A general question about war ......?

Question

If you had to choose just one - who is the MOST culpable in war: The politicians who conceive it, the soldiers who allows themselves to be used as its instrument, or the people who put the politicians in power (or don't protest strongly enough)? Of course - this assumes a democracy with a volunteer army.

Patricia - don't lose the plot dear - its a philosophical question on the nature of mankind - not a personal gibe at you or your loved ones

Answer 1

Well, the people who put the politicians in power may not know what their future plans of action are.

The politicians use the soldiers for their own means.

The soldiers allow themselves to be used (and they do the killing).

In the end, I think the politicians are the most culpable (although they all have a role to play. I think so because they are the ones who start wars.... they could use diplomacy instead.

Answer 2

If this IS a general question about war, it is based on the breathtakingly absurd notion that violence itself is wrong, instead being a natural mechanism by which animals compete in a Darwinian ecosystem.

Even if we grant that violence/ war itself is wrong, you ask which part of a warring society is to blame instead of asking which of the warring groups are to blame.

Got it? Two guys are fighting and you ask: "Do we blame the Eyes, the Brain or the Fists?", INSTEAD of asking which guy is being unreasonable.

Soldiers & Politicians ARE people so a society's people are ALWAYS culpable for a society's behavior.

Now my problem here is that I don't think this is a 'general' question, because the question's form is so typical of the Left wing Liberal 'Blame America First' mindset.

I think you are asking if the villains in the Iraq war are American Politicians, American Soldiers OR the American People.

I think you are asking, WHY America is wrong, instead of IF America is wrong.

I personally see the Iraq war is an American effort to make sure a sizeable chunk of the world energy supply is controlled by a stable/democratic Iraq instead of a loose collection of totalitarian, mosque bombing, reporter decapitating, wife beating, anti-American religious fanatics.

It's understandable if you disagree, AND it's certainly important to question if a war's objective is worthwhile, BUT…

Stop pretending Bush sends soldiers overseas to fill their baby killing quotas.

Now truthfully I haven't been overly impressed with the leadership on the Right, but Jeez, there are some BAD people out there, and a relentless state of denial is just ridiculous.

OYFE

Answer 3

Well I think the politicians who concieve the war are the most culpable. They know better and they always have a chose between the peaceful way and the war. But they always choose war because they know at the end, they are not the ones going to battle ground. It is also an ego trip for them, to start war and let thousands of men and women battle it out for you.

unfortunately for the soilders, it's is a job for them. They have no choice but to do it. They soilders job to protect the interest of the country or the interest of the commanding officer.

As for the voters, I think they have been toothless for a very long time and sometimes they lack the information to make a wise choice.

Answer 4

Is it a one sided democracy with a volunteer army or are both sides in the conflict in a democracy with a volunteer army?

If both countries run a democracy with a volunteer army I would suggest that any differences would be sorted out through diplomatic channels.

If only 1 country involved in the conflict is, then did the other country declare war? In this case surely it is the right of for the country to defend itself and its people's freedom for democracy. The culpable party would then be the aggressor, not the politicians, people or the army of the democratic country defending their freedom.

One other point. Religion. Surely the most culpable for conflict.

Answer 5

It's not the soldiers, there's not to reason why. And the people are not to blame. Democracy differ, but if you take the UK's first past the post. And the US electoral college. Means often that more people didn't vote for the Government that did. As for protest. Yes it could have been possible to stop, but it needs organizing properly, to hit the economy, mass walk outs etc. But with the lies the politicians peddled and still do. The people couldn't be held responsible. So that leaves the politicians.

Answer 6

Good question. I'd say that war is an inevitable consequence of the collective shortcomings of human nature at all levels. I've heard that no two democracies have been engaged in war, so that in my opinion makes the third group least culpable. I think there are various reasons why we can at least partially excuse the soldiers, so I'd have to say the politicians. Their motives are often cynical and driven by greed and lust for power.

Answer 7

Thoughtful question, Sad to say that all humans have bad in them. Politicians abuse power with greed and act as hypocrites just like all of us. They say they will stop war, but trick most of us and the genreal population will not care about the one who sees the truth. The soldiers are taught to serve their "country". An under devoloped country's citizens are bribed and threatend to vote. It is all because one who is the right yet does not speak will be left out. Thus war is caused by many. One person does not determine it. Everybody has a hand in this, religion has a hand. Ironic is it not? Thousands die each day yet you find dead body on the street and it is a big deal.The biggest reason for all this is power, fear and ignorance. Humans do not have the heart to use power correctly. It is impossible to choose just one cause. The trick is not to add gasoline to the fire, not fight fire with fire. So that's it, War is the result of human nature and crimes commited by us.

Answer 8

Whilst I wish that there was no war, and some kind of global utopia was possible, I accept that sometimes we need to go to war.
Had I been alive I would have supported the war against the possibility of being invaded and ruled by Hitler.
Where as I marched against going to war with Iraq, millions of us did and it made no difference, in this I blame both Tony Blair (who still hasn't come up with a good reason for doing it) and the millions who did not bother to protest.
I suspect that we, the human race, has not evolved enough, yet, to live in cultural harmony and therefore we are all culpable.

Answer 9

the soldiers - if there were no soldiers to fight - it would not matter what the politicians or those who put them in power did - there would simply be no one to do the fighting. The politicians could plan wars till the cows come home but without an army to command............ so no soldiers - no wars

Answer 10

Politicians because they think they can control other people. The people will always be there, but its the politicians who try to lead them. They take out their insecurities on the rest of the people. War comes naturally to the politician.