We used to fight wars to protect our culture and freedom, now do we only fight wars for our safety? Our culture and freedom appears to be expendable.
2007-02-28 20:23:16 · 20 answers · asked by Barbara Doll to you 7 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
The man who trades freedom for security does not deserve nor will he ever receive either.
Benjamin Franklin
The people prefer their safety to their passions.
Oliver Cromwell
Which is right?
2007-02-28 21:11:11 · update #1
In the war that we are in now. This war was for "freedom" but that was just a lie. Maybe to get more people to want to fight in the war. I think this war is leaning on safety because we need it now. Now that I think of it, I don't really think it would be safe for us to leave the war at all because I think then the past would just repeat its self.
The war is all about safety now. It might have been a different reason before but now its all about our safety. If the guys we're fighting against ever felt like they had another chance to attack us, I don't think they would even think twice about it. As long as they kill us their happy.
2007-02-28 20:51:19 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Wars are only fought for 1 premise - economics.
You can disguise it as a just cause, freedom, religion, whatever .
Behind it all there will be economics. One group has something of value another wants ...economics.
Us War of Independance , sure there was a whole bunch of reasons .essentially behind it all was economics( taxation without representation)
US civil war, wasnt about the slaves themselves, most Northerners didnt care one way or other about slaves and most southerners didnt own them.
it was about States rights and self determination with their economics, cotton fields were an essential cash crop to the South, profiteering from the slavery of others was unjust to the north.
Just about every war fought to this day and the many more to be fought in the future will have an econimic reason in the shadows.
Economics also play a part in the latest war. Terrorists have attacjked buildings in the US, the result has paralysed your airports , caused the US to pay Billions of tax payers dollars at home and abroad to creatr ho,meland security, and fight a war ( very badly)
The Bush family and industrial friends will make millions out of this war as will their Saudi puppets.
And all this because a dozen hijackers were savvy enough to steal 3 airoplanes and create some havoc, making the fedaeral agencies and administration look like fools and imbeciles in the process..
Economics will always be behind the real reasons we go to war!
2007-02-28 20:51:47 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
We fight wars for money. Pure and simple. People enlist for a job, they go to other countries because a few people tell them to, and they kill, and are killed in returned. If you look, it's leaders that are responsible for wars. Like, can you imagine being in a dictator state and being tortured by military? Having your life ruled by them? Imagine north Korea. The same people that control the people are the people, have came from them. Are them. 70% of casualties are non-combatants in conflicts, overall.
Why would anyone want to join an army? Proliferation only works if the children who have toys can all play nice, and if they can play nice, they don't need the toys. Essentially, we war by nature. Life is conflict.
There will only ever be an end to wars when we all become the change we want to see in the world, to misquote Ghandi.
2007-02-28 20:40:30 · answer #3 · answered by Old long ear 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Mmmmm. If we don't have safety, we don't have much chance to enjoy our culture and freedom. There are certain elements in the world right now who are trying to destroy our freedom through some misguided view of how life should be globally. Those who cherish freedom have to stand up and fight now and again.
2007-02-28 20:41:19 · answer #4 · answered by michael w 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The Civil conflict has politics and economics as its 2 considerable reasons with slavery, taxes and price lists, and Constitutional problems as underlying problems. The antislavery stream began around 1817 however the biggest team to blame for the stream the yank Colonization Society challenged slavery yet not materials rights below the guidelines or the shape. This became to alter however after the Congress grew to become in touch interior the combat to loose the slaves. as quickly as this got here appropriate to the North/South divisions grew to become extra and extra severe. there have been regularly 4 communities interior the discussions. those in the two the North and the South who wanted slavery to proceed, people who wanted all slaves to be emancipated right now, people who wanted them emancipated and removed from American soil, and ultimately people who wanted to work out a reconciliation and emancipate the slaves yet at a slower %. and incorporate them into society. yet another undertaking interior the undertaking became the reality that via Prigs v. Pennsylvania and the Dred Scott selection the suited court docket became siding with the South on too many subject concerns. subsequently the Congress stepped in and commenced passing law.
2016-10-17 00:12:09 · answer #5 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It seems to me that if one lacks safety, his culture will not be around for long. That said, I do not believe in giving up personal freedom for safety; as Franklin said, a person who does so deserves "neither liberty nor safety."
2007-02-28 20:31:48 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
I assume you are American. In the case of the US they fight wars to protect their dollar! Iraq, Iran next and possibly after that Venezuela. All these countries, did, have or will convert their oil trading to Euros and abandon the dollar.
Russia also trades some oil in Euros but has not gone the full 9 yards yet. The US will never take on Russia and the volume of their oil trade is not enough to hurt the US.
2007-02-28 21:45:01 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 3⤋
Man has been fighting wars since the very beginning and shall keep fighting till the very end.
It is beast's supremacy that makes the man grab the resources of others.
Unfortunately it is going to remain there as the man changes but his nature doesn't.
2007-02-28 21:50:37 · answer #8 · answered by Saadi 5 · 3⤊ 0⤋
If we were to surrender to Islamic extremists our culture and freedom would be completely gone. One of the differences is that WW2 had definable battlefields with th emergence of terrorism / freedom fighters.
In WW2 we have to carry ID and have censorship etc. we are at war now to save our culture and freedom, so what is the difference.
2007-02-28 23:11:38 · answer #9 · answered by Freethinking Liberal 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
U probably wont believe there are different types of warfare.
and yes a preemptive strike/war is allowed under international law(another fancy way of saying usa endorses it for its allies).now war is just one of the games nations play in the unceasing struggle for power.live with it.the international system is chaotic and war is just another output for frustration of failed internal and external policies.1of the responsibilty of a state was the protection of the lives and livelihood of its citizens now i think it is the exploitation of the citizens to futher its exxpansionist ambitions in iraq and afghanistan....Drat...i let the cat out of the bag
2007-02-28 20:33:18 · answer #10 · answered by Jessy A 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