Is war ever justified? (1 Viewer)

[Empyrean444]

i just think there are better ways.

Such as...

How would you have dealt with ww2 - simply allowed Hitler to conquer all he pleased? Similarly, I hate to beat a dead horse, but how do you deal with Islamic extremists/terrorists whose very purpose is to maim, assault and ultimately obliterate the Western World? There is simply no 'diplomacy' that can appease them - they quite literally have to be imprisoned or destroyed themselves if we are to protect ourselves and thrive.

 

[mggail]

I believe it just really depends on the circumstances but these quotes make me think..

"War is God's way of teaching Americans geography." - Ambrose Bierce

War does not determine who is right - only who is left. ~Bertrand Russell

Never think that war, no matter how necessary, nor how justified, is not a crime. ~Ernest Hemingway

 

[Riet]

War does not determine who is right, only who is left.

Wars for moral reasons are very rarely justified IMO, but that is not to say that the ability to launch strategic strikes is not an important attribute of a modern countries' armed forces. Precision > Destruction.

 

[daniieee]

Undeniably, wars involve armed conflict of some sort, inevitably leading to death and destruction. On the negative side, hundeds of millions of lives have been lost as both direct and indirect results of wars, yet on the positive side, it has at times paved the way for much brighter futures than otherwise would've been possible. Not in all cases, but many.

World War I and II were disastrous and as far as I'm concerned started for no respectable reason and ended with no respectable result. I have nothing against the Germans, but it's a fact that they basically started both world wars, and for what? To prove their might? For revenge after the humiliation of their first failure at world domination? In no way did it benefit them, but left Europe and it's millions of occupants so very devastated and wartorn. These wars were not justified.

Yet there are many civil wars which I'm sure no one can argue were worthless. The Chinese civil war up to 1949 was worth every moment, and while it may not seem like the nation's come a long way, it has, and they will continue to strive forward and seek a better future. If war can bring hope to a nation that would otherwise have been struggling to get by the day, then I believe it is justified.

 

[quik.]

oh i'm sorry.
was i supposed to take my panties off at the end of that delicious bowl of copypasta?

EDIT: why should i respect people who are diametrically opposed to my belief system.
i dont think war is justified because i dont like killing and i believe in diplomacy.

i could try and google a movie that will have you "reeling in awe" but i'd rather express what i believe in short, easy to understand sentences.

I dont support the troops.
killing is wrong in any form.
don't agree with me, fine. obvsly most of the world is on your side.

You don't have to respect them for holding an opposing view. A little respect for being willing to defend both their values as well as your freedom to express yours wouldn't go astray, though.

They also don't necessarily agree with the wars they fight. Dishonourable discharge / jail time isn't exactly an attractive option. More attractive than the whole previous 'don't want to fight? bang', at least

Not everyone joins the army because they wanna kill some sand niggers, either. Military service offers *excellent* health care, cheap food + housing, depending on rank and service a pension, free training. There are a whole host of reasons for people joining.

The fact that you admit you have rose coloured glasses on yet still cling 100% to pacifism is also a bit perplexing. The world is home to a lot of nasty people.

 

[spyro14]

oh i'm sorry.
was i supposed to take my panties off at the end of that delicious bowl of copypasta?

EDIT: why should i respect people who are diametrically opposed to my belief system.
i dont think war is justified because i dont like killing and i believe in diplomacy.

i could try and google a movie that will have you "reeling in awe" but i'd rather express what i believe in short, easy to understand sentences.

I dont support the troops.
killing is wrong in any form.
don't agree with me, fine. obvsly most of the world is on your side.

You don't support the troops that risk their lives to make sure you can mindlessly post your gutless ideas on the internet?

Why do I say this you may ask?

