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

2007-02-28 15:57:55 · 17 answers · asked by someone 1 in Politics & Government Elections

17 answers

Sure, if a country is invading ours or about to invade ours definitely. I also feel like if a country is terroritorial and invading countries, like Germany in World War 2, for example, war is probably necessary or justified. Other than that, I don't think it should be. I'd like to see more diplomacy, economic means (hurt them by taking away sources of funding), and more covert means being used and war as a last resort in other situations.

2007-02-28 16:21:59 · answer #1 · answered by Karen 4 · 0 0

What is/are the circumstance(s)? What is the situation? i.e. The sec. season of "24", a nuclear bomb was detonate'd in the Mojave Desert. If a rogue nation/defacto state is involve'd, whether through proxy networks such as terrorists, or through multi-proxy platforms such as an oil company, so forth, physical retalitation is mandatory. I ain't talk'n about some sort of scandal only about bringing results for a personal war of some sort, maybe like Iraq, but yes, war is sometimes neccassary. If we hadn't remove'd Saddam, they'd have attack'd us similar to the like of what "24" had shown. The lack of contingency plans for even the most unthinkable worst-case scenarios prior the war for the war is our main reason why we didn't have our favorable-realistic results. There are other reasons too, such as Guantanamo Bay, Abu Graib, so forth. Though, some of these are scandals by the enemy. You mustn't believe everything you view & hear, since you aren't there. There is a thing call'd "K Street," you know... I ain't for war, but sometimes it's ness. For a fact, there were chemical weapons. The information was correct. If you don't believe me, check info about Iran-Iaq war during 1980's. Thus, proves Bush wasn't lying. I'm very anti-war, but sometimes, like this, it's req'd.

Sincerely,

Cristoir

2007-02-28 16:15:49 · answer #2 · answered by r1phoenix41 1 · 1 0

Yes. More has been settled with war than any political means. War as a social tool (or maybe the ability to use force) is what keeps countries safe. The ability to defend ourselves (as an individual and as a country) is a God given right. War is not a pleasant thing, it costs the lives of too many bright and promising people. It is however a reality that we must face.

2007-03-01 01:02:10 · answer #3 · answered by Charles B 4 · 1 0

There are times when war is necessary(Korea, Greek War of Independence) and then there are wars that were unnecessary(WWII would never have happened it the People at Versailles were not so harsh with Germany and had stood up to her when being ruled by Hitler)

As for Iraq, Saddam Hussein had over 10 years to yield to government inspections, whether or not he was intending to sell to terrorists, don't you think that it was enough?

The thing is that War while abhorrent has been responsible for many innovations(like chartered flights were made possible after WWII because of all of the leftover flying fortresses.) and inventions(canned food was a result of Napoleon needing a bacteria-free food supply).

2007-02-28 16:09:28 · answer #4 · answered by travis_a_duncan 4 · 1 1

as long as there are people out there who want to hurt and kill others for personal gain then there will be conflict. you can not reason with a bully, they don't understand reason, or they wouldn't be the way they are. you can not negotiate with a theif, unless you wish to lose something that belongs to you. you can not negotiate with a religious fanatic of ANY religion, because they are absolutely sure you are wrong and will not listen to you.
peace love and understanding work great when there are two sides that want to work out a rational solution, but there is no way to make them work when you are the only one who wants them to.
do you honestly think that people could have negotiated with Hitler and the Nazis? they would have laughed in their faces. they had a goal, and that was to create the ' perfect' race. they would then proceed to kill off anyone who didn't agree with their idea of perfection. we have a new group like that out there now. they have the perfect religion, and if you don't follow it, they think you should be killed. has anyone else noticed that almost every area of major conflict in the world is caused by a radical muslim country that can't get along with it's neighbors? most of the muslims I have met are very nice people, and the freinds that I have among them are great, so it isn't the religion, it is how it is handled.
but back to the question. yes, war is a neccessary evil, as long as there are people out there who will not let there be peace.

2007-02-28 16:28:14 · answer #5 · answered by chris r 2 · 0 0

Not really. I guess it would depend on the situation. The current "war" we're involved in is not and was never a necessary war. Our involvement in Vietnam and Korea was not necessary. The only wars I can think of that were necessary were WWII, the Civil War, and the American Revolution.

2007-03-04 03:33:55 · answer #6 · answered by JoJo 4 · 0 0

You'll find that many answers to this question will involve the logical fallacy that is known as circular reasoning. Namely, that war is necessary because someone might attack us.

If war was universally unnecessary, we wouldn't be attacked to begin with.

Sadly, until literally every person on the planet simultaneously agrees that war is not necessary, war will be necessary.

If you follow me.

2007-02-28 19:47:58 · answer #7 · answered by mykll42 2 · 0 0

We can have it now or in the near future. When these "mutts" in Iran, Korea, al quida get ahold of the nukes. Does anyone believe they won't eventually use them? You cannot trust these crazies. If they get ahold of them it is just a matter of time before the world will end as we know it. Are you feeling lucky?

2007-03-01 02:07:28 · answer #8 · answered by DB 1 · 0 0

Its not necessary but its a part of life. Kinda like you fighting with someone you go to school with, it just kinda happens, but its on a much larger scale, with weapons and lots of money. Peace talks can happen too without the war but what if the two parties dont agree, what do you do, just part ways??

2007-02-28 16:05:48 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2 1

hell no war is not the answer, we should just sit down and talk to other countries before asking for war. It's best to talk to your enemies first before striking them first we made this mistake in the Iraq War.

2007-02-28 16:02:39 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1 2

fedest.com, questions and answers