Poll: War good or not
- Thread starter willic767
- Start date
Recommended Videos
How do you LOVE WAR. its the worst thing that could ever happen, sure it makes some great movies and games but I would really never want to go off to war, unless of course i was engulfed in some revengus rage.
War is both good and bad, no matter what the thought against war, the best technology has come from wars, but it's sad it has to come at the cost of lives. Do I approve of war? Hell no, it's sadly ever needed now a days and it's sicking to see people die for bad reasons.
Well, War is usually a battle for territory, and has been described by some as a fight for resources. It supposedly is good for income, creating jobs and such, and can sometimes bring a Country/State/Small War Torn Village/Etc. together
But it also creates a loss of lives, can take away jobs from those who have them (Such as being drafted), and can also create massive debts and loss of funds.
War is neither good or bad, it is merely the nature of tribes. Even though we have a highly technological society we are still basically a tribe at times, protecting our lands and attacking others.
Personally I think it's merely a way to avoid a compromise, so I think it's rubbish.
But it also creates a loss of lives, can take away jobs from those who have them (Such as being drafted), and can also create massive debts and loss of funds.
War is neither good or bad, it is merely the nature of tribes. Even though we have a highly technological society we are still basically a tribe at times, protecting our lands and attacking others.
Personally I think it's merely a way to avoid a compromise, so I think it's rubbish.
War is always a awful thing in that people are going to die, period. Nobody should "like" war, killing people really shouldn't be at the top of you things to do list. But without war we would not be where we are today so I have to say its good in that a lot of good things come as the result of war.
The wars of today are an embarrassment to those who waged war in the distant past. It requires such a marginal degree of strategy and ability because of the advance and complete reliance upon technology that I cannot view modern warfare with any sense of praise. Admittedly war is a tragic, albeit necessary aspect of life or rather it was.
In ancient text we read about marvelous displays of genius, tact and wit or unimaginable skills with the blade that war in and of itself was awing inspiring. The masterful strategies of Zhuge Liang and Zhou Yu; the ruthless conquest of Cao Cao, Julius Caesar, Alexander the Great, Genghis Khan and Napoleon; The Thirteen Colonies? rebellion and additionally even the folklore tales of Troy and The Spartans; many of whom derived their own tactics from Sun Tzu, hailed to be one of the greatest military minds ever known.
Suffice to say war required advance planning, superior tactics and above all skill of arms. Certainly many soldiers were draftees, forced to engage with little experience however in these times existed men with expertise lost in the annals of time. Today war is based upon luck, with guns requiring exceptionally little knowledge to wield effectively and worse bombs that even a trained ape could use. War use to have meaning, even the conquests as merciless as some of the aforementioned may have been, all held reason for their actions; believing they could establish a battle country. Now war is simply? pointless.
Nonetheless it is not my intent to criticize the soldiers fighting in Iraq or upon any other war in the modern era. They all hold my respect for their selfless decision to protect and aid their respective countries. Furthermore I do not desire a return to the days of old; I am simply commenting that centuries ago war was akin to an art despite the bloodshed. It was cruel, it was merciless however it meant something. Today that meaning is vague if visable at all.
In ancient text we read about marvelous displays of genius, tact and wit or unimaginable skills with the blade that war in and of itself was awing inspiring. The masterful strategies of Zhuge Liang and Zhou Yu; the ruthless conquest of Cao Cao, Julius Caesar, Alexander the Great, Genghis Khan and Napoleon; The Thirteen Colonies? rebellion and additionally even the folklore tales of Troy and The Spartans; many of whom derived their own tactics from Sun Tzu, hailed to be one of the greatest military minds ever known.
Suffice to say war required advance planning, superior tactics and above all skill of arms. Certainly many soldiers were draftees, forced to engage with little experience however in these times existed men with expertise lost in the annals of time. Today war is based upon luck, with guns requiring exceptionally little knowledge to wield effectively and worse bombs that even a trained ape could use. War use to have meaning, even the conquests as merciless as some of the aforementioned may have been, all held reason for their actions; believing they could establish a battle country. Now war is simply? pointless.
Nonetheless it is not my intent to criticize the soldiers fighting in Iraq or upon any other war in the modern era. They all hold my respect for their selfless decision to protect and aid their respective countries. Furthermore I do not desire a return to the days of old; I am simply commenting that centuries ago war was akin to an art despite the bloodshed. It was cruel, it was merciless however it meant something. Today that meaning is vague if visable at all.
First things first - This thread has a terrible original post. Holy crap OP, never use the internet again.Bourne said:
Secondly, wars of the past were often over-glorified by those who profited from them. The truth is that primitive warfare usually amounted to throwing the most bodies you can at the enemy hoping to overwhelm them. Numbers won the game then, and uncontrollable variables like weather and disease played an astonishingly significant part in the outcomes of battles.
