"Just wars are the exception, not the rule." Thoughts?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
12-11-2013, 07:43 AM
"Just wars are the exception, not the rule." Thoughts?
And that violence, wars, war hawks, and soldiers should be chastised as a default position, rather than cherished.

Thoughts and opinions on this?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-11-2013, 08:31 AM
RE: "Just wars are the exception, not the rule." Thoughts?
Dear PoolBoyG,

We hereby contact you with regard to recent reports to the effect that you have been entertaining anti-Murikan thoughts.

Please be ready, at short notice, to attend a hearing at an as yet undisclosed but very sound-proof location where you will be appearing as the defendant.

Yours,
Commission for Unamerican Notions and Thoughts (CUNT)

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like DLJ's post
12-11-2013, 10:20 AM
RE: "Just wars are the exception, not the rule." Thoughts?
(12-11-2013 07:43 AM)PoolBoyG Wrote:  And that violence, wars, war hawks, and soldiers should be chastised as a default position, rather than cherished.

Thoughts and opinions on this?

Agree.

Soldiers aren't heroes and they aren't defending freedom for anyone, they are dumb poor people that joined to die and fight for rich people. I call that an extremely stupid thing to do.

They aren't brave either, it doesn't take bravery to go into a third world country and kill the poorest people in the world, in fact they are pussies who have to beat up on weaker people to make themselves feel good. The world is better without people like that.

NEXT

Drinking Beverage
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-11-2013, 04:55 PM
RE: "Just wars are the exception, not the rule." Thoughts?
I guess there's always one side in a war that thinks it's not just.

Aspiring optimist
Eternal Pragmatist.
With the uncanny ability to see all sides in every argument.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-11-2013, 05:27 PM
RE: "Just wars are the exception, not the rule." Thoughts?
I agree in part. Wars are very rarely just. They are usually fought not out of need but out of a desire to control others, or to benefit a group of some kind economically or politically. Pretty much every war in the middle ages was fought because someone wanted to expand his land or influence, for example.

Some wars are just initially, such as revolutions against dictatorships, but the groups fighting them rarely have entirely benevolent intentions, as they take advantage of the coup to install themselves in their former master's place. Even wars against aggressors, though beginning as justified actions to fight oppression and destruction, often become grabs for power and resources upon the turning of the tide.

Wars are usually fought for selfish reasons, or are taken advantage of for selfish goals at the end.

However, I disagree with your negative attitude toward soldiers. No one joins a military force (in my part of the world) with the intent to kill civilians, repress other peoples, or profit corporations and governments. They join because they need money and/or because they want to serve their country. People do honestly join armies with the attitude that they are protecting their country. And in the case of disasters and external threats they actually are. In the case of peace-making/keeping, they are preventing death and destruction of other nations. They actually are helping in those cases.

Of course, since most wars are selfish, soldiers do end up fighting for causes they have no stake in and don't necessarily support. Militaries are necessary for national defense and global peace, so they have to exist unless the world unanimously agrees to abolish them. But because a country has a military, the government of that country will be tempted to exploit it for not-so-benevolent purposes. But that's a problem with the government, not the soldiers. I don't believe in soldier worship, but soldiers still serve important roles and deserve respect for that. They're risking their lives for a good cause, even if they end up being shipped off for a bad one. Hate the war, not the warrior, I suppose.

If something can be destroyed by the truth, it might be worth destroying.

[Image: ZcC2kGl.png]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Elesjei's post
15-11-2013, 06:29 AM
RE: "Just wars are the exception, not the rule." Thoughts?
As a default position, disagree.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-11-2013, 07:35 AM
RE: "Just wars are the exception, not the rule." Thoughts?
(12-11-2013 07:43 AM)PoolBoyG Wrote:  And that violence, wars, war hawks, and soldiers should be chastised as a default position, rather than cherished.

Thoughts and opinions on this?

"Wars are just to those to whom they are necessary." - Edmund Burke
And I suppose the opposite is just as true.

The people closely associated with the namesake of female canines are suffering from a nondescript form of lunacy.
"Anti-environmentalism is like standing in front of a forest and going 'quick kill them they're coming right for us!'" - Jake Farr-Wharton, The Imaginary Friend Show.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-11-2013, 08:20 AM
RE: "Just wars are the exception, not the rule." Thoughts?
"Just wars are the exception, not the rule".

First....define "just".

And remember, as A. Toynbee - an emminent historian - has written (or said), "Winners write the history."

And I take vehement exception to "I&I"s proposition that our (or any) military are "dumb poor people" and "they aren't brave either. . . "

As as veteran myself, I was not then and am not now "poor".

I&I speaks as a very young person who would not and can not know first hand what bravery is nor what it takes to spend substantial time in the military. He (or she) is a civilian. And I might remind him (or her) that in the US, the civilian authorities determine where - and for what reason(s) the military will expend it's effort and blood. Members of the military are sworn to obey their civilian, constitutionally authorized, leaders.

It frightens me to say this, but it is I&I and others of his(her) ilk that determine where the military goes and and what they do. Therefore, when I&I makes these silly vacuous statements, he(she) is really looking in the mirror and inveighing against him(her) self.

"People don't go to heaven when they die; they're taken to a special room and burned!" Evil_monster
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like RaisdCath's post
15-11-2013, 08:55 AM
Re: "Just wars are the exception, not the rule." Thoughts?
What's a just war? You ought to have an example if you want to define one.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-11-2013, 09:16 AM (This post was last modified: 15-11-2013 10:14 AM by PoolBoyG.)
RE: "Just wars are the exception, not the rule." Thoughts?
Just wars defined for the purpose of this thread would be: handing over your body to an over arching authority (usually the state), to give you sanction and means to kill foreign people in order to prevent (foreign or domestic) people from being killed.

So, say, killing several thousand men, women, and children is some far off village, because it prevents similar or greater number of men, women, and children closer to your residence from being killed.

The position made in this thread is that it is never the case. And when it is, it's an abnormality.

There were some arguments made that, even if the wars aren't just, killing for money, or due to ignorance, is partially excusable. And also some sort of "just following orders" is an acceptable argument. Maybe we can get something better..
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: