on the broken backs of the true strength, the People.

                replyreport
13. 59

    Jaggedfrostposted 13 years ago

    Why skipper?  When you will so graciously do it for us and with such  emphasis.  For all that you must be right.

    replyreport
14. 0

    blink4567posted 13 years ago

    I believe most wars are started by an opposing position, disagreement, or just plain greed. Everyone is right and *rarely* someone is actually wrong, or admits it.

    replyreport
    1. 60

       Druid Dudeposted 13 years agoin reply to this

       ALL wars were started by men. Unless of course you wish to include ants. Man wars against man. Some logic dictates that the gun is to blame, not the one pulling the trigger. Faulty logic. Lacking a gun (religion), we would beat each other with clubs if we had to.

       replyreport
       1. 0

          blink4567posted 13 years agoin reply to this

          I agree if ants were in context to the debate . In most forms man is responsible, but sometimes it is just an ideal. Not even religious in certain events. It could have even been a ideal from someone or a structure from long ago. Personally I think certain actions, and thoughts are really to blame. The person is a conduit, and the specific decision could have sparked a flame, but it takes oxygen to keep it blazing. Man vs Man, Man vs Environment, Man vs Himself, Either way a conflict will arise.

          replyreport