"My Son Serves So You Can Be Free"

[LuisDantas]

Even in a purely hypothetical sense, it is odd to think that someone could think of war as a freedom-preserving activity. It is, after all, glorified threat of use of force. Worse still, it often enough degenerates into actual use of force.

That simply cannot very well bring peace about. If it could, we would possibly still be living under Pax Romana, or any of the many other attempts at "bringing peace under gunpoint" that people have brought about time and again. They are, obviously enough, inherently doomed to fail due to their very nature.

 

[gnomon]

My last post was a copy n paste quote from the OP, it is what i was responding to, the question the OP posted. Makes sense no?

As for putting words in a service members mouth, the words that come out of mine are those of a service member.

No, it doesn't make any sense at all. Read it again and read the thread.

You might get there one day.

 

[Kathryn]

War can and does often usher in a long period of peace and prosperity. Sometimes it's a necessary evil.

Besides that - as awful as it sounds, some group of yahoos is always going to be stirring up a war somewhere. That's because power hungry and corrupt leaders are always, ALWAYS going to be trying to justify grabbing someone else's sack lunch, or farm, or diamond mine, or whatever (fill in the blank).

This is human nature, and our history on this earth proves this, over and over again. That is why a standing army is always necessary.

Might doesn't make right, but it does make sense. In the course of our history as humans, nations have the unfortunate propensity to bully and overrun their weaker, less fortunate neighbors.

And those in power always want more. It's inevitable.

That being said, I want the biggest gun. It keeps the hounds at bay.

 

[dust1n]

War can and does often usher in a long period of peace and prosperity.

Ushing in; as to be a precursory of? To cause? To start?

War can cause long periods of peace and prosperity.

How long is long? What is peace and prosperity when war and destruction are allotted to happen in the name of peace and prosperity? And for whom gets the peace and prosperity and who gets the opposite?

Let's say, WW2 (which I figure will be the inevitable example). What was the 'prosperity' we got in the from the war? And how significant was war in this peace and prosperity amongst all factors at play?

Sometimes it's a necessary evil.

Necessity indicates a goal. If your goal as powerful man in a country is to continue the security of business, you will invest your power in continuing it-- and, yup, war sometimes does that. It makes a lot of wealthy men very wealthy. It makes a lot of middle class jobs at the expense of their kids dying. If your goal is peace and prosperity, how does war achieve it?

Besides that - as awful as it sounds, some group of yahoos is always going to be stirring up a war somewhere. That's because power hungry and corrupt leaders are always, ALWAYS going to be trying to justify grabbing someone else's sack lunch, or farm, or diamond mine, or whatever (fill in the blank).

In ethics, the whole because-someone-else-does-something-justifies-my-own-contributions-routine doesn't really go over well.

This is human nature, and our history on this earth proves this, over and over again. That is why a standing army is always necessary.

Indeed. Anyone will be violent if their rational agents choose to be so.

Do I need to bring up that American's longest time of peace is from 1806 to 1811?

Where's the long periods of peace? Prosperity, sure, on occasion. And look where wars have gotten us; insurmountable debt.

Might doesn't make right, but it does make sense.

Mark 16:11? Right?

In the course of our history as humans, nations have the unfortunate propensity to bully and overrun their weaker, less fortunate neighbors.

Ok.

And those in power always want more. It's inevitable.

War isn't the only form of power, but ok.

That being said, I want the biggest gun. It keeps the hounds at bay.

And then taking over everyone's resources.

 

[AntEmpire]

No, it doesn't make any sense at all. Read it again and read the thread.

You might get there one day.

Well it did to me, and no one else seems to agree with you...

I've got better things to do with my time then read this whole thread. I respond to the OP, and then to anyone who responds to me, thats just how i do

 

[LuisDantas]

War can and does often usher in a long period of peace and prosperity. Sometimes it's a necessary evil.

With all due respect, do you really believe in that?

War is great to making one feel empowered, and for providing "honorable" outs. But it is still a failure from its very conception. To claim that it is unavoidable is, to me, akin to saying that infidelity is a fact of life - it may be technically true, I guess, but we really shouldn't just accept it mindlessly.

 

[sandandfoam]

I think that societies that prize militarism are headed the wrong direction, twentieth century Germany and Imperial Japan are stark examples.

I was talking to an old man once who fought at the battle of Monte Cassino. He was an artillery spotter in the British army. He had an extremely low opinion of the American military, he regarded them as un-professional and ill-disciplined. His criticisms I perceived as evidence of something good about America. I saw his description of the WW2 US soldiers (sloppy uniforms, calling officers by first name, opinionated etc etc) as evidence of how they carried an inherently free and democratic mindset into military service - in contrast to the the class riddled hierarchical structure of the British army.

I cannot help but see a passion for militarism and bumper sticker patriotism as the antithesis of what America is supposed to be.

 

[Kathryn]

War can and does often usher in a long period of peace and prosperity. Sometimes it's a necessary evil.

With all due respect, do you really believe in that?

War is great to making one feel empowered, and for providing "honorable" outs. But it is still a failure from its very conception. To claim that it is unavoidable is, to me, akin to saying that infidelity is a fact of life - it may be technically true, I guess, but we really shouldn't just accept it mindlessly.

With all due respect, yes I do.

You seem to be talking about the emotional effects of war - the emotions of empowerment, emotional justification for violence, feelings of failure, unacceptance of the inevitable nature of some humans.

I'm talking about taking up arms and resisting tyranny, defending one's home and family, taking a stand against what is wrong, protecting others from those who would destroy all they hold dear.

Wow, how can we even be talking about the same thing? And yet we are - because wars, on small and large scale, have complex and multilayered reasons, causes, and consequences.

But I'm glad you brought up the example of infidelity. Infidelity exists, right? I mean, it happens. Stating the obvious doesn't mean that we're accepting it mindlessly, or that we would tolerate it in our own relationships.

In fact, I think DENYING it's existance or possibility, being unprepared for it, ignoring situations which could increase the likelihood of infidelity in our own relationships, or turning our head when our partner is unfaithful - THAT is mindless acceptance, in my opinion.

We don't WANT infidelity in our relationships, but if our partner is unfaithful, we should take action, even if that action is difficult, unpleasant, expensive, and something we'd rather not do.

And - when we do take action to rid ourselves of infidelity in our lives, often our lives and the lives of our children are much improved. The unfaithful partner may not be so lucky, but frankly, that's not our focus.

 

[LuisDantas]

With all due respect, yes I do.

You seem to be talking about the emotional effects of war - the emotions of empowerment, emotional justification for violence, feelings of failure, unacceptance of the inevitable nature of some humans.

Yes, they seem to me to be the true justifications for war, as far as they go.

Once upon a time war as necessary because humanity had no better ways of dealing with demographic and economic realities. That is no longer true. We are emotionally and politically attached to war instead.

I'm talking about taking up arms and resisting tyranny, defending one's home and family, taking a stand against what is wrong, protecting others from those who would destroy all they hold dear.

By that note, one can only wonder why the USA are involved in two wars at the moment. None of those reasons apply, after all.

Wow, how can we even be talking about the same thing? And yet we are - because wars, on small and large scale, have complex and multilayered reasons, causes, and consequences.

No argument there.

But I'm glad you brought up the example of infidelity. Infidelity exists, right? I mean, it happens. Stating the obvious doesn't mean that we're accepting it mindlessly, or that we would tolerate it in our own relationships.

In fact, I think DENYING it's existance or possibility, being unprepared for it, ignoring situations which could increase the likelihood of infidelity in our own relationships, or turning our head when our partner is unfaithful - THAT is mindless acceptance, in my opinion.

I disagree. Acceptance of war is engaging in it.

Much like being unfaithful in return usually promotes further infidelity, armed aggression feeds upon itself.

We don't WANT infidelity in our relationships, but if our partner is unfaithful, we should take action, even if that action is difficult, unpleasant, expensive, and something we'd rather not do.

And - when we do take action to rid ourselves of infidelity in our lives, often our lives and the lives of our children are much improved. The unfaithful partner may not be so lucky, but frankly, that's not our focus.

 

[sandandfoam]

I'm talking about taking up arms and resisting tyranny, defending one's home and family, taking a stand against what is wrong, protecting others from those who would destroy all they hold dear.

Precisely the reason Stalin put forward for ensuring the 'freedom' of Poland at Yalta - "...Poland has served as a corridor for enemies to attack Russia...that is why the Soviet Union is interested in the creation of a mighty free and independent Poland" (J.Stalin)

The Soviet occupiers of Poland in WW2 were doing exactly this - defending their homes , families and taking a stand against what is wrong. They were protecting others from those who would destroy all they hold dear.
The retreating Germans they were battling with were doing exactly the same.

 

[Kathryn]

I think some people may be missing my point. I am not justifying every war with my assertion that wars are sometimes necessary in order to effect peace. I'm simply saying that they are SOMETIMES necessary - and even then, sometimes one person's peace is another persons nightmare.

What I am saying is that human nature is such that I cannot see the realistic possibility of disarmament and kumbayah.

 

[LuisDantas]

Not right now, on that I agree. But I can't help but wonder why we act exactly as if we expected that possibility to depend on external events instead of our own decisions.

 

[sandandfoam]

What I am saying is that human nature is such that I cannot see the realistic possibility of disarmament and kumbayah.

What else was Jesus about?

 

[kai]

Precisely the reason Stalin put forward for ensuring the 'freedom' of Poland at Yalta - "...Poland has served as a corridor for enemies to attack Russia...that is why the Soviet Union is interested in the creation of a mighty free and independent Poland" (J.Stalin)



The Soviet occupiers of Poland in WW2 were doing exactly this - defending their homes , families and taking a stand against what is wrong. They were protecting others from those who would destroy all they hold dear.
The retreating Germans they were battling with were doing exactly the same.

Yep and on and on it will go forever or until the day we can hold hands and sing the same song. personally i believe humans are so diverse, so insecure ,so greedy,so violent,so selfish ,that that day may never come.

 

[LuisDantas]

Maybe so. But even if it turns out to be true, there is still no point in believing in that.

 

[kai]

Maybe so. But even if it turns out to be true, there is still no point in believing in that.

There is a point in recognising the behaviour of human beings , history is full of clues, people who ignore it are usually the ones who are surprised or shocked the most by it.

 

[sandandfoam]

Yep and on and on it will go forever or until the day we can hold hands and sing the same song. personally i believe humans are so diverse, so insecure ,so greedy,so violent,so selfish ,that that day may never come.

You might be correct but I don't believe so .
My view is based on this:-
The evolution from the first homonoid to you and I has taken less than 6 million years. The blink of an eye.
The first artistic human relics we know of date from only 25,000 years ago, Animal husbandry and agriculture have only been around for 9000 odd years, writing for about 5000 years, the modern European technological age only began about 500 years ago.

The development of our species seems to be happening at incredible speed. Human nature is not fixed and I am an optimist


I'm up for holding hands and singing songs. In fact I think I'm going to listen to some John Lennon now.

 

[LuisDantas]

There is a point in recognising the behaviour of human beings , history is full of clues, people who ignore it are usually the ones who are surprised or shocked the most by it.

But what is the point of believing that humans can't possibly learn? Even if it is true, maybe it will change. On a practical level, it is pointless to even consider that possibility.

 

[kai]

You might be correct but I don't believe so .
My view is based on this:-
The evolution from the first homonoid to you and I has taken less than 6 million years. The blink of an eye.Thats a blink of an eye to you but its our whole history
The first artistic human relics we know of date from only 25,000 years ago, Animal husbandry and agriculture have only been around for 9000 odd years, writing for about 5000 years, the modern European technological age only began about 500 years ago.

The development of our species seems to be happening at incredible speed. Human nature is not fixed and I am an optimist
I ask you has it got any better ?

I'm up for holding hands and singing songs. In fact I think I'm going to listen to some John Lennon now.

John Lennon got shot

 

[LuisDantas]

John Lennon got shot

Yeah. But he had a good life before that. More to the point, he did not seek to destroy it.