Quite simple really, ever noticed that crazy dictators who want power over the world also want to keep it under wraps by promoting the simplicity of farm life or alternatively, death. What you may not realise is that war is a reflection of the faults that lie deep within humanity and will probably remain for the rest of our existance. But for Christ's Sake, you can not possibly want the, "civilised world" to respond to terrorists flying planes into buildings passively. Its crucial we remain the winning side. Rather than the passive losers of the world. Say goodbye to your morals, either way you lose if you keep them.

 

[AlleyCat]

You don't have to respect them for holding an opposing view. A little respect for being willing to defend both their values as well as your freedom to express yours wouldn't go astray, though.

They also don't necessarily agree with the wars they fight. Dishonourable discharge / jail time isn't exactly an attractive option. More attractive than the whole previous 'don't want to fight? bang', at least

Not everyone joins the army because they wanna kill some sand niggers, either. Military service offers *excellent* health care, cheap food + housing, depending on rank and service a pension, free training. There are a whole host of reasons for people joining.

The fact that you admit you have rose coloured glasses on yet still cling 100% to pacifism is also a bit perplexing. The world is home to a lot of nasty people.

i understand why you respect these people, i just dont.
i wouldnt spit on them as they walked off their planes home a la vietnam, but i wouldnt congratulate them either.

if they dont agree with the wars they fight, they shouldnt be in the army, and they should think about that before they choose to serve.

i feel sorry for the young people who join the army because of the "benefits" it offers, because i think there are so many better ways to make a living, get healthcare, food housing, training etc.

america in particular has cultivated a very enticing package for people to join the armed services, which is almost impossible to turn down if one is from a background of low education and poverty. this is sad to me, that being a part of a war machine is their best option.

i know there are a lot of nasty people, i just dont think war is the answer.

 

[spyro14]

Of course you don't.

 

[SnowFox]

i understand why you respect these people, i just dont.
i wouldnt spit on them as they walked off their planes home a la vietnam, but i wouldnt congratulate them either.

if they dont agree with the wars they fight, they shouldnt be in the army, and they should think about that before they choose to serve.

i feel sorry for the young people who join the army because of the "benefits" it offers, because i think there are so many better ways to make a living, get healthcare, food housing, training etc.

america in particular has cultivated a very enticing package for people to join the armed services, which is almost impossible to turn down if one is from a background of low education and poverty. this is sad to me, that being a part of a war machine is their best option.

i know there are a lot of nasty people, i just dont think war is the answer.

Sometimes its inevitable, but its usually the best choice to blot out the problem before it rears its ugly head again.

 

[Empyrean444]

World War I and II were disastrous and as far as I'm concerned started for no respectable reason and ended with no respectable result. I have nothing against the Germans, but it's a fact that they basically started both world wars, and for what? To prove their might? For revenge after the humiliation of their first failure at world domination? In no way did it benefit them, but left Europe and it's millions of occupants so very devastated and wartorn. These wars were not justified.

Yet there are many civil wars which I'm sure no one can argue were worthless. The Chinese civil war up to 1949 was worth every moment, and while it may not seem like the nation's come a long way, it has, and they will continue to strive forward and seek a better future. If war can bring hope to a nation that would otherwise have been struggling to get by the day, then I believe it is justified.

Um, Germans didn't 'start' ww1 necessarily, and nor are they the most responsible country for it (that would be Austria for attacking Serbia or Russia for beginning her mobilisation).

 

[daniieee]

Um, Germans didn't 'start' ww1 necessarily, and nor are they the most responsible country for it (that would be Austria for attacking Serbia or Russia for beginning her mobilisation).

When Austria-Hungary asked the Germans to support them in their war against Yugoslavia, just to put them in their palce, the Germans pretty much said, "Here's a blank cheque". They didn't directly start the war, but took Austria-Hungary's situation as an excuse to wage war against the Allies. The Germans knew that if they backed Austria, then Russia would back Yugoslavia, then France would back Russia, and in turn Britain would back France. The Germans knew all this, they knew it'd be an all out war, yet they still went ahead and offered Austria-Hungary a blank cheque. Without the Germans, Austria would never have declared war. They were too unstable.