Also, most modern military equipment takes a ton of training and practice to use. Any idiot can theoretically pick up and inflict damage with a sword with no instruction, but that same idiot could not get a plane off the ground or effectively place a round on a target. You underestimate the complexity of modern advancements.
And as an end note: Sun Tzu's military "advice" is the largest list of vague "well, duh's" I've ever witnessed. Common sense 101 is what it should be called, and he gets far too much credit for stating the obvious.
War, war never changes.
No, but really though, war gets people killed, war tears families apart, war maims and slaughters, war ruins lands and homes, war is not a good thing. That having been said, when an enemy arises, it is nescecary to deal with him right away so as to prolong your existance. Living with killing is better than dying a victim.
No, but really though, war gets people killed, war tears families apart, war maims and slaughters, war ruins lands and homes, war is not a good thing. That having been said, when an enemy arises, it is nescecary to deal with him right away so as to prolong your existance. Living with killing is better than dying a victim.
War is a redhead? Maybe I should join the Marines then...thiosk said:
Wars have the power to both unite people and to split them apart. So really it's a tricky issue.
But to put it bluntly, I think wars are usually pointless.
Take the Anzac war, we (Australia) lost that war, but we still carry on a tradition of saluting those who fought, but those who fought, fought for a pointless cause, one which they didn't achieve. I know that isn't their fault, but still.
But to put it bluntly, I think wars are usually pointless.
Take the Anzac war, we (Australia) lost that war, but we still carry on a tradition of saluting those who fought, but those who fought, fought for a pointless cause, one which they didn't achieve. I know that isn't their fault, but still.
Wow. War = killing people, often LOTS of people. And you love it. You seem to have a deep grasp of the issue.willic767 said:
You know, most people view war as a sad but necessary evil in a world of imperfect people and selfish nations, but you make it sound like a celebrity you <3 or </3.
It not a goddamn game. It's not good vs evil or anything as simple as that. It is a complex situation wrought through human aggression, nationalism, and many other isms.
Sometimes it becomes necessary. World War 2 and sich, battles for survival of your nation or becoming your own sovereign state.
You cant say war in general is bad, was the war to free the slaves bad? Was the war between the Aztecs defending against the European invaders bad? No, good thing they happen... People need to stand up for what they believe in.
Think of war as a medium to achieve your goal, it can be used effectively and necessarily, but it can also be abused.
You cant say war in general is bad, was the war to free the slaves bad? Was the war between the Aztecs defending against the European invaders bad? No, good thing they happen... People need to stand up for what they believe in.
Think of war as a medium to achieve your goal, it can be used effectively and necessarily, but it can also be abused.
While I may have undercut modern warfare by some degree; as unintentional as that was, I must disagree with you. It is true numbers played a significant role in choosing the victor in numerous battles of the distant past, there are numerous where masterful displays of strategy were the only reason one side amassed a victory. Take the battle of Chi Bi between the Warlords Cao Cao and Sun Quan, which is one of the greatest naval battles in history. Cao Cao possessed a fleet of two hundred and fifty thousand, although boosted upwards of eight hundred thousand, while Zhou Yu; the Supreme Commander under Sun Quan and Liu Bei; at this time a minor warlord who had entered an alliance with Sun Quan, met him with a mere fifty thousand.Delicious said:
Zhou Yu was victorious despite the overwhelming force disadvantage all because of his strategizing. I could go into detail how he managed such a feat however no need for this post since it is easy to find. That is one example of many.
You also state "Any idiot can theoretically pick up and inflict damage with a sword with no instruction" the same could be stated when referring to a gun however the latter of the two requires far less understanding to be used effectively. Consider you have five opponents charging you and have access to a gun with more than enough ammunition or a sword.
The gun regardless of ability will nearly guarantee your survival; sure you may not have consistent accuracy however it is not difficult to fire a gun. Meanwhile a sword you have to have skill to fight a close range and maintain and constant offensive and defensive; switching when needed to avoid taking injuries while attacking your target. It is a feat to kill five or ten men with a sword, even greater if accomplished without a single injury. There is no feat in doing the same with a gun.
As for planes, you have to consider what people of those distance eras had available; siege towers, arbalests, rams and so forth. Ultimately such cannot even remotely compare to what is required of us to learn with advanced technology however once one learns how to operate a plane, the plane does a significant amount of the work itself. Inventions of the old did not.
I imagine you have never even glanced upon the Art of War. It is worldly renowned to be one of the greatest military text ever written and used even today; well beyond two thousand years since its creation. What may have been "common sense" nowadays may not have been when the tome was written, regardless when Sun Tzu is still receiving recognition for his insight millennia past, his wisdom has to be worthwhile.