If the people who run your country won't give you a straight answer, what makes you think we will?

(I'm a self-defense-rather-than-1st-offense-kinda-guy, btw)

War kills the weak. We need war. The world is too populated.

first of all ampy... the war does not kill the weak! people have to be pretty d@mn brave/strong to go into the military or army or watever anyway. and second, no one needs war. it destroys people's lives!

No, we need war.

War doesn't kill the weak, it kills the strong and those who understand duty and honor for their cause.

Those with no strength (inner & physical) are the ones who stay home and let someone else do the fighting.

You calling King George a coward?

Absolutely!

War is a biological nessicity of life.

War is a biological nessicity of life.

And its people like you that oppose it that need to be banished from society

War elevates a countrys sense of national pride.

Without war,we would be a very undevloped world.

The higher orders of animals do not have wars. Insects have wars.

It raises national pride in the people who do not actually fight in the war.

Ask the men who fight on the front lines if war is something to be proud of. Ask the men who saw their friends die in the mud or sand of some foreign nation if war is a biological necessity.

Go stand at the Vietnam War Memorial and watch those vets come find their buddies names, and ask them.

Or better yet, ask the widows of the soldiers that died in Desert Storm, Vietnam, Korea, or Grenada. Ask the children who never got to meet their fathers. Ask the parents of the boys that died for no apparent reason. Go to the home of the parents of a Vietnam soldier who died over there. Visit them at christmas or on their son's birthday and see if they feel pride.

War is not about pride and glory. It is about old men in polished offices sending young men to die. It is about pain and agony, both there and here. It is about demanding honor and duty and then forgetting about them when they come home shattered. It is about fear.

War is usually started by greed. But always paid for in the blood of idealistic young men who believe the stories they have been told.

War causes conflict, conflict causes competition, competition causes technological advancement. Look at history. The Cold War, even if it wasn't a real war, put a man in the moon, for example. War is one of the wonders of the world and I love it. During war every man is relatively equal. They all dress the same, they all sleep in the same area, each one's work helps the rest. During was man exploits his whole potential like in no other situation. I wish there was a massive world war so I could enlist and find out how big my potential is.

"War is usually started by greed. But always paid for in the blood of idealistic young men who believe the stories they have been told."

You're a freaking hippie. No, really. I can't believe you can generalize like that. You sound like one of those trendy gay lefties who criticize war because it's "in", saying stuff like "Like, ummm, war is, like, totally bad, and I, like, totally agree with the rest because I, like, I'm a total sheep" I thought better of you to be honest

I hate you Winterborn.

A thousands death is not punsihment enough for you.

War in the material world is the conquest of territory by force.

War in other terms tends to be used as a situation where one faction locks into mortal conflict with another faction until one side is defeated.

War is not biological. People know how to fight, there are instincts with in human beings to fight, and within the reptile brain of man, fighting is one of the major commands.

However, war is not biological. In the literal sense, we do not need war to survive, no war has ever been fought because one side said,

"We've run low on our war supply, we need to go get some more to last through the winter, let's take some from that nieghboring country over there." Human beings do not need war to live, nor is it entirely instinctual that it needs to be fufilled to balance out the other needs.

However, war is an option in negotiation with most foreign powers. When one country will not comply by reasoning, a country will deem it necessary to force the other power into agreement by militaristic force. Some countries go to war becasue of what war brings, despite the dead of war, countries gain territory, resources, and other spoils from a defeated country. War forces coutries to improve combat technology and, if played correctly, can bring benefits to the economy, that is; if they win.

However, whtether or not war is "Bad" rest with the values and aspects of the people.

America has won most of it's major wars and therefore has not truly faced the consequences of defeat like most older countries. Such military success has bred overconfidence, and has spawned people who beleive that their country's military is unbeatable, that there will be no consequence on their part, hence, why America has all these people who beleive war is "Right", that it is the best solution to all problems. They have created a false sense of security that they try to make real by always proposing we go to war first. The whole 'Shoot first, ask questions later" facade is merely projected by their insecurity, their fear of foreign people seeing them as "weak" if they don't keep up the bullying swagger.

People who think war is "Wrong" don't share such a "We gotta look tough by sounding tough" philosophy, by my observation, tend to have either more experience with war, ie. actual soldiers, people related to soldiers, journalists, etc. or have actually given deep thoughts about war on the personla level, behind the gunfire and over-inflated national pride. They ignore the overall benefits of war over the human cost of war, that the dead soldiers all had families, friends, and loved ones; something I think that the "Pro-War" people tend to either ignore, or not care for.

Now for personal adressments:

VJ: There are sheep on both sides of the issue, you have, what you mentioned, the " gay liberal hippie sheep" (Which I think only makes you look like an idiot). and then there are the "Der, WAR IS AWESOME, KILL EM ALL, LET JEBUS SORT EM OUT!" kind of sheep. Being a war hawk doesn't make you any less of a sheep, but merely puts you on the other end of the spectrum, which I remark, is almost as nauseating. You're still a sheep.