Besides which, I don't believe that the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand in itself was the main reason Austria-Hungary declared war on Yugoslavia. Franz Josef was just looking for an excuse to put Yugoslavia in their place, and the assassination was the golden opportunity.

Edit: My fellow modern historian, I'm liking you already. =]

 

[spyro14]

A valid point but it's difficult to choose a certain point which can be called the reason for it all. Maybe bring it back further and blame Willhelm II for not continuing Bismarck's policy with the Russians.

 

[jules.09]

Rethinking this, and considering what a strong pacifist AlleyCat is, I think I belong in the 'Yes - with caveats and qualms etc' category.

Given how unjustified the previous wars were, such as the recent Iraq war and that in Vietnam, and imperialist methods in the 19th century and prior to that, well yeah, war doesnt seem very justified.

Yet there are many civil wars which I'm sure no one can argue were worthless. The Chinese civil war up to 1949 was worth every moment, and while it may not seem like the nation's come a long way, it has, and they will continue to strive forward and seek a better future. If war can bring hope to a nation that would otherwise have been struggling to get by the day, then I believe it is justified.

I would disagree, considering the censorship, the Tiananmen massacre, the Great Leap Forward, Red Guards etc.

 

[moll.]

Armed struggle to rid our glorious culture of the rotting and parasitic effects of International Jewry is always justified.

On a lighter note, I'm going to join the Infantry Corps of the ADF, so fuck you all.

 

[spyro14]

Armed struggle to rid our glorious culture of the rotting and parasitic effects of International Jewry is always justified.

On a lighter note, I'm going to join the Infantry Corps of the ADF, so fuck you all.

I'll see you there.

 

[daniieee]

I would disagree, considering the censorship, the Tiananmen massacre, the Great Leap Forward, Red Guards etc.

Hence, while it may not seem like the nation's come a long way, they have, if you delve into the history of China prior to 1949. Imperialism from both the Western powers and the Japanese tore the country apart, and corruption from within the country in the GMD govt didn't help things either. The Communist takeover allowed the nation to rid the country of imperialism, to establish a real, and not apparent, sense of unity, which arguably has never been achieved before.

In our eyes, it may seem like China is a backward country and hasn't come a long way, but honestly, just take a look at the Olympic Games and which nation is victorious? Nationalism is real, their sense of unity is real, their economy's developing rapidly and I believe we've got ourselves our next Superpower. I'm not saying that China has no problems, but every nation has problems, even ours. They're still a fairly new united nation if you ask me, so give them some time to develop first and find their grounding. Besides which, China is home to approximately a third of the world's population. To run a country that big, with that many people? You've got to give the Chinese some credit for that.

On a lighter note, I'm going to join the Infantry Corps of the ADF, so fuck you all.

I'll see you there.

Oh wow, it's definitely an admirable occupation. Good luck to you both!

 

[Amogh]

The issue of whether war could ever be justified started to come up in the Hiroshima thread and I thought it deservered it's own topic.

Pro:
- Sometimes it is necessary to fight evil​

​

well who decides whats evil and whats good?
wouldnt 'evil' perceive the 'good' to be evil and vice versa

 

[moll.]

Oh wow, it's definitely an admirable occupation. Good luck to you both!

I can't tell whether you're being sarcastic or not

 

[moll.]

[/INDENT] well who decides whats evil and whats good?
wouldnt 'evil' perceive the 'good' to be evil and vice versa

No. Believe it or not, evil is quite easy to measure. Granted, there are no absolute positions possible on the good/evil spectrum, but every situation has a relative position on that spectrum.

 

[daniieee]

I can't tell whether you're being sarcastic or not

Wow I'm sorry, I didn't realise earlier, but now I can see why you might think I was being sarcastic. Sorry for that lol, I was being wholeheartedly sincere. It really is an admirable occupation.