Flash Flash Revolution: Community Forums

Flash Flash Revolution: Community Forums (http://www.flashflashrevolution.com/vbz/index.php)
-   Critical Thinking (http://www.flashflashrevolution.com/vbz/forumdisplay.php?f=33)
-   -   Is it right to rage or start wars? (http://www.flashflashrevolution.com/vbz/showthread.php?t=44277)

Sniper911 06-20-2006 02:09 AM

Is it right to rage or start wars?
 
I want everyone's opinion on the topic.....
It can be any war......
I believe some wars were very unnnessasary...

Omeganitros 06-20-2006 02:18 AM

Re: Is it right to rage or start wars?
 
Edit: I nee dto shut up and GTFO of Crit THinking.

Grandiagod 06-20-2006 02:23 AM

Re: Is it right to rage or start wars?
 
Raaaaaaaaaaaagggggeeeeeeee!

Neonatrias 06-20-2006 03:32 AM

Re: Is it right to rage or start wars?
 
If you want respectable answers, you're going to have to use some better phrasing than that. First off, your spelling can use work. Second, give a little more than "I want your opinions, guys." Give a little background. Give us your opinion and explain why you think that way.

And I can tell you right now. The topic of war and reasonings behind it is probably going to go fine for a few pages before it erupts into a flaming battlefield.

Patashu 06-20-2006 03:51 AM

Re: Is it right to rage or start wars?
 
Obviously not. Notice how one of the seven deadly sins is Wrath?

trillobyite 06-20-2006 10:21 AM

Re: Is it right to rage or start wars?
 
I support war against rogue states if they are a threat to international or an individual country's security. The UN has failed many times because diplomacy sometimes simply does not work. Without any form of military prowess to intimidate or back up a diplomatic maneuver, diplomacy is practically useless. If negotiation is impossible and a country's security in danger it has the right to attack the threatening country even without international approval.

Benny1 06-20-2006 01:03 PM

Re: Is it right to rage or start wars?
 
I find war to be one of the stupidest ideas ever. It's a very primal idea, we're stronger, so we get dominance. It may have been a good idea back when it was sticks and stones, but now that we have gotten to nukes and guns, it's a bad bad idea.

Peaceful solutions for the win.

repeat 06-20-2006 01:21 PM

Re: Is it right to rage or start wars?
 
When you mentioned rage, I immediately thought of road rage. >__<

I'm against war, rage, or any sort of unnecessary violence. An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind; cliché, but true.

However, in certain situations, war may be necessary, or at least beneficial to a country. For example, the Civil War was a major step toward the abolition of slavery and prevented the secession of many southern states. Without the events that occurred during that time, would the United States still be the same nation we see today?

Reach 06-20-2006 01:23 PM

Re: Is it right to rage or start wars?
 
Is it right? Heh, well, right and wrong do not have tangible definitions; so the answer is it depends.

What do I believe? Moronic or pointless would sum it up. As for what trillo says, yes, but threatening countries are moronic XD Now see, if people wern't stupid/greedy/evil/other to begin with, war would be unnecessary; but the fact is, people are like that. An inherent flaw in every human being. I think it would take a much greater mind to be devoid of war, though I hope one day it will be possible, and I definitely think peaceful solutions to problems are generally achievable already.

flamingspinach 06-20-2006 03:52 PM

Re: Is it right to rage or start wars?
 
Almost all wars seem to come from the clashing of different cultures and/or beliefs. The natural state of human beings seems to be to stick to a small tribe of their own and not mingle with people who are different. Then again intercultural contact also leads to innovation, so it's a tradeoff. Essentially the human race faces problems that no other species faces, mainly due to its extremely weird (by most standards) organization. Our social structure seems to be extraordinarily large and therefore impersonal, which leads to strife between individuals who feel isolated or subgroups who feel shunned.

aperson 06-20-2006 04:20 PM

Re: Is it right to rage or start wars?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by flamingspinach
Almost all wars seem to come from the clashing of different cultures and/or beliefs. The natural state of human beings seems to be to stick to a small tribe of their own and not mingle with people who are different. Then again intercultural contact also leads to innovation, so it's a tradeoff. Essentially the human race faces problems that no other species faces, mainly due to its extremely weird (by most standards) organization. Our social structure seems to be extraordinarily large and therefore impersonal, which leads to strife between individuals who feel isolated or subgroups who feel shunned.

This deals with the fact that societies of people ultimately try to homogenize. It's quite Darwinian, really: Individuals cluster and mold other individuals to have the same moral compass and mental wiring as themselves in order to make society more well-off for themselves. This is because society tends to pander to the majority the most, and if you homogenize society to your mean then you become the majority. This is the reason things like discrimination occur. Ultimately, borders between different cultures are boundaries that allow cultures to start developing different states of homogeneity. This causes a much larger moral and mental gap to arise when these cultures do intermingle, and schismatic differences in areas of high moral gravity are what lead to confrontation.

