(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); Is war effective?

In my opinion, war is an ineffective way of solving problems and making advancements as a human species. Not as a country or a group, but a human species, because in the end, that's all that really matters. We all share the same planet, sometimes even the same continents, yet our own stupidity allows us to form alliances, and therefore enemies, and use violence as our means of influence.

Look where humans have come, look at how advanced we are as a society. Our technology advances at shockingly high rates, and we are constantly learning more and more about the universe in which we inhabit. Yet still, here lies the pathetic humans that think that their opinions are non-negotiable, and if anyone gives them any trouble, war is the solution. War means nothing. War says which country can raise a stronger army, or which country can throw the most bombs, or the biggest bombs. But ultimately, the strength and physical power of a country is irrelevant to any future peace. Why must humans resort to violence when someone else won't agree with them? It's just stupid.

A better way to function is to be willing to negotiate, be willing to accept someone else's ideas if they can prove yours wrong. There is an answer to everything, there will always be right and wrong, better and worse. Right now, if someone can't accept one or the other, and be willing to change for the better, than war/violence is the automatic solution. I could be wrong here, but I think that one of the most important matters that needs to be resolved is religion. Actually, it's not even that religion shouldn't exist. I'd be perfectly fine with religion existing (not that I would be a part of it), as long as religion doesn't play a role or affect how people make major decisions, decisions that affect other people and/or countries.

This is getting long for the first post, so I'll sum it up now. To put it in one sentence, I just don't understand why people can't sit down and agree on a final consensus without bringing violence into the equation. It just seems so barbaric.

This was not the case, Germany was fighting multiple nations at once, if they would have focused themselves just at the USSR, yes; they would have beaten the USSR. If they didn't and stayed at attacking Europe and left Asia for another day, things today would be much different. They made the mistake of going over too much at once, it left them open.

We would have stood no chance against them had they not focused on Russia, they had far better weaponry, what you hear about the US is we built medium-grade weaponry and a much higher amount than they did. They built high-grade weaponry.

For every weapon they had, we had 5. They had superior weaponry, had they not taken focus off of Europe and went into Asia, we easily would have not been able to hold ourselves.


-----
Overall though, war needs to be a final option; there are better methods that can be used to solve problems in the world. It's just that the ones at the top know that war makes them rich and choose it over all other choices.

Example: Iraq and North Korea. You think it was over Communism, that's what was stated to scare the public into accepting it, there was a much larger idea behind it. Iraq = Oil

I personally don't agree with war. I could never kill a person, unless of course they were threatening my family, but that is a terrible excuse to go to another country for a war.

However, the effectiveness of war depends based upon which war you are referring to. WWII was very effective, as the end goal was achieved. And in this particular case, there really was no other choice.

What really annoys me, which is very apparent in America and the UK is the glorifying of soldiers and branding them "heroes", I totally agree saying what they do is very brave. But when asked what people think of german soldiers fighting in WWII or another war, most people would call them 'monsters'. How can a person justify a person killing another, just based upon which country they are from. After all the majority of germans in the war were no different from our troops over there.

I know that was not the case, that's what I said in the first place. :p



It doesn't truly matter. Germany would have created the Atomic Bomb before the United States would (that would have required Hitler to stop slacking off on the German's nuclear program). The Atomic Bomb could have been made by the Germans at least a year before the United States had theirs ready from the Manhattan Project. The problem was that they had the technology, however were not using it at the time, as they were focusing on getting rockets to bomb London.

If they ever managed to harness that, Russia and the USA could use all their might, but it would be useless. The countries that fought against Germany were: America, Russia, Britain, Canada, French Resistance and I guess the Danes (lol). Really the only problem that Germany faced was the strength in numbers. Germany literally started running out of people to put on the lines to defend from this many attacks. But, if Germany increased their missile capabilities to the point where they could hit the USA, it's really hard to see how Germany would have lost the war. Germany bombed London literally like so:
You must login or register to view this content.

Now imagine if they did that to the USA and Russia at the same time as harnessing nuclear capability. Game over I could tell you that much.


But see, Hitler was insane. He was not fighting to win but fighting to kill Jews. He didn't want to harness nuclear power and to win the war in the most intelligent manner possible, he wanted to slaughter millions of Jews. That's what truly killed Germany. If Germany had advanced it's military capabilities (rockets/nukes), no one could have stopped them.



Iraq isn't about communism. Iraq was about Saddam Hussein and due to WMD's. The oil companies in Iraq are still there, and they are not "stealing" oil as so many flag burners like to put it. The oil companies are paying huge sums of money to drill in Iraq. Granted, it's probably at a cheaper price, but it's complying with Iraq laws, so it's not "stealing."

North Korea is just threats. North Korea has no chance against the USA. That though, is about communism. It's like traveling back in time when you go to North Korea. North Korea likes to play games like threaten the USA with nuclear war, but it's useless. Patriot missiles are stationed all over South Korea. A nuke would be taken out in North Korea's own airspace, if worse comes to worse over the ocean. It wouldn't hit the USA.

Should have worded myself more correctly as I understand Iraq isn't about communism.

Everything else; I agree with.

Care to explain why you feel that way? I am a U.S Vet so explain to me personally why it's ok for the Taliban, Nazi Germany, Japan (1933-1945) and North Korea to start conflicts. The countries that were affected by war never had any issues but I guess it's ok because you think it's stupid and useless.

War has it's reasons. Either it is to stand up to a horrible government, expand territory or put fear into people eyes. Whatever the reason, there will be a purpose behind it.

Ok war has it's reason but for me we should search different ways than war... obviusly there will be a purpose behind it.

Yes it's very effective at causing people to negotiate and turn things into little bits of dust!!
The answer is no in the end , bringing people around the table has better results. The problem is a lot of the people at the top are unwilling to negotiate.
Strange result is war is very effective causing new technology most is very useful during peace times.
If only we could get the same advances during peace time as war , less mess to clean up.

It's interesting to see the world is slowing starting to learn that war does not work and we are starting to become more willing to negotiate are problems away. Hard power is dying and soft power is getting stronger.

No no no, the real question here would be "Is killing effective?"

Yes, yes it is. When all other resources have been expunged and tired out, the only logical thing to do is would be to kill all your adversaries and defend what is rightful and just to you.

Only when a few bodies are on the floor will people understand what your fighting for.

Now this is coming from a guy who tries to talk people out of doing dumb SH*) 24/7.

Personally i feel if everyone had a proper education.... and a proper upbringing the chances of them growing up insane is minimal, but human beings are naturally crazy, and naturally like to kill/win/fight. Friction will occur regardless, the moment a rivalry starts, you can already assume that you are currently in a war with someone else. So get used to it, we all have our own personal wars that we NEED to win.

Sure lets be apes about it and hurt each other physically.