War. Is it ever justified?

[TheBigDog]

I actually really disagree with the points you made Dog, but I respect you all the same. :lol:

How dare you! Are trying to provoke me? :hihi:

 

I don't think punishments like spanking do anything more than teach the kid how to get away with things without getting caught. Positive reinforcement is key... punishment no workie.

Kids learn to get away with things without getting caught no matter how you punish or reward them. It is human nature. Spankings happen after several escalations without improvement. Spankings should not be administered in anger. But there are ground rules established that the kids know will result in a spanking. What always amazes me with spankings is how quickly they are followed by a new understanding. In fact if you whack a kid on the butt just right you can actually see wax shoot out of their little ears, and suddenly they hear what you have been telling them.

 

Is it my turn to go Biblical? "He who spareth the rod hateth his son: but he that loveth him correcteth him betimes" (Proverbs 13:24)

 

The dead murderer never actually learned a lesson. They're just dead. Not a lot of learning happening there. Perhaps someone else learned a lesson, but not the one who is actually guilty.

There is a lesson learned by the murderer. Minutes or seconds before his well timed death he learns that society is serious about not tolerating the taking of innocent life. And that justice will be served after the meal of your choice.

 

Blowing someone up doesn't make them desire peace. At least... I am pretty sure it doesn't.

August 10th of 1945 the Japanese were pretty anxious to end hostilities, and they have played nice ever since.

 

Bill

[pgrmdave]

I look at the problem logically.

 

I start with the idea that war is a bad thing, to be avoided and, if possible, eliminated. I don't think that is unreasonable. So, I try to find ways that we could avoid, and eventually eliminate, all war. Keep in mind this doesn't mean ending A war, but ALL wars. Let's look at America's current situation, trying to extrapolate what may happen in the future, and what may have happened had we done things differently.

 

Terrorists attack America.

America attacks terrorists.

More people become angry at America, and wish to become terrorists.

There are more terrorists.

There are more terroristic attacks against America.

America attacks terrorists more.

More people become angry at America, and wish to become terrorists.

There are more terrorists.

There are more terroristic attacks against America.

America attacks terrorists more...

 

Hmmm.....

 

Let's see what we may have been able to do differently.

 

 

Terrorists attack America.

America pays for massive educational and economic reform

-The total costs for the war in Iraq will be a bit over $2,000,000,000,000 according to Columbia University economist Joseph E. Stiglitz and Harvard lecturer Linda Bilmes. The government predicts total costs of only $500,000,000,000. [article here]

-To build a school system, including one elementary, one middle school, and one high school, costs, as a high estimate in America, $20,429,777. calculated using this calculator.

-We'll double that cost, to include buying land, building overseas, and materials needed, the new cost is $40,859,554.

-Assuming that we need 100 employees, teachers, custodians, secretaries and the like, and the average salary is $40,000, that brings the total cost for one year to $44,859,554.

-Using the governments lower estimate of the total cost of the war, alongside our high estimates of the cost of a school, that means that the US could fund 11,145 school systems. Using the economists' numbers, the US could fund 44,583 school systems.

-If the school systems served an average of 1,000 students, there would be between 11,145,000 and 44,583,000 people educated.

 

Now, with these educations, and with the understanding that it is the American people paying to educate them, far fewer people choose to become terrorists, and the radical voices that try to incite them to hatred find fewer and fewer listeners.

 

The U.S., through diplomacy and economic sanctions, is able to stop most major funding for terrorism, and through espionage is able to arrest many terrorists.

 

 

 

So, with these two scenarios, we see that the first, while possibly more immediately successful, only leads us to more destruction as we polarize people, reinforcing their image of America as an evil empire, while the second, while much less satisfying in the beginning, actually acomplishes goals, and helps prevent a terrorist mentality from taking hold within a society. Which seems the more logical meathod?

[tarak]

I dont agree with You....You dont agree with me ...

We have different opinions about different and similar things...I feel I am always right and you feel you are always right...You want others to endorse your rights and wrongs and you want others to confirm to your opinions...The "I's" converts to "we" and the iteration starts and finally we are at war with each other.....I win you lose...You are annihilated....and vice versa

Still Do we agree with each other????

To an extent Yes..But without you with whom do I Disagree or agree...But your opinion always exists and is right according to your beliefs..and always adds to my conflict,,...

[TheBigDog]

I look at the problem logically.

 

...

 

Terrorists attack America.

America pays for massive educational and economic reform

Your good intentions are separating your logic from reason.

 

If someone attacks us, we should inject billions into their infrastructure to prove what swell guys we are? My local school district had a levy that didn't pass, and next year we will have no extra-curricular activities if it doesn't pass this Tuesday. So maybe I should organize some students and bomb a tall building in Columbus to get more school money? Maybe when Saddam invaded Kuwait in 1990, the Kuwait government should have built some more schools in Iraq to pacify the Iraqi government. Maybe the Kurds should have done some barn raisings in Baghdad after being gassed in the 80's.