This is why war, discrimination, prejudice, and the like occur: If you allow nonhomogeneous traits to take over, then you take the 'you-ness' out of society... and no one wants to fade away without leaving a trace. In a sense, it makes the 'you' extinct.

mailedbypostman 07-4-2006 02:04 PM

Re: Is it right to rage or start wars?
 
War is necessary at times, doesn't make it right.

Shopowner200 07-5-2006 08:36 PM

Re: Is it right to rage or start wars?
 
In my opinion, war isn't morally right. The idea of killing other pople and destroying things because you can't come to an agreement or can't live in a world with countries unlike your own. War is really never right, but very occasionally it is needed to be fought (World War II).

aperson 07-5-2006 08:42 PM

Re: Is it right to rage or start wars?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Shopowner200
In my opinion, war isn't morally right. The idea of killing other pople and destroying things because you can't come to an agreement or can't live in a world with countries unlike your own. War is really never right, but very occasionally it is needed to be fought (World War II).

Opinion. Fragment. Opinion. How intelligent and persuasive!

Z3ratul 07-6-2006 08:45 AM

Re: Is it right to rage or start wars?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by mailedbypostman
War is necessary at times, doesn't make it right.

Right. Wrong. Words.

@AutoAlden- ap, you'll learn, has a knack for intellectually bashing the majority of us.

My opinion? I think that your opinion would probably drastically change if you were directly affected by it... not to say I speak from experience. It's just easy to look at something apathetically when you have an objectional standpoint.

I'm not one to say who does and doesn't deserve death. Ultimately, as long as I and the ones I REALLY care about aren't getting nuked, I probably couldn't care less. Even if I did have some empathy, I don't think it would matter in a larger scheme, since I doubt I'll be changing the path of the world that drastically. Negative, perhaps, but I prefer realistic. Then again, I don't believe in voting- uh oh!

Cruel as this might sound, to hell with the people dieing in other countries. I'm still here, and I still have my indulgences. Selfish? Maybe. All I'm getting at is all the care in the world isn't going to change whatever war is going on (unless of course you're in a position of some sort of power- I'm not, and frankly, don't want to be).

I'm not sure what I'm getting at; I never am all that sure. Hopefully you can decipher something in all my trite logic.

PS: North Korea, sup?

deltro300111 07-6-2006 09:02 AM

Re: Is it right to rage or start wars?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by repeat
An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind; cliché, but true.

what the **** are you talking about? If you are really saying that punishments don't teach anyone anything, you are ****ing stupid. Something that deserves a slap on the wrist deserves a slap on the wrist. Something that deserves a beat down, deserves a beat down. What the US is doing to Iraq right now is a spanking on a 3 year old, but the three year old is freaking out, and telling all his friends that his daddy beats him. But like, the US is a 9 year old, so like, 12 3 year olds could beat it down.

Z3ratul 07-6-2006 09:06 AM

Re: Is it right to rage or start wars?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by deltro300111
what the **** are you talking about? If you are really saying that punishments don't teach anyone anything, you are ****ing stupid. Something that deserves a slap on the wrist deserves a slap on the wrist. Something that deserves a beat down, deserves a beat down. What the US is doing to Iraq right now is a spanking on a 3 year old, but the three year old is freaking out, and telling all his friends that his daddy beats him. But like, the US is a 9 year old, so like, 12 3 year olds could beat it down.

Where's the definetive list that decided what every action deserves? I think I missed that memo.

deltro300111 07-6-2006 10:11 AM

Re: Is it right to rage or start wars?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Z3ratul
Where's the definetive list that decided what every action deserves? I think I missed that memo.

There's no definitive list, but we're not firing a nuke because they blew up a tower.

We're punishing them with forced reform.

flamingspinach 07-6-2006 02:39 PM

Re: Is it right to rage or start wars?
 
Stop being so petty and living in the past. As Gandhi said, "I object to violence because when it appears to do good, the good is only temporary; the evil it does is permanent [...] Things undreamt of are daily being seen, the impossible is ever becoming possible. We are constantly being astonished these days at the amazing discoveries in the field of violence. But I maintain that far more undreamt of and seemingly impossible discoveries will be made in the field of nonviolence." An eye for an eye does indeed make the world go blind. I certainly hope that our world leaders are not thinking in such childish terms as "teaching lessons" to people by "punishing" them, or else our "modern" society is sadly degenerating.

-fs


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:32 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright FlashFlashRevolution