If a war lasts one year and it results...?

Question

...in the x amount of lives lost, Is it more tragic than a war that last a decade, and results in x amount of lives lost?
When you answer take in to account both the heightened intensity that a short war requires, and the prolonged agony that comes with a prolonged war. (I try to ask these questions as neutrally as I can think to ask them. I hope the question does not offend, but this forum is disigned for such questions.)

I agree with you, so what is you opinion, or would you rather not say.

Thank you Steve S.

I realize that the dead are not the only casualties. Can anyone give me a strait answer? Don't be afraid to have an opinion.

Out standing answers True Dec and Monita C. Thanks.

David C. the suffering caused by a war has no relationship to the cause of that war. Suffering prior to the war may have contributed to the decision whether or not to go to war.
This question is hypothetical and your answer should be the same no matter what war you apply it to, otherwise you are guilty of being in consistent. Are you going to let your political motivations corrupt your intellectual integrity?

Answer 1

That is a very Zen question.
Indeed is either more tragic than a 15 year period of peace where x amount of lives are lost and, to make it relative, the price of peace was global third world conditions?

after thinking it over, i am supposing that what makes any of these scenarios a tragedy is not the events or the cost in lives and blood, but the human condition that might be in them, despair, misery, destitution of hope and sanity those things are the tragedies, and the extent of any tragedy is as large as the extent of -lessness in the humans experiencing it.

Answer 2

If one wanted to measure the costs of a war, I would think that lost lives would be only the crudest of ways to do so. There are, after all, many atrocious circumstances which can befall people even though they retain their livelihoods.

To list a few:
- monetary costs
- lasting injuries
- physical pain and emotional suffering
- changes in way-of-life

A long war may have few casualties simply because everyone is maimed instead. This is hardly a fantastic outcome. Even a short war where nobody dies could drain a nation's treasury, displace thousands of people, and sow seeds of distrust and hatred that could blossom into a dozen other conflicts.

I think a person who was comparing wars would be a bit remiss to overlook such varied factors as these. But that's me.

Peace.

Answer 3

It depends for what cause?

The middle-east has been going at it now for some 60 years, man has been going at it to find solutions to what he's here for since time immemorial, the reasons for his inhumanity to man, etc., so the cost of lives never really amounts to anything other than by those looking back on a major event.

If you stop a man like Hitler, the amount of lives to attain the victory doesn't come into the equation - it must be accomplished otherwise to be a slave to his & those like him regimes.

The idea of war short or long is to put a government out of control of its populaces and thus bring about a more amenable relationship. But really these ideas of war and taking control of anothers country is one of the real diseases man has and is totally made of insanity. For why can't governments actually communicate peacefully to resolve global matters?

Answer 4

To me and I have seen war up close and personal, it doesn't matter how long or how short a war is, its tragic, horrific, innocent and good people die and it changes you forever. The intensity you mentioned also happens in a prolonged war and one thing that is always with you is the stress, the terror and the tension, be it for a day, a year or 3 years.

Good question BTW!

Answer 5

So, you're asking out of two wars, on that lasts only a year, and one that lasts a decade, which one is more tragic, if they both kill the same amount of people, right?

Well, I would say the one that lasts a decade is more tragic, because even though it causes the same amount of deaths, it causes more worry. More time for people to worry about loved ones at war.

Answer 6

Short war is less tragic than a long one with the same "costs"

I assume there was a reason for the war. One worth dying for by at least two participants.

So a short war means that the life-and-death reason for the war is resolved sooner (for the same cost, in your scenario). Restated - a shorter war means a longer peace.

Answer 7

The dead are not the only casualties as any Vet can explain