 

And please recognize that your idea of building schools is not entirely original. We have built and repaired hundreds of schools in Iraq and Afghanistan since the wars began. Much of the war effort dollars is earmarked for just that. This does not include the charitable organizations that are working in the regions to help those in need. Do the terrorists treat the aid workers any differently? Have they managed to avoid being kidnapped and executed? Are they not killed by random bombings?

 

During the 12 years of sanctions against Iraq Saddam let his people starve while he prospered through corruption of the UN, all the while blaming the US for the plight of his people. Fools all over the world buy into that insane lie and condemn the "peaceful" measures by the US for being cruel to the common man of Iraq. Sanctions have never worked against a corrupt regime. Look at our 40+ years of sanctions against Cuba. Anything yet? Fidel certainly seems comfortable. How are the people of Cuba thriving these days? Canadians are pouring millions into Cuba as a vacation resort. Does that help the cause of sanctions? The prostitution industry is thriving there as well as young women shack up with foreigners for a week at a time because they have no other options. And still Fidel is comfortable. Is that sanctions being successful?

 

Terrorism cannot be rewarded. It cannot be ignored. It cannot be justified. It must be universally recognized for the evil that it is. Short of universal rejection, brave men need to stand up and fight for the cause of good to protect themselves and the ignorant among the masses who condemn their action and would exchange it to live at the mercy of evil men.

 

Bill

[pgrmdave]

Terrorism cannot be rewarded.

 

I agree, however I also feel that we cannot simply attack the symptom (terrorists) but we need to remove the cause (poverty, misinformation, cultural frustration). If we don't deal with the problems which cause terrorism, then we are not properly dealing with terrorism.

[InfiniteNow]

Spankings happen after several escalations without improvement. Spankings should not be administered in anger. But there are ground rules established that the kids know will result in a spanking. What always amazes me with spankings is how quickly they are followed by a new understanding. In fact if you whack a kid on the butt just right you can actually see wax shoot out of their little ears, and suddenly they hear what you have been telling them.

You know, I had a stepdad who followed that logic, and all it taught me to do was hate and feel angry. Even to this day... sob story stops there though. Punishment too often tends to be our own expression of our disappointment and frustration more than it is an effective training tool. There could be exceptions, but they are rare.

 

 

Is it my turn to go Biblical? "He who spareth the rod hateth his son: but he that loveth him correcteth him betimes" (Proverbs 13:24)

I've heard that some new concepts have been proposed that are a lot more effective since the time when that book was written. But, I guess if you still want to use a cup and a string to communicate with your neighbor instead of a cell phone, go ahead. :)

 

 

There is a lesson learned by the murderer. Minutes or seconds before his well timed death he learns that society is serious about not tolerating the taking of innocent life. And that justice will be served after the meal of your choice.

That doesn't do a lot to make me feel that we've improved our society. Granted, cancers are best removed, but wouldn't you rather find a way to prevent them from occurring in the first place? An ounce of prevention equals a pound of...

 

 

August 10th of 1945 the Japanese were pretty anxious to end hostilities, and they have played nice ever since.

There are always exceptions, but don't you think the families of those who are still suffering the mutations and pain and loss from radiation poisoning are pretty pissed still? That's what leads to war... anger. Kill the weed at it's root or it will only grow back.

 

 

We are getting off topic somewhat. The thread is about war, and I asked the questions I did to make a point. You can't stop war with more war. Pure and simple.

 

 

Not a lot of buddhist thinkers in here, huh? :cup:

Our evolved responses go way back to single celled organisms and are doing more to put our survival in detriment than to enhance it. We're at a point in society where we need to move beyond evolved responses and do something more proactive and forward thinking.

[TheBigDog]

I agree, however I also feel that we cannot simply attack the symptom (terrorists) but we need to remove the cause (poverty, misinformation, cultural frustration). If we don't deal with the problems which cause terrorism, then we are not properly dealing with terrorism.

Terrorism is caused by moral bankruptcy. Period. And I don't give a damn about what rationalization any particular terrorist may use to justify their actions. The fact remains that in a world of possible solutions, they choose to hold people in fear by taking innocent lives. And they use that fear as their method of projecting power.

 

Now look at the lucky survivors of these insane acts of terror. I see all these letters about how we are asking for it. How the real victim is the terrorist. And every time I see that I think of battered woman who bruised and bloodied tells the police how she deserved what she got. That she wasn't listening again, and well, he was drinking and I should know better than to provoke him when he has been drinking. He really didn't mean it! He is really the sweetest guy, sometimes.... INSANITY!!! Evil is as evil does. No excuses. Terrorism is pure evil.

 

So, what are these alleged causes of terrorism?

 

Poverty - There is no indication that terrorism is caused by poverty. Many of the terrorists are well educated professionals. The lies that are spread by recruiters of terror networks are those of class separation. But as is often the case, the "guilty rich" are the biggest wavers of that banner. There are far more poor people in this world that rich, and the vast majority have seemingly beyond all odds resisted the unavoidable path of committing terrorism.

 

Misinformation - there is no amount of good information that will help. Proof of that is found right here on this website. Claims that we could have waited out or pacified Hitler, and that going to war to defeat that evil was unjustified. Or just look around the Internet. Think of the most ludicrous idea in the world. Somewhere there is a website dedicated to exploiting that idea as being true, and people are paying to believe it.