Balial: I'm baffled, your remark towards Winterborn is

A thousands death is not punsihment enough for you.

If I've interpreted this correctly, you stated that Winterborn isn't satisfied with the soldiers already dead, when he is an opponent of war? Especially when you a couple posts before him put

Without war,we would be a very undevloped world.

I mean, weren't you saying we NEED war? that war was necessary? Maybe you should ask yourself your own question.

Kiggity: See above, when I'm talking about the point of war. To gain territory, resources, or submission from the opposing force. And yes, we do know why we're fighting.

we do not need war to survive, no war has ever been fought because one side said,

"We've run low on our war supply, we need to go get some more to last through the winter, let's take some from that neighboring country over there."

That DID happen actually, it's one of the reasons for why Hitler invaded Russia. He needed raw materials to feed his gigantic war machine and he couldn't just keep buying them from Stalin.

And also, war IS necessary for survival. Living space is the keyword. Also self sufficiency. I know it sounds like an awkward concept to you, but if country A is overpopulated with good living standards, and food imports from country B are destroying it's economy, while country B has huge. empty, poor farmlands, don't you think country A has a right to take away some of country B's lands?

War have been fought for raw materials since countries exist. Why raw materials? So the country can get richer. If the country gets richer, even if the government is corrupt, some of the wealth will reach the population one way or the other.

Plus, war does unite populations. National cementation. China, divided in almost a dozen different factions, united against the invading Japanese in 1937.

I am a hippie?

reread what I said. I did not say BOTH sides are in it because of greed. I did not say anything that was trendy or because I am following someone else's agenda.

Greed is usually at the root of war. This is not a liberal point of view, it is a matter of historical information.

Religion has been blamed for many wars. But religion was what the leaders used to stir the masses so they would attack. Greed was the root cause.

That DID happen actually, it's one of the reasons for why Hitler invaded Russia. He needed raw materials to feed his gigantic war machine and he couldn't just keep buying them from Stalin.

Wrong. Hitler invaded russia becasue Russia was a communist country, and being Nazis, claimed earlier that they would wipe out the communists, along with the socialists, the gypsies, jews, etc. They were already taking territory at the point in the war where they turned on Russia. WW2 for the Nazis was about territory, but not on the grounds that they needed it (Nvm the pun). The Nazis were on a conquest of revenge (against the victors of WW1) and to get back the land they beleived belonged to them. They took the land not becasue they couldn't survive without it; it was good for them, but they didn't SURVIVE off it, they took the lands because they beleived they deserved the lands due to the superiority complex instilled into most of their soldiers by Nazi propaganda. It was a war based on revenge and extreme nationalism.

-If I misinterpreted what you interpreted, let me make a correction, when I used the term "War Supply" I didn't mean guns, food, materials, armor, etc. I meant to use war as you would an Item, like for example "I'll take 1 war, please" Heck, ammo and other supplies are one of the reasons Hitler invaded Russia.

War have been fought for raw materials since countries exist. Why raw materials? So the country can get richer. If the country gets richer, even if the government is corrupt, some of the wealth will reach the population one way or the other.

I know, I already made that point. as for the the ending part: not exactly, look at China, they're an immensly powerful country, yet so much of their people live like rats under the thumb of poor-paying companies and industries.

Plus, war does unite populations. National cementation. China, divided in almost a dozen different factions, united against the invading Japanese in 1937.

Another point that I'm not disagreeing with, but China was a unified country long before the attacks of the Japanese of WW2.

Wrong. Hitler invaded russia becasue Russia was a communist country, and being Nazis, claimed earlier that they would wipe out the communists, along with the socialists, the gypsies, jews, etc.

Those were the ideological reasons. If they were their only reasons they would have never invaded while still at war with britain. But they did because they were pratical reasons that made it mandatory. Plus, he whole revenge had nothing to do with the USSR. I already know plenty about that.

1- A inevitable soviet attack in July

2- Resources about to run out, economy not powerful enough to just keep buying them

3- Even if they could buy them, they still needed them in amounts that only direct exploitation can provide

4- Basically the weather and the military situation offered a great opportunity that was about to slip away; Allies across the entire front, soviet disorganization, relative technological advantage that would only last for maybe a year

They needed to invade to survive. Their economy was a expansive one, like that of the Roman Empire. With no conquests, it slowly dies. Ideological reasons were not as important as you think, remember the millions of inferiors who fought in the waffen ss units.

I know, I already made that point. as for the the ending part: not exactly, look at China, they're an immensly powerful country, yet so much of their people live like rats under the thumb of poor-paying companies and industries.

That's because they're communist and that's what communism does to people (Look at Cuba today)

Another point that I'm not disagreeing with, but China was a unified country long before the attacks of the Japanese of WW2.

erm, no, not all, it was divided in pretty much more than a dozen different factions. Remember? The communists, the normals, and a myriad of autocratic war lords.