English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Basically, what I mean is, what do you think about it? Do you think it's stupid? Do you think it's a smart thing to do? Thanks for your answers and/or opinions :) .

2006-10-29 15:01:42 · 29 answers · asked by Addie M. 1 in Politics & Government Military

29 answers

Warfare is a great matter to a nation;

it is the ground of death and of life;

it is the way of survival and of destruction, and must be carefully examined.

The Art of War by Sun Tzu.

That above-mentioned quote says it all.

2006-10-29 15:05:37 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1 3

I have two answers for that:
One: I believe that war is necessary 'only' when you really have a desire to defend what you really believe in. In this case, I believe war was necessary for the US. Our freedom isn't going to be threatened by terrorists, and I know it comes with a price.

On the other hand, I do believe that war is the most brutal thing that has ever existed; it'll still exist as long as man is still in charge.

I think the tricky part is knowing when enough is enough.

And two:
{My own feelings about war are that I do not wish to take in any part of it; in which would be destructive; which would include going into the militia. It may be a little over the top, a little too idealistic and possibly be shunned, but it's the way I feel. I support our country and our troops; I pray for them every day.}

2006-10-30 03:32:55 · answer #2 · answered by littlemsbrunette185 1 · 0 1

War is a part of life. It is at times just a fight between people that disagree and all other attempts to solve a problem have ended. It is like you and someone at work disagreeing and if you both feel strongly about something, you are going to press your opinion until someone steps into settle it for the two individuals or you fight for supremacy. Humans have always had this problem because someone wanted something and would do anything to get it. If someone else has it, some one will try and take it from them. Power, money, and fame are dangerous things in our lives and what we demand to be comfortable in life. IN different cultures, it is acceptable to kill for what they want and some cultures its not acceptable, then after time they will clash over these issues and the biggest kid on the block usually wins. Only when we decide to listen to someone and their views and accept them over time, but someone will never accept them , so war happens to get their point across

Here is a link I found that shows how easy it is to start a war!

http://www.ark1.net/hanimlarikizdirmayin.htm

2006-10-29 23:17:55 · answer #3 · answered by kevin T 3 · 0 1

War is a waste I've been to the cemetery's in France for WW1 and WW2 soldiers there are crosses as far as the eye can see just miles and miles of crosses and there are so many graves that don't have any name at all just 'known only unto god' the
soldiers buried there are 17-22 year old kids too many of them died in horrific ways we can't imagine. War cemetery's are a legacy of war and it's aftermath they are a reminder to us all that someone paid the price for a free world and it wasn't cheap.

What gets me very angry are young punks who piss on war memorials and even on soldiers graves like this drunk guy and
his friends did this summer (the unknown soldier is resting
there so it is pissing on a war grave)

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/ottawa/story/2006/07/03/ott-warmemorialpee.html

That's how you show the soldier up in heaven your respect
for his sacrifices?! *sigh* someday you kids out there could be in that grave or your name on a memorial if you had to go fight in WW3. I'm sure not one of you would appreciate somebody doing to you what this guy did :(

2006-10-30 01:23:01 · answer #4 · answered by markm 4 · 0 1

As an officer in the military I have to be careful of what I say because expressing contempt for officials is criminally prosecutable; however, I can say that I think the Powell Doctrine of overwhelming force would have been a preferable way to operate despite the higher dollar cost.

2006-10-29 23:11:40 · answer #5 · answered by Big Blair 4 · 1 1

The great majority of us claim (with some real sincerity too) that we disdain war and violence. Our real opposition to war ought to be in studying the causes of war and working sedulously against these causes coming to the fore. Aside from that, we can refrain from preparing for war or finding reasons to justify it. Wars are incredibly ugly; their reality is really too ghastly to comprehend. So, people who support war are generally people without a lot of knowledge of what war is really like.

I oppose war philosophically, but I have to admit that, given my personality and psychology, I would probably have volunteered to fight in World War Two. I might feel like it was a kind of test of character... that I was supposed to demonstrate courage along with millions of others and risk a horrible death, and that after this the world would be sort-of rescued from indecency and horror because of our courage and unselfishness. I don't know.

I should point out here also that I was neutral on the matter of war with Iraq in 2003 when the war actually started. I, like so many other people, was not sure that Saddam Hussein possessed prohibited WMD, but I was quite sure he had been pussy-footing around with the UNSCOM team for many years; and this, of course, led many to suspect the worst. I don't like war, but I did not actually have a better plan to make the world safe from dastards like Saddam Hussein. Thus my neutrality. However, I should point out that after the war started I was no longer neutral: I wanted the Americans to win very quickly and decisively. Several months ago I became convinced that the Iraq war was unwinnable for the U.S. because the insurgents surely by 2006 realized that they don't really have to beat the Americans, but just make them give up and leave. So, the agenda of the insurgents now is to start a civil war. It is definitely a civil war now. The U.S. military, I believe, should have left Iraq in February or March of this year. Now it seems very much that the current president is trying to (coincidentally??) rescue his place in history by continuing a fight that cannot possibly be won. What is likely to happen now is that American support for the war will continue to erode and in 2008 the war will be the major campaign issue. With no end to the war in sight, Americans will support the Democratic candidate, who will have a plan to withdraw from Iraq very soon. That Democrat will be elected, most probably. The American military comes back, and Iraq suffers a terrible, internecine civil war which results in the dismemberment of Iraq into three different countries. What will the insurgents have won? Well, all they were ever really fighting for was a place in the terrestrial world as a man, or finding agreeable manhood by courageous, manly death in battle (and after two humiliating defeats at the hands of the Americans - in January and February of 1991 and in March and April 2003 - they had neither of these).

Now it is especially important that we all try to learn about spirituality because in the current age of international terrorism and proliferating weapons of mass destruction the world is in quite a lot of trouble. About 45 years ago John Kennedy said, "Mankind must put an end to war or war will put an end to mankind." Sadly, in the current political atmosphere, there is no mention of "putting an end to war." And thus we march headlong into a catastrophic future.

2006-10-30 00:09:01 · answer #6 · answered by voltaire 3 · 0 1

War is always a thing filled with sin, and the bible says its wrong, but war must happen to improve the world at times and stop people.

2006-10-30 02:35:32 · answer #7 · answered by gook_mother 2 · 0 1

This may sound some what ( ah man I can't this) Machiavellian, but I believe that the war in Iraq was inevitable. Now I know that it looks like the US was some what aggressive in going into Iraq, but I think it was better not to hesitate. Also, Bush had to know that people were going to hate him for what he did in Iraq, but he followed what he knew must truly be done.

2006-10-29 23:15:03 · answer #8 · answered by Joey W 1 · 0 1

It would be a great joy to be able to say, "Ban all war!" But: War is, unfortunately, a necessary evil in a world where force is necessary for the defense of life, liberty, and morality.

It should be avoided if at all possible,
. . .entered with moral, definite, and specific objectives in mind,
. . . . . .waged with as much humanity as possible (yes, I know, not an easy task),
. . . . . . . . and ended as soon as possible.

2006-10-29 23:22:51 · answer #9 · answered by blktiger@pacbell.net 6 · 1 1

In all instances of war politicians look at all decisions on a cost benefit analysis. War is not pretty, it is merely a means to an end.

2006-10-29 23:04:32 · answer #10 · answered by 3rd parties for REAL CHANGE 5 · 1 2

fedest.com, questions and answers