IMO war might not be the most suitable way of getting your point across, but the bottom line is: it sometimes is inevitable. Some people find war to be an impractical solution, finding it "needless". The other question that it raises is morality: why do we kill killers to show that killing is wrong? Bottom line: Who cares? Do you think that the child who lost both his parents in a terrorist attack reasons that its okay since killing the killers would be "morally" wrong? It makes no logical sense, other than to soothe a conscious that morally they are doing the right thing. They will NOT stoop to their level. They are on a higher plane of existence. Ethically; good job. Reality; your needlessly subjecting innocent lives to death merely to stop more mayhem. Logically, with no opposition, terrorists become emboldened by the lack of resistance and increase their efforts. In this case "fight fire with fire" is the most apt description. It's not about the ethics, its about sending a message. In order to stop the bleeding, you sew it shut. You don't slap a bandage on it and hope it stops. The "out of sight out of mind" mentality is at work here. Thoughts?
Zero to 100 without considering anything in between. War is always referenced by those who have never experienced it. Once you have seen combat, you will find any possible way you can to avoid it. No one would deny a horrible crime was committed by terrorist acts. The senseless slaughter of civilians always horrifies observers. But as soon as you go to war you are condemning thousands to senseless death and hundreds of thousands to years of pain, loss, and misery. You better be sure you are ready to change the lives of a whole population for the worse the rest of their lives in pursuit of your hand full of terrorists. Making war is a much easier task than recovering from it. Ask yourself if any of the following will address the problem; Asking the local authorities to round up the terrorists. Asking the country or surrounding countries to apprehend or simply kill the terrorists on your behalf. Letting your own law enforcement people deal with it. Let your covert operatives to deal with it. Get the host country to allow you to send in an enforcement team. Covert attacks with missiles or drones. Your own surgical strike team Someone else's strike team. Bring other pressures to bear to force host nation reactions. Multinational police action. Multinational military action. Any combination or variation of the above.... And after you've exhausted all other options, is it still absolutely necessary for you to take action at this time?
False, 100%. Many people love war, the brutality of it, they love the experience of it. Do you really believe that every who re-enlists does it because they are fighting for a cause? lol Considering your first statement is so inaccurate I am not even going to waste time critiquing the rest of that drivel. To the OP I would say that there are many different types of war. Sparta used it for training, they never even took anything in many of their victories as it was the love of war and training for which they went to war with their neighbors. Napolean loved war as did Alexander the Great, both of whom experienced it first hand. War is fought for a number of reasons and the justification is up to the individual to make in every single case.
Another puppy posting about something he has never seen. Why don't you go roam around Syria for a year or two then come back and tell us what a wonderful time you've had. You'll find the first couple of bullets whizzing by you ear a great source of enlightenment. And it only takes a few weeks to get over wondering if the next step you take will blow your balls off. Let's hear from some other old coots. For you other combat veterans, do you still think war is something you do for a little weekend revenge?
So you are saying that anyone who has experienced war will never try to return to it if it can be avoided. So in order to prove you wrong, tell me how many people you would like me to show, who absolutely love war for the sake of war, before you will admit your wrong. There is no shortage of them. Would it be 1...well technically one would be all it takes to prove you silly statement completely wrong but I would like to embarrass you even further. How about 5, maybe 10.....want me to post 20 individuals who were obsessed with war, the mayhem, the destruction, and the death that comes with it?
That's probably because they are lucky they have suffered any major injury. Then again, there's always gonna be a few oddballs out there.
Why are they oddballs? You cannot help what you like. Do you consider homosexuals oddballs also? Some people love war and all that goes with it and many of them, probably the majority of them I would venture to guess, have experienced it first hand. Its what gives them their first taste of it. Many great war leaders throughout history have seen the horrors of war and when they gained power at a later date they often have conducted unnecessary wars themselves. There obviously has to be a link there. Adolph Hitler experienced war as a young man, was actually blinded by Mustard Gas and he obviously did not do everything in his power to avoid war, he did everything in his power to make it happen again. This is a theme that repeats over and over and over throughout history and I could literally spew off names of people like this all night long but I think I have proven my point sufficiently. Its like saying that someone who has seen a dead body would never murder anyone. Yet we have plenty of serial killers out there and many more who simply are not phased whatsoever by death and its horrors. Go look at a video of a beheading you can find all over the internet (there is no shortage of them) and read the comments of people joking about it. Watch the video itself and watch the people doing the beheading joking about it. I would say that the more you experience war the more desensitized you come to it and the easier it is for you to partake in it again, not the opposite.
