Do you think starting a [B]WAR[/B] ever has a net positive effect on the world?

DO you think starting a war can ever create a net positive impact?

  • I'm sure it never can. WAR SIMPLY SUCKS!

    Votes: 14 17.1%
  • It probably can't but you can never be sure.

    Votes: 15 18.3%
  • I think it can but I'm not exactly sure.

    Votes: 17 20.7%
  • 'ELL YEA, Of course you can create a net positive impact by starting a War. I'm sure of that!

    Votes: 36 43.9%

  • Total voters
    82
Sidhe's criteria for judging effects of war in 20th C ranked by Birdjaguar
Negatives:
1)loss of human life, totals either side
2)Misery caused by starvation, poverty, disease and lack of housing, knock on effects

I would not rank at all:
financial loss, loss against investment if you want to be mercenary Someone's loss is another's gain and mostly this impact effects the rich anyway
Hateful relations between the two countries for the next x years Of no consequence unless it causes 1 or 2 above.
5)propaganda especially racism and attempted genocide Repeats 1 or 2 above
6)Religous hypocrisy Not a net result of war; it is always around.
7)world opinion of invading country suffers So what? Opinions of nations ebb and flow all the time with or without war
9)escalation in terrorism The cold war produced a climate of political competition between communism and the west; Arms trade fed the fires. Terrorism adds to world misery should be included in 2 above.
people become fiercly partisan against war and governments lose face

Positives
1) stalemates result in nuclear proliferation Kept nukes from being used in war again for 61 years and counting.
2)topling of dictatorships Stopped persecution of minorities by Germany and ended Japanese invasion and subjegation of China and South Asia.

Lesser positive impacts
3)lack of military build up in defeated countries resulting in prosperity in the long term Offset some of prior misery and deprivation
4)technological advancement Offset some of prior misery and deprivation
5)the UN Has a debateable record of reducing misery and poverty and furhter war

How's that? Totally subjective too!
 
BasketCase said:
A war is pretty much universally considered justified if its purpose is to stop somebody who started a war against you. Then you've got World War II, in which the Allied nations were bending over backwards to get the U.S. involved long before the U.S. actually got hit by anything. And, with that, the line starts to get real blurry, real quick.

The current conventional wisdom is no solace--all kinds of crimes against humanity are tolerated as long as said crimes stay inside a nation's borders. "It's none of our business".

ROFLMAO bad bad idea of placing these two examples side by side.
Ironicly thou a "Pre-Emptive" strike is an act of "self defence"
 
No, its never right at all. Whatsoever. Some ppl argue that its good as it spread culture and technology around. It is true ??? So, papua new guinea has alot of "undeveloped" trides. Should the USA goes to conquer them and spread democracy ??
 
thats not what i said, and lets not turn this into ANOTHER anti amiercan thread, we've got enough of those as it is.
But on a different note, yes somebody ought to 'enlighten' those people, perhaps if there is a closer ethnicity to theirs which posesses modern technology ( indonesia/phillipines, for instance?) ought to go. Thats one of the reasons who colonialism was so good to he world ( not to say bad things didnt happen, but not my point) it brought the modern age to peoples whose development had become all but stagnant

you know what.... NEW THREAD TIME!!!
 
Sidhe said:
War in the 20th and 21st century has been a real bust financially or economically, it's just not practical on any humanist or economic level. And as for overthrowing brutal dictators I think history has taught us that it's best to leave the country to sort that out for itself.
So, NATO should have left Milosevic be?
 
I'm not even going to bother telling everyone my view on this LOL.
 
I would say that World War 1 and 2 have a net positive effect, but just barely. At the end of that fourty year time span, the world saw itself burst out of the Industrial age and into the Modern age technologically, socially, and politically. Really, if it wasn't for those two particular wars, we wouldn't be discussing this right now, since the internet came about from the Cold War, which came about from World War 2, which came about from World War 1, etc. So yea, wars do have a net positive effect in advancing mankind.
 
If we had known before Pearl Harbor that concentration camps were exterminating an entire culture, could we have sat back and done nothing?

If a religeous sect today decided that anyone not of that religeon should be PUT TO DEATH could we sit back and do nothing?

Yes war has a positive effect, it makes an entire generation not want to go to war again. Sometimes though, wars are necessary.
 
Top Bottom