Why big nations such as US, UK, and others prefer make war rather improving wellness of others?

Question

It based on fact that big countries frequently used their military power to get their wants

Answer 1

Because the US and UK are driven by greed and agression. The most profitable industries in the world today are Arms, Oil and Pharmecuticals. The Arms Industry makes Billions in profit each year, so it is in their interest to have ongoing conflict around the world. They have powerfuil lobbyists and both the Republican party and Blair's New Labour are very greedy.

Bush and his party spend $422.5 Billion each year on arms and defence. That's a helluva a lot of bunker busting and cluster bombs. They give $4 Billion to Israel. All of thos e bombs sent last week to Israel were made in the US and delivered in US planes, but prevented by Ireland from landing to refuel. Blair allowed them in.. What chance is there of peace?. It is more to do with sheer greed and aggresion. Innocent civilians usually women and children are the casualties of this greed.

Answer 2

By making war in other countries they just sit back and watch others make asses of themselves. I don't live in India but when the British left they made darn sure that there was no peace. The country became divided.
When the British left British Guyana, they placed a black man in charge because of what happened in India. This animal treated the people extremely bad. Where was the UN during this time.
I am not a Guyanese.
The British also sold Trinidad to the Americans because of all the oil in the small island. Eric Williams stole so much money that his daughter was at one time the 6th richest woman in the world while the people in Trinidad had no running water as they did before and the electrical system was extremely bad.
There is more, but the but tom line is this as long as you can keep a country in chaos you are in control.
This is going on right now as I write this.
Peace to all.

Answer 3

You know something? If the governments would take a vote before going to war, there would be no war. Yes, I'm an American. But no one asked me if I wanted my tax dollars spent on blowing up that big sandbox over there. I've got all I can do just to fill my gas tank and put food on the table. I would imagine that it's the same with the UK and any other country that you're talking about. What it comes down to is this...even though our government gave the okay to blow things up doesn't mean that they have everyone's support. No one asked us. But, in answer to your question, from what I've heard over the years, if big countries like us don't step in, things will end up being much worse. What would have happened if the U.S. didn't step in when Hitler was trying to take over Europe? His final plans, after doing so, was to come after the U.S. you know (it's a matter of history). So, eventually, we would have ended up in the war anyway. No one likes wars, even the ones supporting it. But if the big countries didn't step in, the little countries would be overwhelmed and taken over. If you were that little country, wouldn't you wish someone would come to help you? Then, I'm reminded of something I heard several years ago...what if they gave a war and nobody came? Well let's just think about that now. If Cuba bombed Miami and Miami didn't fight back, what do you think Cuba would do? Well, I think Cuba would think that they could get away with bombing them, and maybe go to the next step, which may be occupation (taking over). That's the nature of war. Eventually, the country who took the first step will try to take over, and control everything. I wish there were no wars, and that we could spend our money on making everyone's quality of life better. But, when you got these extremist groups out there, wanting control over their neighbors, something has to be done. Hopefully, it will end quickly, and that these groups can be stopped before they get their hands on some really big bombs. Then everyone will suffer. This may sound kinda weird, but just knowing that our guys are over there, trying to make things safer, gives me a little more comfort. Our soldiers are making it harder on the terrorists to gain strength to do bigger damage. If we can stop them there, they won't come here, or go anywhere else. So, it's not a matter of big countries having a preference to make war. It's a matter of protecting those who need help protecting themselves. <*)))><

Answer 4

A government is only in power for 4-5 years. If they want immediate results, they can't start long term policy, such as improving the conditions in poor countries. Smashing the threat is easier and immediate.
It would be a political suicide if they thought in long terms.

Answer 5

See: History of the World, from beginning to now
Mesopotamia, Rome, Greece, Germany, et al.
Today's nations are doing what power nations have done since there was such a thing as power nations.
fight = win - stay on top.
The good news is, sooner or later, someone bigger came along and kicked their butts.
Sure, Rome still stands...
But not like it did.

Answer 6

If You were the one that was being abused by a terrorist or tyrant you could understand the US action better. Giving up American and British lives to free others should be praised not condemned.
Countries who only think of themselves like France, China and Russia will pay for their ignorance when the terrorist become More active in their countries. They are taking payoffs now to stay out of things and block positive actions but in a few years France will have major problems just like Israel. I sure as hell hope we do not waste one life trying to save France again.

Answer 7

Sure, we started a war. Most of the US population thinks that it was a terrible idea, but nobody in the government asked us what we thought before declaring war.

However, the US currently averages 18 billion dollars in foreign aid per year. It would be nice if someone noticed that, too.

Answer 8

Making war is profitable to the big nations. They are suppliers of war material to all Nations, therefore war means regular market of weapons. Secondly, their political (read economic) compulsions requires them to do war and create instability in fragile zones for reaping benefits. Further, reconstruction after war also creating business possibilities to them.

Answer 9

Because throwing money doesn't always fix a problem. In addition, when you try to help out, you're viewed as intruding. I think you're statement though is misleading. I don't think that big nations PREFER to go to war. I think that sometimes there just isn't another feasible option.

Answer 10

Because war = money. That is how nations got big in the first place.