ForumsWEPRGeneral War Discussion

60 6832
SonOfVader
offline
SonOfVader
110 posts
850

Pretty self explanatory.

A few kick-starters:

Is war ever inevitable?

Is it justifiable?

Is waging war a part of human nature?

Is war a legitimate form of foreign policy?

Does war have a place in the 21st century?

Is war necessary to the progression of humanity; or does it hinder it?


I hope these arn't too vague, but it's all I could think of off the top of my head. I'll venture to share my own views if this thread attracts any interest.

  • 60 Replies
nichodemus
offline
nichodemus
14,469 posts
24,700

That, and kim jong-un has virtually no allies.


He doesn't need allies, he merely needs countries that will intervene on his side, (Much like China and Syria), for strategic reasons. China will almost certainly push in troops (if only to secure the North, not to fight any invasion), in order to prevent a deluge of NK refugees, therefore providing a non-hostile but major obstacle. Russia might as well, given the obvious geographic reasons.

NK has one of the more major militaries in the world. It is under-equipped, shabby, but it is tenacious, numerous, an average level of technology, a nation that though is increasingly opposed to the government, is still largely thought to be hostile and most worryingly, has nuclear missiles (Which despite range issues, would pose a danger if war was on the Peninsula itself).

I would say that main reason why NK doesn't want a war, is because it doesn't want to, and the status quo suits it fine. It has a powerful bargaining chip, receives aid, can hang the sword of Damocles over the South, and has countries near it, that though may not be major allies, or treat it warmly with caution, will back it in a war. NK knows it cannot win, and an invasion of the South would push the ruined economy further into the doldrums, whilst also causing their nation to collapse because of the sheer impossibility of controlling the South.
SonOfVader
offline
SonOfVader
110 posts
850

The sad thing about NK is that it's foreign/economic/financial/military etc. policies are all directly controlled by the Kim family. The people have no say in the running of their country and remain gripped in constant poverty and constant fear of the outside world. They're kept in check by a genuinely religious belief in the power of their 'Dear Leader' to protect them.

nichodemus
offline
nichodemus
14,469 posts
24,700

The sad thing about NK is that it's foreign/economic/financial/military etc. policies are all directly controlled by the Kim family. The people have no say in the running of their country and remain gripped in constant poverty and constant fear of the outside world. They're kept in check by a genuinely religious belief in the power of their 'Dear Leader' to protect them.


That might change, with a new, inexperienced leader.
SonOfVader
offline
SonOfVader
110 posts
850

That might change, with a new, inexperienced leader.


Maybe if he screws up badly enough.
nichodemus
offline
nichodemus
14,469 posts
24,700

Maybe if he screws up badly enough.


By all accounts, he's sharing power with his relatives, powerful figures who control the army and government. So I doubt he will screw up.
danielo
offline
danielo
1,776 posts
660

NK is so last month.

Is there gonna be fighting between syria and Israel? Assad started to say that "the public want war". Will he dare? Will the world do something or, like usual will stop Israel when we start to fight back and call us warmongers?

EmperorPalpatine
offline
EmperorPalpatine
9,410 posts
2,730

Is there gonna be fighting between syria and Israel?

Eventually. Maybe by the end of the year there will be more than some border conflicts. Currently, Syria has too many internal problems to start an external war, but the current government seems to be winning against the rebels.

Will the world do something

The US and Russia will likely fund opposing sides of the conflict, but other than that, not much.
danielo
offline
danielo
1,776 posts
660

But how will the UN react? Im all the last time they stoped Israel when they saw that our enemy is not gonna win. Will they stop us again or let us throw down assad?

How would the world react?

It will be a war, not a opreation in Gaza. Will these sheeps in Ireland and Norway understand or will they keep supporting the under-dog (like they did with us befor 1970-80)?

stinkyjim
offline
stinkyjim
487 posts
1,585

Is war ever inevitable?

Is it justifiable?

Is waging war a part of human nature?

Is war a legitimate form of foreign policy?

Does war have a place in the 21st century?

Is war necessary to the progression of humanity; or does it hinder it?


War is not inevitable. Countries will always have their differences and greedy tendencies. As long as our society is run by money and natural resources, there will always be war. Doesn't matter what country you live in, they've all been guilty of greed atleast once.

Yes, in a way war is part of the human nature. Evolution is about survival of the fittest. Our ancestors had to fight tooth and nail to survive, and their genes and tendencies have been passed down to us. We are simply animals after all, and obtaining material goods and land is considered surviving, just as two hamsters would fight for food and territory if placed in the same cage.

I'm not really sure how to answer the third question...

Diplomacy is all and good, but when it comes down to it only conquering your enemies will truly change their minds. Let's go back a century, to WW2: The Japanese were fighting a losing battle they knew they couldn't possibly win. Why? Because they believed the western world would suppress their beliefs and culture. Only by dropping the two atomic bombs were we capable of ending the war. If we had attacked them like we had attacked Europe, millions of additional lives would have been lost.

I believe that war is only neccasary when innocent lives are at stake. Take Libya for example. Their leader was slaughtering them by the thousands. While we didn't actually fight their government, we gave the rebels the tools to fight their tyranical government. Let's take another look at WW2: In order for Hitler to reign control of Europe he revolutionized countless inventions and machines. In a way, Hitler's research programs helped speed up the the way we use technology today. So yes, sometimes war is necessary.
stinkyjim
offline
stinkyjim
487 posts
1,585

Sorry for double posting, just want to say that if my long ramble up there is a bit incoherant it's because I was thinking and typing at the same time. I basically just wrote what came to mind, and I noticed I didn't really answer the second from last question. xD

nichodemus
offline
nichodemus
14,469 posts
24,700

In order for Hitler to reign control of Europe he revolutionized countless inventions and machines. In a way, Hitler's research programs helped speed up the the way we use technology today. So yes, sometimes war is necessary.


Doesn't mean we need war to advance our knowledge. We have made huge leaps and bounds in the last decade, without a major war spurring these developments.
partydevil
offline
partydevil
5,168 posts
4,560

sometimes war is necessary.

war is never necessary. only when 1 party has already crossed the line to violence then it is justified to defend yourself.
but going into war 1st isn't necessary, and never will be.
danielo
offline
danielo
1,776 posts
660

And you restarted the thread... how fun...

partydevil
offline
partydevil
5,168 posts
4,560

well your just about israel. understandable as you live there. but i closed that book long ago. i'm not following anything about it any longer. as i c no end to it. (viva palestina libre)

it was more generally speaking.

SonOfVader
offline
SonOfVader
110 posts
850

Assad started to say that "the public want war".


Assad stopped representing the Syrian people when he went to war with them. Before that, even.
Showing 31-45 of 60