Warfare: good or bad?

Question

I'm not looking for fence-sitting answers here. I already know that there are many reasons to argue both for and against warfare. What I am asking is that you imagine you possess a magic amulet that gives you the power to end warfare everywhere, now and forever. Would you use it? What are your reasons, for or against using it? Would you hesitate before choosing or jump right in?

The background to this question is this:

Recently I asked here whether the world would be better off had gunpowder never been invented. To my surprise I received a resounding, "No!" I expected some no answers but it was actually unanimous. The reasons were varied. One suggested that without wars and the technology developed in and because of wars we might still be in the dark ages.

So how do you feel about this? Use the magic amulet or not?

Answer 1

the magical amulet lol......

Doesn't this thought experiment fail?

You want us to consider a possible world where there is no warfare and compare it to this one.

It begs the question that such a world even is possible... or suitably similar to our own to offer a this-worldy comparison that doesn't take a universe of perspective to approach justification.

The amulet does nothing. I have to consider a world without guns, missles, standing armies -- and not just state-instituted weaponry, but all human potential to rise in solidarity to destroy another faction.

You want some kind of utopia/dystopia

Of course I will pick my world, that other one doesn't even make sense to me. We'd have to literally change humanity in some way to destroy the very possibility of unrest.

Answer 2

No. When water stagnates, it becomes poisonous... Without conflict we will stagnate, and rot from within. We may have conflict, but it is necessary so we can learn. There are such neurons called Mirror Neurons that allow us to understand why something is done. If we don't experience it, we can not understand it. Which could explain why when you tell a child "Don't touch that. It will hurt you.", they sometimes do it anyway. The neurons haven't been "programed" to comprehend the action.
Besides, all this "Magic amulet" would do is create peace... Not to say that a war still wouldn't happen, and that the only survivors remaining are those like minded to me the holder of the amulet.
CyberNara

Answer 3

Any such wave of the wand that banished warfare without at the same time altering human nature would merely take away a tool used both for oppressive purposes and to end that oppression.

Without that tool there would still be oppression but perhaps no 'good" way then to end it.

And without changing man's nature as hunter-warrior, you would have a hell of a lot of frustrated people to boot. War persists as a means to an end because we get great satisfaction from it, regardless of the pain and suffering that is the price of that satisfaction.

Answer 4

The only way I can see to end war by using a magic amulet would be by destroying us all (Peace Through Annihilation) or taking away our freedom of choice (Peace Through Annihilation), consequently I would be reluctant to use it.

Based upon personal experience, war tends to make someone more human; it strenghens and weakens us in ways we never thought were possible or even realized exists. While we are in the crucible of war, the choice as to which we go is largely up to us, but the choices tend to remain at war's end. Hitler and S. Hussein were shaped by war, but Lincoln, Roosevelt and many others were also.

D.J. Lachance, Milwaukee, WI. U.S.A.

Answer 5

Generally warfare is bad...
Yet, Warfare provides an incentive to innovation (of course not all innovation is good). It can unite a country and give them a central focus against a common enemy. It used to provide a country with economic benefits from lands and resources taken during war, but this is usually mostly ancient warfare. It allows one country to dominate and control another, politically and economically. While it not generally considered to be good things, it is sometimes necessary.
Sometimes it is unavoidable, because war is a very human activity and people sometimes resist change or negotiation, and may initiate it themselves or force it to be initiated against them. Such as WWI and WWII.

Answer 6

No, wars in are needed as a natural part of human evolution. When you look at war from a long-range perspective, it becomes clear that, as destructive as wars are, their very destructiveness has served as the primary force for the evolution of the human race. By mercilessly eliminating those who were unable to survive in the theater of war, wars resulted in a constant upgrading of both the physiological and intellectual acuity of man.

Although many bright people perish in wars, the preponderance of the casualties occur among people with the limited intellectual capacity to understand the mechanics of wars and who are thus unable to avoid becoming casualties.

Who would seriously dispute the fact that smart people have higher living standards than intellectually less endowed persons do? War eliminates the intellectually less fit and thus, in the end, raises the average intelligence and the living standards of society as a whole.

Throughout the ages, evolution took advantage of the 4 horsemen of the apocalypse, war, natural disasters, disease and famine.

If we succeed in eliminating armies and war, we are also eliminating war in its capacity as a powerful contributor to evolution by keeping the world population in check. We are now at 6 billion humans, scientific projections of growth predict 10 billion within 50 years...mostly in under developed countries. Humanity will reach the limits of available resources at 9-12 billion..this is not sustainable.

We can only speculate as to which path evolution will take in reducing the world from 10 to 3 billion. A battle for resources will favor those with higher levels of intelligence and rationality. Evolution never receds to irrationality, superstition and stupidity.

Answer 7

My magic amulet would be "inner peace." Yes, I would use it. War will continue as long as the inner wars continue. There will be no peace until peace rules in the heart of mankind.

Answer 8

Warfare is always bad, but when there is no other choice it is a necessity.

Nations must be prepared for war, because other nations are prepared for war. When a situation arises that MUST be changed, and diplomacy fails, WARFARE IS NECESSARY, but it is never good.

Answer 9

Warfare is bad
There are other ways of resolving problems than through violence. If warfare could be justified, the same principles could be used to justify fighting in the streets.

Answer 10

Good, only as defense against a nation that threatens the genocide of a particular race, and or that threatens to conquer a particular nation for personal gain...