Why do people think peace is just going to happen one day?! You have to fight those who dont want people to be free, thats why the war is going on.
I said- A liberal is a man too broadminded to take his own side in a quarrel
A liberal friend of mine said, "Yes, we refuse to 'pick a side' in a conflict. We fight for peace."
you FIGHT for peace? So you have to have war to gain peace, right?
Civil War=Freedom that = Peace
2006-08-04 03:02:43 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Si vis pacem, para bellum - If you want peace , prepare for war , Vegetius
2006-08-04 03:11:50 · answer #1 · answered by Hippie Hunter 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Civil War was a conflict over money. Sure the North one but what was the state of black people afterwards. They crap payment for hard work and they are taxed heavly. The North saw the economic benefit of controlling the SOuth and also saw that the slaves outnumbered the southern plantation owners. How better to destroy the south then to use slaves against them by offering them a step up. Sure it was in the right direction but things didnt change for almost a hundred years. The north was just as racist as the south if not more so. Dont be fooled. Peace is a temporary outcome after war. Give me a time when there was everlasting peace? Never. People are still battling for civil rights in America.
2006-08-04 03:31:35 · answer #2 · answered by omsuperhoops 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I am liberal, but I disagree with whichever liberal you are quoting there, unless some context explains it better.
The context of that quote means a lot, though. If two other nations are warring, playing the role of the arbitrator between them (as opposed to joining the conflict on one side or the other) is a way of "fighting for peace," at least figuratively. Maintaining order is an unstable nation (i.e. playing the role of cop) is also a means of "fighting for peace," this time a little less figuratively.
My opinion though -- we shouldn't be in any war that isn't self-defense. Just because we're the biggest doesn't mean we have this great calling to police the planet. Anything other than self-defense (nation-building or stabalizing a region) should be a unilateral effort amongst many nations -- particularly the ones surrounding the nation in question.
2006-08-04 03:14:48 · answer #3 · answered by Michael 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Thats dumass convoluted logic. Peace is found through diplomacy and understanding. Through negotiations and bargaining. Through the development of a Win-win solution.
2006-08-04 04:13:16 · answer #4 · answered by answers999 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It just seems that by this time in our evolution as a species we would be able to resolve differences without violence (Perhaps some people in past generations have considered this).
Just stop killing and maiming one another and settle the dispute.
Makes me think we crave the violence. Some part of our 'caveman' past needs to dominate or eliminate potential challengers.
2006-08-04 03:21:35 · answer #5 · answered by LatexSolarBeef 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, there are always people who don't want peace. How can you force them to concede without power? You can't.
2006-08-04 03:08:24 · answer #6 · answered by thrty2mars 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Your statement is naieve.
War is about self defense - not peace.
2006-08-04 04:33:53 · answer #7 · answered by Alexander Shannon 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
peace always found through , otherwise it may fragile
2006-08-04 03:15:08 · answer #8 · answered by prithvi 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
LIBS SUCK
2006-08-04 03:28:01 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