Quote from MicVeir4

Also if no one ever had wars imagine the kind of crisis we'd be in. The overpopulation would be at ridiculous levels if wars had never been fought. The human race repopulates much too quickly. Therefore war is a necessity.

We went from 1 billion people in the early 1800's to over 7 billion today. Population growth occurred because of industrial, medical and agricultural advancements. It has nothing to do with war keeping the population in check before that time.

Quote from CaptinLongstock

You honestly expect the rest of the world to say, Come on guys, lets talk about this, theres no need for blood shed... I take it you really know nothing of how the Taliban works...

Once again you've missed my point. The statements I'm making are not saying why the Taliban or terrorist forces exist. They're explaining why they're attacking the US. I already told you that defending helpless people from hostiles is a necessity because human life is a charitable thing. That's why I believe if we're supplying our troops anywhere in the world, it should be in Syria. Not strategically around Iran where co-operation between our civilians already seem to exist.

I suppose a few guys on here act as though they don't value human life at all and the deaths of others don't bother them. But let's see if they say that if they're ever in the situation where they watch an entire village of innocent gun-less civilians be mowed down simply because some big shot in the world wants to make a point.

You also don't seem to know the difference between war and defending innocent people because war can be talked out of. Ever heard of the Cold War? That along with hundreds of others have been avoided from becoming a massacre because diplomatic solutions were sought and found. When I say War, I mean two different cultures/powers/nations/organizations/etc. that despise each other to the point where they feel killing human beings on the other team will stop them and make them succumb to the ways of the other. NOT a nation interfering with another nation's plans to dominate an obviously weaker nation. They may have the official title of "war", but there's a fine line between these two scenarios. This whole thing between Israel and Iran seems stupid as hell. All the conflicts between the countries in Africa seem stupid as hell. How the nations in the UN can't even see eye to eye because there's conflict between them seems stupid as hell. Everyone sees war sort of like a strategy map where you see forces move and simply pass over another force that just disappears. Those forces don't just scatter and disperse. They're killed. Mutilated. Destroyed. Along with some of the winning force. The people who died had families, friends, futures. Imagine someone in your family passing away. Okay, that happens. Imagine 5 of your family members dying due to war all within the same week. Imagine that along with 14 of your friends also dying within the same week. Suddenly war isn't so fun.

Not necessarily disagreeing with you, Sacred, but appealing to emotion like that doesn't really strengthen your argument at all. Obviously having our loved ones killed in war would give us a negative view of it, but the debate seems centered on the objective purpose of its existence. Not about how we'd personally feel about it if we had front row seats to a village of innocent people being massacred.

You also speak as if leaders in negotiations don't attempt to avoid war if possible. It's unbelievably costly and irreparably damages your country in countless ways. There's a reason it's a last resort, I'm sure most people share your distaste for violence and bloodshed. It doesn't mean it's not a necessary option at times.

I can't think of one good reason for the US to intervene with Syria. It's simply not our fight.

Quote from Sacred

As we all know, Iran and the USA are having major tensions with each other. The idea of war is on our minds at all times. It's almost like we're in a Second Cold War. Well despite how much these two countries hate each other, a news report came in and sort of brought a shock to the world. Apparently in the Gulf of Oman there were a few US sailors who were being attacked by pirates. As they were being attacked they sent out a distress signal to anyone nearby. Well it just so happened that an Iranian patrol heard that the US cargo ship was in distress and actually came and scared off the pirates, later detaining them. Afterwards they thanked each other kindly and went on their way.

This got me thinking. Despite all the hate and contempt we all throw at each other with threats of war and violence, we still co-operate with each other on a personal level and only the economic level of situations destroy our understanding of others and their positions. So the question is, is war really necessary? Or is there a better way to approach these sorts of situations?

Take this for example. We all rave (here in the US) about how much we want the troops out of the Middle East. Yet right now Syria is having a civil war against a tyrant, and the world believes that we should help those civilians that are fighting against an oppressive controller. The governments of the world have taken itty bitty steps with peace plans and sanctions and agreements and it has done nothing to halt the civil war by even a bit. So is arming and strengthening the war a better way to end it?

I myself honestly don't have a stance at the moment, which is why I created this thread. I'm interested on seeing your takes on it.

no, it isn't, but it is an inevitable part of the human mind in which rich and powerful spoiled brats dont get what they want and start killing each other. what i will say however, is that for better or worse, war always leads to advances in science, medicine, and engineering. penicillin, jets, Rockets, and nukes were invented during WWII.the first space rocket was actually a comverted ICBM...

Quote from The Mockingjay

what i will say however, is that for better or worse, war always leads to advances in science, medicine, and engineering. penicillin, jets, Rockets, and nukes were invented during WWII.the first space rocket was actually a comverted ICBM...

