With all of our advancements in medicine, health and welfare, and social issues why does the US do war?

Question

If you think about how the human race has advanced in 1,000 - 2,000 years, why is it that our weapons have advanced, but we (our govt) can not find a way to settle differences between countries without blood shed? Do they really do everything they can to negotiate a peaceful settlement or try economic sanctions? I would like to hear other peoples views on the war.

I am a military wife (ret) with 4 sons in the military. The military has been a big part of my life for 30 years. This is more philosophical then political. The older I get, the more senseless the bloodshed, destruction and loss becomes. I can not see the gain. I have always been a Bush supporter, yes I voted for him twice, but I have to tell you, I am not impressed with his handling of the middle east and the situation in New Orleans. My two biggest gripes right now.

If we took away that which is a natural instinct in men to blow things up, would we alter men forever? Thanks for all of your opinions

That was a joke about men wanting to blow things up

Each of you have given me very different opinions and I apprciate your honesty and openess very much. You have given me alot to think about..Thank you

This war is so different from anything we have had to deal with in the past.

Answer 1

It doesnt matter how much we advance technologically, war and bloodshed will always exist. I think to understand it you have to believe in good and evil.

Answer 2

War in the United States, in my opinion, is primarily necessary to give us an excuse to go blow up the expensive bombs we make, so that we'll have to make new ones, and weapons manufacturers will make money. Also, Halliburton and similar companies, which equip and feed soldiers and conduct reconstruction efforts, make a lot of money. This is the root of at least this war. As for the rest of the world, in my opinion what's happening in the Middle East is a remnant of the old wars, but most countries these days are very very far from fighting wars. The old system of bombing civilian targets no longer works, and really it only worked for a short time.. the Romans would salt the fields to starve the people, but other than that, most wars were fought between armies of people with swords who had to go find eachother and fight between them. The fact that the U.S. still bombs cities is outdated, and to the rest of the world, it looks more barbaric every day. We need to stop, clear and simple. Having a strong military is a good thing, but with an international court on the way, most military action will be against specific crimes or criminals ("terrorists", etc.) and should be conducted by means of well-equipped police action, with a preference for capturing rather than killing targets, using nonlethal weaponry which is already very advanced. And after capturing them, instead of just locking them away to be tortured by other nations in secret CIA prisons, we need to try them and bring them to justice.

Answer 3

Sweetheart, I'm not sure if you're aware of this, but this country is being attacked by Islamic Fascists who have no interest in negotiation and are not deterred by economic sanctions.
Militant Islam is a far greater threat to the USA than Japan or Nazi Germany were, because it is a movement not motivated by material gain.
It is an apocalyptic movement led by religious fanatics, whose ultimate goal is to destroy everything, including themselves, and move onto an imaginary afterlife.
A war of self-defense is essential to preserve the very life we hold dear.
I have more bad news for you - things are going to get a lot worse before they get better.

Answer 4

The problem is there are people out there who want to erase our advancements in medicine, health and welfare and society. Bush's theory is that we need to eradicate those who would like to destroy our country. Unfortunately, he's done a really lousy job.

BTW...I'm a man, a husband, a daddy and have never had an urge or instinct to blow anything up. Only to love my family and provide for them. Perhaps you think that because of your 30 year exposure to the military. Thank you for your service.

Answer 5

Warfare is in our nature as human beings. All civilizations have waged war against other human beings all the way back to the begining of our species. Try to imagine how far society and mankind in general would have progressed if all of the money spent on war and the rebuilding after war would have been spent on education, science and technology, and other progressive causes.

Answer 6

A military should be used only when necessary in the name of "defense".... the problem is that some people do not seem to understand the difference between "force in the name of defense" and "force used as violence".

www.bush-magic.20fr.com

Answer 7

I have said the same thing for many years. It is just unbelievable, that with all our knowledge and extensive educational accomplishments, that in the area of peace making, we would have evolved much further then are primal ancestors.

Pres. Bush was also my candidate of choice and I too, am weary of the troubles we have seen these last several years.

Thank you and your family for all their support in our military for so many years.

Answer 8

Because your nation´s economy is based on the Military-industrial complex and you need war in other countries for maintain it. And because you need oil to support your way of life and because you vote politics that spend your money in weapons instead of in public health, education and other social issues that you need urgently because great part of your population lives in the most absolute poverty.
Because you think that the new Hitler is in Iran when you have him at home.

Answer 9

I rarely stop and say this but, "Hi nice to meet you. I am ex-military myself and am glad to meet someone involved with military life yet is able to question our actions."

Let me tell you a quick story:
I was in the IRR when Iraq invaded Kuwait. I was so impassioned about it that I immediately called and scheduled my physical stating I wanted to go active just for that war. (I was in a MI field which allows a person to go active without signing back up because it is a 'hot' area)

I remember thinking to myself (no kidding), 'the world has advanced to a civilized state where the days of occupations and just invading a country so you can be the brut who takes it over, had ended.(I thought the days of the brut Roman Empire conquering nations just because you have the muscle were over)' I felt proud to fight for a civilized world and felt very proud to play a part in advancing that idea of civilization.

I feel as though all my faith and belief that I had at that time, have been destroyed.

I guess part of what I am saying is that advancements in medicine, health and welfare and social issues that you mentioned mean nothing compared to advancement in being a civilized nation. I honestly never believed this day would come for us... maybe the day when another Hitler emerged.. but I never thought for a second it would be us trying to conquer the world.

Btw, I can't answer the question you have. I too ponder what happened to diplomacy. I thought we had reached that point in our world but then a neanderthal became president... that is my only guess.

I remember things like Saddam himself going on 60 Minutes just two months before we invaded Iraq where he flat stated to Mike Wallace, "I DO NOT HAVE WMDs." Not saying he was a man to trust but that did make me think about it at the time... like why would he go that far if he was lieing and maybe we should take the UN's advice and give inspectors 6 more months like they had requested.

Then I remember something that took me two days to find in a PBS archive because I only heard it once: the Taliban offerred a deal to Bush on Sept. 18 & 19th, 2001 to hand over B.Laden to a nuetral country. They were concerned he would not get a fair trial so that is why the nuetral country. But the point is: why did Bush not accept that? Why was he so determined to occupy Afghanistan? He could have made an impression on the entire world that he had the bad guy and that we were going to remain a civilized, fair nation.

I'm kind of going on and on but it is because I understand your internal dilemma all too well. I too feel it.

I know a lot of ppl dog Clinton and I voted for Perot twice and not him; but, one thing does stick in my mind about him: a PBS interview I saw with him right after we invaded Iraq. He blatantly said that he believed Saddam was a threat to the world and that he needed to be dealt with. BUT, he went on to basically summarize the different methods and explained that sanctions were working. I mean afterall, there were no WMDs so he was right. He talked in depth about the different methods of dealing with this type of world conflict.I can't remember it verbatim but it really described a very civilized manner to go about this.

I'm saying that the ppl we have in Washington now are leading us down a dangerous path of self-destruction. And when I say self-destruction, I don't mean we will lose. I am saying we will win in the battles but we will have lost the war by losing everything our country (I thought) stood for.

Answer 10

Wars in the Middle East is for the Israeli lobby only