Peace or War?

I am a Hippy.. so I prefer peace, but!

War is good to fight specific problems... like too many people on earth...
we just destroy things like the earth itself, so decreasing the human rase isn't that bad?
but still I prefer peace =)

 

war gives more peps jobs but peace will let them live longer and if we all in peace then third world countries can get all our help rather than being the center of a ww.

 

I would like to have peace than wat. It makes me very sad when people go to war. People go to war , and come back with disease, missing limbs, mental problems,as well as, other problems. They go out their to serve their country ,but their country does nothing for them. Veterans become jobless and are in the care of who their famlies. All I want now at days is peace because I have lost faith in the system. Everyone is out for themselves and that's not like it should be :sad:.

 

I say peace,not war.Why would you say war?I know true peace would be unattainable but it would be nice.War will just rage on forever,we won't have world peace,but I'd like peace.

To shorten,I say peace.

 

PEACE come on if we have war we will all die

 

peace

 

You cant have peace without war, coz if there wasnt any war to begin with; peace wouldnt exist coz it would already be like that. ;P (Hmm, my statement sounds confusing. I dont know, it sounded better in my head)

 

There's a reason it's a contradiction (in my opinion) to NoE's statement above

Without war, people would not know what peace was because conflicts brings about a difference in their lives and so they can classify a state as being at peace.

Without peace, war would be continuous and people would know nothing except what war is.

Without one or the other, I believe that the people would not know what they would exist in.

However, I will note: peace on a personal level is much more easily obtained than constant war on a personal level. Even if the world was only at war, they do not fight all day and night, for they are humans and still have limitations, and so they must sleep at some time. And while it may not be a fully peaceful sleep, it is still a small window, and thus the concept would be known.

Taking a more practical standpoint: War is not always necessary on a level that requires that it be used as a mediator to control the numbers of humans. Even human ignorance or indifference will be enough to maintain humanity at a acceptable. The people in Africa are not dying just because of war, they're dying because the rest of the world don't care enough to help them out. And though they might say education will erase indifference, it often doesn't. A great deal of people (if not most people), unless motivated, will not care about someone in a distant place because it does not concern them, their friends, or their family. Note that I say a great deal-most, not all.

Yeesh, did I make sense at all?

Sorry for the long windedness

 

That's because this is, believe it or not, a paradox. War can't come without peace. If there is only war, then there is peace in the outcome of the war, because both sides will eventually resolve, peace will continue, and war will take its place when the peace is broken.

 

Would that be a good thing though. I mean not knowing war, and not knowing peace because there no war and they are always at peace.

Yes, it does makes sense. Well put too!

 

War is a political game where citizens of the country are used to settle petty political disputes. The other reasons for War are finical. Now, because war is always started and always will be started by greed, lust for power, narcissism, and ego, you must find a way to eliminate that derivative if you are to eliminate war. The derivative, being politics, and economy, can be eliminated and an anarchist commune can be established, where collective is valued beyond individual and a perpetual state of peace is established. In the end it is easy to see that war is a battle between the powerful, not the poor and when the poor unite then peace will be established, but as long as government and economy hold the masses at bay, war will be inevitable. Peace however, as we can see is much more efficient, enjoyable, and beneficial to the human race, meeting the needs of the collective.

Check mate.

 

well...

to answer all this, yes, war will always be part of human life, no matter what. Even after the world unites to form a federation into which all nations will serve under to make one planetary alliance as we expand outside of our planet, even if earth does advance into this stage (thats if we dont all die of global warming, corp's leaders are forced to pay the middle man more, and nuclear weapons stay out of under-developed nations hands) onces in space, and colonization begins, people will revolt, because SOMEONE SOMEWERE shall ALWAYS want to be independent because they dont have the same believes as their governtment. And that is what i think

 

to teenagers warfare sounds good but one more war and it might wipe humanity out.....:fmad:

 

if theyres peace hardly anything could go wrong

war on the other hand.... can kick major buttox

 

Here is my philosophy on the subject.

Imagine all of humankind was just one person. That person, if he/she is to live, must have a dual personality 'approach' to war and peace, or otherwise, if the person was entirely warlike, he/she would kill him/herself, as there would be no people to kill, as a means of gaining glory, by means of suicide.
If the person was entirely peaceful, he/she would not have the will to fight, leading them to be killed by a wild animal, without attempts of retalliation.

Therefore, no one is truly peaceful or warlike. People instead try to cover up their warlike/peaceful sides, as life itself is a balance of these two factors. This does not make them more peaceful/warlike than warlike/peaceful. Personality does not exist. It is people covering up the fact that they do not appreciate being a certain type of person. This we cannot stop. Us, as humans, invent new ways of keeping balance without realising.

Something I forgot to mention... Ever heard of Ashoka the Great? He was an Indian emperor who often fought lots of battles in his thirst for land. After the events of the War of Kalinga, he turned to Budhism, a pacifist religion. Ashoka brought the balance back as a result of his actions, after he caused a lack of balance between war and peace. And Ashoka prospered soon after until he died of old age.

 

I prefer peace, yet I'll do war if necessary.

It's like "black and white" and "Good or bad" thing. You need to know each other to know them well. I wouldn't be surprised if there's World War III, it's just the matter of world's fate.

Just remember: When war is ended, there's come peace. When peace is over, there's come the war. So, just prepared when the peace is over. The nightmare from World War II will come again to us.

 

As they say "If you want peace, prepare for war"

And that's the problem, I suppose. It's never a black and white thing. There are always factors in the middle that make it that no one side is truly 'good' or truly 'bad'.

And when war is over, there comes peace? I somehow doubt there's ever been a sense of true peace, anywhere. Ceasefire, perhaps, but not peace. Peace is too idealistic of a prospect to have been achieved, methinks. As I said, people are conflicted, for one reason or another, and it simply blows into war if allowed to fester for long enough. You could make the analogy that war is when two leaders of a nation get into a fight. Forget fists, they go for armies and nukes now.

Just my two cents.

PS: If WWIII comes, I wouldn't be surprised at all. Let's see what happens, first though.

 

war is necessary.
only by the narrowest of margins is it necessary but it is nescesarry none the less.
war is simply about need and greed.
either the need of a resource or just human greed.

 

I think sometimes war is necessary, because it might be the easiest way to solve something. Otherwise we need peace.

 

The problem is: The easiest way to solve what?

Was it really worth the amount of lives, equipment, etc that was required for it?

Not saying that war DOESN'T seem to be a constant part of life, just saying that its necessity could come into question unless used for the purpose of purging.