NationStates Jolt Archive

[FONT=Verdana][SIZE=5][COLOR=Red]
Is it true that war secures peace or its just an exuse for political issues?
:mp5: :sniper:

[FONT=Verdana][SIZE=5][COLOR=Red]
Is it true that war secures peace or its just an exuse for political issues?
:mp5: :sniper:
In a democracy, the military secures the peace but is subject to civilian authority. War is ( or should be ) a last resort.

It absolutely does secure peace. Sometimes, there is no other alternative but force.

The war in Iraq has hardly secured peace there.

ON the other hand, the results of WW2 have secured peace in Europe for 60 years. So yes, sometimes it does.

Peace generally precedes and follows war, being that any time you are not at war you are, by definition, at peace.

BUT one can't recover from a mistake with an other mistake , fire is fought with fire! so why cause a hell out of nothing?[SIZE=5][COLOR=Red]

Only on weekends.

but what were the concequences of those sixty years of peace your saying about there were about 3 generation of people dead with out counting the executed!

BUT one can't recover from a mistake with an other mistake , fire is fought with fire! so why cause a hell out of nothing?[SIZE=5][COLOR=Red]

It has to be done. Otherwise, the people who don't share those ideals will simply take over and/or destroy the people who refused to defend themselves. Pacifism requires universal compliance of all nations, and there will never be an end to people who want power over others.

but what were the concequences of those sixty years of peace your saying about there were about 3 generation of people dead with out counting the executed!

It would have been hundreds of millions or even billions more if we hadn't stopped the Axis from conquering the world. We did fail in stopping Stalin, but we didn't really have a choice until the war ended.

We should start from the assumption that there's going to be conflict in the world, whether at the domestic or international level. Sometimes ignoring a conflict can cause just as much damage as using force. War doesn't secure peace, but sometimes not going to war can make a situation all that much worse.

We should start from the assumption that there's going to be conflict in the world, whether at the domestic or international level. Sometimes ignoring a conflict can cause just as much damage as using force. War doesn't secure peace, but sometimes not going to war can make a situation all that much worse.
Yeah. Kinda like ignoring a hurricaine, eh? :headbang:

But it could be prevented in some way? why shall a country have intelligence corp. and national security from most others. stalin finally was defeted by the cold war i think.

Defending is one thing as happened in ww2 but there were wars caused for more less.

I think war does secure peace because it makes the opposing country no longer a threat. That is if you win the war.

war can be used to secure peace providing the inhabitants want peace. cough cough im talking to u middle east cough cough

yes thats true war does stop and peace is restored . but how to prevent it we cant just call for a war because you and me dont agree. And Why is it big leading countries do have nuclear weapons while others have to ban them?

there is no way to secure peace. war will come to you no matter how much you avoid it.

war can only secure your "way of life" and then only if you win.

could be that war is created for arm business or other material or resources ?

could be that war is created for arm business or other material or resources ?
Perhaps, although I can't think of any specific wars for those purposes. Most wars are, at base, over economics.

There was some quote in a Neal Stephenson book that I can't quite remember. It went something like, in a war you are either praying to Ares or praying to Athena. Ares is hotheaded, thundering through with his sword. Athena is defensive. Protecting people behind her shield. Attacking with decisiveness and precision.
So basically, which God is leading your country?

i cant image a country that conquers an other country for now 12 months at least and with the expectation to find something that does not exciste or if found why is this long time ? And for bring it to its knees!?

i cant image a country that conquers an other country for now 12 months at least and with the expectation to find something that does not exciste or if found why is this long time ? And for bring it to its knees!?
Knees!!

There was some quote in a Neal Stephenson book that I can't quite remember. It went something like, in a war you are either praying to Ares or praying to Athena. Ares is hotheaded, thundering through with his sword. Athena is defensive. Protecting people behind her shield. Attacking with decisiveness and precision.
So basically, which God is leading your country?

NEITHER my country is neither big nor powerfull i'm maltese from Malta .THE UNSINKABLE AIRCRAFT CARRIER <winston>

War always secures peace, if you consider peace something that needs to be secured rather than agreed upon.

peace can be kept but secured thats the problem cant protect peace but keep it!?!?!

[QUOTE=Nadkor]The war in Iraq has hardly secured peace there.

Is it true that war secures peace?

[FONT=Verdana][SIZE=5][COLOR=Red]
Is it true that war secures peace or its just an exuse for political issues?
:mp5: :sniper:

Let's put it this way: What is the longest period of time the U.S. has gone without a war? 30 years? Tops?

they can live without it everyones in 30 years they have to get in some shit.
might be to get rid of old weaponery!? dont know may be to reduce the unemployment!? dont know...

you can comment any thing you'd like here?

whats the aim for the iraqan war for? and did they found chemical weapons?
and why they r still there?

Jim Dunnigan wrote a book called "How To Stop A War", it was an analysis of the last 200 years of warfare.

The quick answer from the book is that a war does not truly secure peace unless the opponent has truly turned from war as a way to make up or back whatever they think they should have.

This usually happens because the underlying culture changes and the grievance is forgotten, there are greater rewards in peace, or the 'loser' has lost so much people and/or material that another war is unthinkable.

whats the aim for the iraqan war for? and did they found chemical weapons?
and why they r still there?

Quick answers:

1: Different to different people. Everybody fights about it.

2: No. Maybe they're there, most likely, they aren't.

3: Because if they left now, it could turn into another Iran/North Korea/other crackpot dictatorship/theocracy.