 

Cultural Frustration - Now you are getting closer to the root of the issue. Look at where terrorism is coming from. Do you see an ordered society under the rule of law AND a system of government where people have a say in the laws by which they are governed? By and large terrorism begins within oppressed people, and continues when they buy a lie about who their oppressor is. The infidels from the west are the enemy and the oppressor; pay no attention to the dictator with his boot heal on your throat. It is living without freedom that breeds the level of frustration that turns people to the insanity of terrorism. By and large, free people are not terrorists. And free people who commit terrorist acts typically do so in the name of other people who are not free.

 

The cure to terrorism is as follows:

 

• Freedom
  
• Democracy
  
• Justice
  
• Hope and opportunity
  
• Rash and total intolerance of terrorism
  

 

Bill

[Boerseun]

Defensive warfare could be justified. Offensive, never. Not even under the guise of a 'pre-emptive' war, because that can too easily be abused.

 

I love this quote from Dave Barry:

 

"The first major president to be elected after the War of 1812 was President James Monroe, who became famous by developing the doctrine after which he is named. This policy, which is still in effect today, states that:

1. Other nations are not allowed to mess around with the internal affairs of nations in this hemisphere.

2. But we are.

3. Ha-ha-ha."

[InfiniteNow]

Besides the question of what is "now," there is no question with which I struggle more than...

 

How do we deal with terrorism effectively, in a manner that prevents the loss of innocent life, while maintaining the pacifism we are so motivated to spread?

 

 

It's going to take something completely different, and I am not referring (entirely) to Monty Python.

[TheBigDog]

How do we deal with terrorism effectively, in a manner that prevents the loss of innocent life, while maintaining the pacifism we are so motivated to spread?

Islam needs Ghandi. Instead they have... who?

 

Bill

[questor]

what would happen if the country could be divided into those who would defend themselves with arms and the peacenicks who ,in order to be true to their creed would not defend themselves. peacenicks cannot morally expect other people to die for them, so the warriors would refuse to fight for the peacenicks. if an attack comes, the enemy would probably attack people who claim they are peaceful and unarmed. so what would be the fate of the peacenicks? would they grovel at the feet of the attackers? surrender? become slaves? be murdered by the victors?

[InfiniteNow]

what would happen if the country could be divided into those who would defend themselves with arms and the peacenicks who ,in order to be true to their creed would not defend themselves. peacenicks cannot morally expect other people to die for them, so the warriors would refuse to fight for the peacenicks. if an attack comes, the enemy would probably attack people who claim they are peaceful and unarmed. so what would be the fate of the peacenicks? would they grovel at the feet of the attackers? surrender? become slaves? be murdered by the victors?

If I read Sun-Tzu correctly, I'd theorize that an intelligent attacker would be one who disguises themselves as a "peacenick."

 

You are always so lovely and beholden of understanding questor. Please, stop beating around the bush... tell us how you really feel about people who strive for peace. I mean, form an opinion for a change, will yeh?

[arkain101]

War is a word for declaration of a group versus another is it not?

 

Is fighting ever justified? Yes, sometimes you need to defend yourself.

 

Is war a thing to justify? not in my opinion. Is a group of groups choice to engage in comabat justifiable, knowing it is to death and the outcome of their actions? I think it can be justified.

 

The accidents invovled in fighting are never justafiable, if war has rules as it does oddly enough, then repsectivly the fight should be taken place in a designated location to prevent unessesary harm. Sadly though it is not this way and you have to wonder about that. Are you really fighting a war or are you just trying to stay alive even at the risk of killing innocent civilains.. you gotta wonder about that.

[Tarantism]

just jumping in,

 

a quote from 1984,

"war is peace

 

so in a sense, it isnt justified, but wars continue now to ensure peace.

at least in the dark ages it was over land openly, instead of this silly disguise,

PARADOXY

 

ok, jumping back out, cheers

[Racoon]

"Is war ever justified?"

 

Yes.

Not always though... (key word being EVER )

 

Japan attack Pearl Harbor.

Germans attack Stalingrad.

Western settlers attack Indians.

Conquistadors attack South American Indians.

(you get the point)

[HydrogenBond]

Ancient war often allowed more advanced cultures to spread their cultural influence and allowed them to become more metropolitan and worldly in the process. Even in the Old Testament of the bible, war was treated as a natural part of life.

 

With modern communications, economics, internet, etc., cultures are all allowed to merge and advance without the need of war. It become justified to prevent culturalrepression, such as imperialism, dictatorships, etc. In that respect, we should go into African and free the people from the thugs and corruption that keeps these people starving in a fourth world environment. Iraq is second world and should be able to reach first world without too much addtional help.

[InfiniteNow]

Even on this forum we are engaged in a bit of warring. While no lives are put at risk (at least, I sincerely hope they aren't), we express opinions, and battle ones we find to be mistaken or inaccurate.

 

 

War is far more ancient than old testament. It goes back to strong and weak molecules (or even before...) battling to survive through the pressures of the environment around them.

 

My hope is that we use our intelligence to get past our innate tendency toward this, but even I, myself, am all too often unsuccessful in this regard.