When has violence not solved something?

Question

I mean, i know people die or get hurt, but in the end, the world is one dumbass short and we experience some population reduction. Isn't that good?

I like alot of the answers you all posted and i have to say the dude with the Ghengiz Khan idea is a good idea. But to all in collective, i know there are alot of deaths and alot of the kids grow up as orphans, but is that not the state right now. If Lebenon and Israel had been allowed to continue and fight, Israel would rocked Lebenon and alot of Lebanese people would have dead and all, but in the end, if the had failed to get rid of Hezbollah (which the case is right now), Israel would have crumbeled, from Palestinian pressure, Irani pressure, Syria, Arab Nations and everyone around that hates them... hey proly even the Nazis in hiding... what i am trying to say is, that war breaks out and we should let it play out, because that sets an example to the rest... after the war, the world unites, to help the ones in need... i basically saying what Randkl and Justin just said... with a twist to it...

But thanks for your answers...

Answer 1

It fails every time the idiots in the world step in and stop it from reaching its natural conclusion. In those cases, the lack of violence is the problem.

Look at the middle east for an example. Every few years, there's a war and thousands of people die. The idiots step in and stop it. The dead died for nothing. Five years later they start another war with the same results. Over and over.

Let nature take its course ONCE and there would be peace in the middle east and the rest of the world.

This world needs another Genghis Khan and it needs it quickly!

Answer 2

The better question is. When has violence ever solved anything?

I can not think of a time.

And you said that in the end (if someone die's from violence) we are just one dumbass short.

It's not that simple.

You have to think about the others involved. What about the child of the person who was killed? They grew up with out a dad and now their lives are altererd forever. Perhaps in a negative way if they were made to grow up in a poor, single family home, where their mother was so upset about the death of her husband that she couldn't properly take care of her child.
That child grow's up to be an angry adult. They feel no one ever loved them, noone ever gave them a break in life, so why should they give a **** about anyone else? They are gonna do what they need to survive.
One day they need some money, so they pick a house and decide to rob it. (Let's say it is your families home)
Then the person who they robbed (your family) no longer feels safe in their own home. Your wife and you began to fight all the time because she wants to move to another neighborhood. But you can't afford it. Eventually the fighting gets so bad it leaks into other areas of your relationship, and the next thing you know you two are fighting about everything. You end up getting a divorce. And your kids have to grow up in a split family.
Your daughter is destrought over your divorce and starts acting out at school. You try to get her help, but she feels you don't really love her or you would be living with her and her mother still. Things gradually get worse over the years and she gets into drug use and becomes permescuous. She ends up getting pregnant by a guy who doesn't love her. That man walks out on her and she feels her life is over, so she commits suicide.

I could go on like this forever. You know why? Because the actions of ONE person effect the lives of MILLIONS!

Answer 3

But why do we need a reduction in population, like we have to live a few years and then we go away, what difference does it make ? Even today, with the over population, god/nature has given enough food to feed all, and there is an excess, only a few selfish (multi-millionaires), accumulate wealth and some accumulate food, so that some people eat their full and throw the remaining, while others do not even get leftovers to satisfy their hunger. We have to violently kill the selfishness of the people, this violence will solve something.

Answer 4

No thats not good! Tell that to the people who lost their son's and daughters in the conflict! Violence obviously doesn't work, it has only accelerated the problem, thats plain to see. There was a lot to be learnt from the holocaust during world war 2. That did no good because ethnic cleansing still happens! Violence is never EVER a good option and only leads to misery disress and loss. And as for population reduction do you still feel the same when you see pictures of dead children in the paper caused by war??

Answer 5

I would say violence is a tool to make people happy.

When two groups oppose, they do it to establish their way or outright get their way. That doesn't mean a problem has been solved necessarily, but violence can SEEM to solve some problems when the person committing it 'wins'. Is that really a solution to a problem?

Your example is a good one, and I'd agree, but I think that example is hardly the universal cause of violence. In fact, I think that situation is quite rare - rather its usually (but not always) the dumbass that lives.

Answer 6

I can give you a personal example: My father was very violent towards me and then I grew up & got married-to a violent man. So that taught me that violence is the only way to get your point accross. Well, I got my children taken away from me because I was blamed for my sons broken arm (I didn't do it, but the school knew I was a violent person).

Answer 7

Hey Im all for violence but I think the goal I have would be gone for sure so it is like putting myself in check not allowed

Answer 8

Disney movies

Answer 9

Violence does not solve, it dissolves! Dissolves lives, dissolves good order and peace!

Answer 10

It certainly hasn't curtailed shallowness of thought . is that good ?