It's true that war is a horrible thing, and no one knows that more than the soldiers that take part in it. However, there are times when war is a necessary fact and killing on the battle field can not be avoided. Are there people who think that war should be averted at all costs? Even at the cost of innocence, freedom, and life? Should one not kill a person who is murdering hundreds of others?
"War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself." John Stuart Mill, English economist & philosopher (1806 - 1873)
P.S. This is not a question that has ANYTHING to do with Iraq, but a question regarding the concept of war.
2007-09-27 12:22:06 · 10 answers · asked by ? 6 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
I really don't want to wait until the enemy is "at the gate" to have to decide. War is like alot of things in life concerning human nature- keep your friends close, but keep your enemies closer. Not every one is a friend, so war is always going to be inevitable.
2007-09-27 12:38:50 · answer #1 · answered by Wired 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think the best example of what you're talking about is Chamberlain's apeasment of Hitler to prevent the second world war.
There are some things that are worth fighting for. However the only reason there are things worth fighting for is because there are agressor nations who start trouble and need to be stopped because their leaders whipped the people's patriotism up to a fever-pitch.
I think war (and even borders) would become largely unnecessary if ordinary people the world over discovered they have more in common with each other than their own leaders.
John Stuart Mill is right, however that people should have something they care about more than their own safetly. But whatever that thing is, it doesn't necessarily have to be a nation state.
2007-09-27 19:49:11 · answer #2 · answered by K 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Nope. Sometimes war is the lesser evil. It was a good thing we got into WWII. A Europe divided between Hitler and Stalin would have been a bad, bad thing. Stopping Hitler from just randomly invading countries was a good thing. Striking back against Japan was the only reasonable thing we could have done...clearly they would have just continued killing us otherwise. I supported the invasion of Afghanistan (but not the invasion of Iraq). Sometimes war is the only way to defend yourself. It should always be a last resort, but it is an option,
2007-09-27 19:29:21 · answer #3 · answered by Nightwind 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Interesting theory, but what the hell does this have to do with religion and/or spirituality? Being a true patriot has nothing to do with God.
2007-09-27 19:28:50 · answer #4 · answered by Red 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
War is completely horrible and we should try to avoid it at all costs. War is NEVER right or humane.
If you pay attention to the people who are the biggest warhawks (pro-war), they're usually the same people who never volunteer and whose family never serve in the military.
2007-09-27 19:26:49 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
Well, I'm from Switzerland and it manages JUST FINE without war - so the whole world can.
War is never necessary.
2007-09-27 19:27:14 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
there always are people who will bi anti-war no matter what.
I am not saying they are right, and i am not saying there are wrong.
Just that they will always be there.
2007-09-27 19:26:05 · answer #7 · answered by Steve 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There is a time for everything.
2007-09-27 19:25:19 · answer #8 · answered by Pearly Gator 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
war is hell , but war is needed .
2007-09-27 19:26:13 · answer #9 · answered by Suicide642 5 · 1⤊ 3⤋
I don't.
2007-09-27 19:25:09 · answer #10 · answered by harshmistressmoon 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