Now that is a point that made me stutter. This is very true. War usually forces an advancement in technology. There's nothing to really counter that unless you're a nature freak.

Quote from Exilement

Not necessarily disagreeing with you, Sacred, but appealing to emotion like that doesn't really strengthen your argument at all. Obviously having our loved ones killed in war would give us a negative view of it, but the debate seems centered on the objective purpose of its existence. Not about how we'd personally feel about it if we had front row seats to a village of innocent people being massacred.

When I said that I was trying to appeal to the statements people made in this thread about how human life doesn't have much value thus war isn't as terrible to them as most everyone else.

You also speak as if leaders in negotiations don't attempt to avoid war if possible. It's unbelievably costly and irreparably damages your country in countless ways. There's a reason it's a last resort, I'm sure most people share your distaste for violence and bloodshed. It doesn't mean it's not a necessary option at times.

True that leaders attempt to avoid war in order to dodge costs. But that doesn't mean they try to avoid things that will potentially provoke war because they think they'll find a way out of it. But don't worry, I'm not all anti-government and think that politics are evil and greedy. I just think that when there is conflict, war is put on the table to soon.

I can't think of one good reason for the US to intervene with Syria. It's simply not our fight.

For years now the US has always intervened when a dictator was killing his people. Just think about Saddam Hussein. My point about Syria is basically that if we're going to place our troops anywhere in the Middle East, place them where they can defend the innocent who are being massacred like we've always claimed we do.

Quote from Sacred

Now that is a point that made me stutter. This is very true. War usually forces an advancement in technology. There's nothing to really counter that unless you're a nature freak.

and How can I forget Captain America? an awesome WWII invention. but here is my thoughts on
it:
1.)The Nazis cant defeat the US so they Start HYDRA
2.)We cant defeat HYDRA so we start Captain America
3.)Captain America and HYDRA each try to get the upper hand throught technology....cap with his shield, HYDRA with their weapons...

Quote from Sacred

Now that is a point that made me stutter. This is very true. War usually forces an advancement in technology. There's nothing to really counter that unless you're a nature freak

It didn't really have any relevance to the necessity of war, though.

Quote from Sacred

When I said that I was trying to appeal to the statements people made in this thread about how human life doesn't have much value thus war isn't as terrible to them as most everyone else.

The people who spout that bullshit do so because of the atrocities humanity is so fond of committing. Putting them in a hypothetical scenario where their lives are personally and directly ruined as a result of it will just add to their jaded cynicism.

I really think they believe their lives are meaningless and invaluable, so they rationalize that depressing outlook by viewing humanity as a whole in the same way. I get what you're trying to do, but your argument is falling on deaf ears.

For years now the US has always intervened when a dictator was killing his people. Just think about Saddam Hussein. My point about Syria is basically that if we're going to place our troops anywhere in the Middle East, place them where they can defend the innocent who are being massacred like we've always claimed we do.

A depressing thought: there's no profit to be made in aiding the Syrian uprising. American intervention is typically a result of serving our own interests, it's not as altruistic as it appears at face value. There are so many unspeakably horrible things that have happened in the world which we've done nothing to stop. We have the means to stop world hunger, why haven't we done it yet? Because there's no money to be made by doing so.

God that reasoning makes me want to kill myself.

Okay so all this arguing over war is understandable and i understand many of the points of views each of you have made... However the fact of the matter is war is just like anything else in history, no matter how hard you try to make a perfect "Utopia" it will always be their. I personally don't think war is necessary does that mean that it won't happen of course not. My favorite quote is this, "As long as there is man, there will be war." -Julius Ceaser He said this back when humans where still gashing at each other with swords and using the most brutal of ways to accomplish their goals. War, needless to say, has evolved much since then. I think that it is just as, or even more so brutal as it was back then, but throughout history there has never been any single point where no one in the world was at war. Asking a question such as "is war necessary?" is very logical. But you must look at the full spectrum of things. Constants in this world are; war, poverty, death, taxes, and many more, its sad but its true. People die everyday and that's not likely to change just by talking about it. If anybody ever finds a way to successfully develop "peace" I will eat every word I have just said about this subject. But war has its benefits as well, and the biggest one I think, although a little fucked up, is that it keeps the world population low. I understand if you do not like this comment but its merely just that a commented opinion.

nope ya cant have peace without war and so on and so forth. Religion/beliefs start A LOT of wars. and the war in iran is a war against terrorism.

The war with Al-queda is a war against terrorism. The war with Iran is because we're allies with Israel.

Lets see Hitler dead Bin laden dead whos next

whoever crosses the USA.

Quote from Feldhacker

nope ya cant have peace without war and so on and so forth.

Actually you can, peace can *only* exist if there are no wars occurring.