War Philosophy

[willemvanoranje]

don't just randomly attack anyone like the whole Iraq business. It'll make things much worse. Attack if you're attacked, self-defence.

 

[Plexus]

I advocate war in many circumstances. I voted warmonger.

 

[rilnator]

I voted peacemonger because wars are horrible and expensive. However we don't live in a utopian world and never will so wars are inevitable. Conflict is part of man's nature.

 

[Pongui]

Peacemonger! Perhaps I'm just squeamish about little kids getting their limbs blown off, screaming, and can't put those minor incidentals in proper perspective. I've grown to value peace yet more since becoming a father. Must be the hormones, or something.

I also have this odd belief that arming oneself is a sure way to harden enemies, or even make them where none existed. So I advocate unilateral steps towards disarmament. I believe that crisis may often be averted if either side draws the gun away from the other's head.

 

[YNCS]

As someone who spent 20 years in the military, I guess I fall into the Warmonger faction.

 

[Hayek]

I'm not too keen on attacking others without first having been attacked, although there might be some exceptions to this which escape my mind at the moment. I'm pro self-defence, so I guess this makes me rather neutral.

 

[Bozo Erectus]

I voted neutral because although in a perfect world there would never be war, this is far from a perfect world. Sometimes its necessary.

 

[CivCube]

Although war is sometimes necessary to eliminate a common threat against society, I voted peacemonger. The only reason a war begins is because of inflamed passions from an earlier war. If everyone could see the needs of the "other side" for once, maybe we wouldn't need war in the first place.

 

[Simon Darkshade]

Quite obvious. But one dislikes the term 'warmonger' - it sounds like a purveyor of fish, and one certainly has never been associated with anything so middle class as that.

 

[Aphex_Twin]

War in general is wrong, but sometimes fighting fire with fire is the only option. The diference is that we shouldn't be prepared to sacrifice the ideals (equality of justice, freedom of expression) on which the Western world was built to achieve some momentary gain.

 

[Maj]

Originally posted by rmsharpe
I am an advocate of an aggressive foreign policy, so I voted "warmonger."

I cannot say I care for that term, though.

Good one

I'll go with neutral, only-in-self-defense crowd on this one. But even that line of reasoning is blurred. The recent reintroduction of pre-emption to the theatre of war is one instance of this.

Kill only those who kill/maim/torture and cannot be brought down through diplomatic discourse. I value my life more than the aggressor's.

 

[luiz]

Neutral
Only a fool "likes" war. But only a fool would expect us to fight no war. War has always been around, and most likely will remain. I think it was Cicero who said: If you want peace, be ready for war

 

[Aphex_Twin]

If you want peace, be ready for war
This is most often interpreted as : "Arm yourself to the teeth the first chance you get". Peace by fear is always shortlived.

 

[luiz]

Originally posted by Aphex_Twin
If you want peace, be ready for war
This is most often interpreted as : "Arm yourself to the teeth the first chance you get". Peace by fear is always shortlived.

Is it? Pax Romana was basically peace by fear, and it did perfectly well.
And the Cold War? There was no nuclear holocaust mainly because both parts had fear of each other.

PS: I'm not advocating a weapon race here, I'm merely pointing out that Pax Romana is a concept still modern.

 

[Aphex_Twin]

Originally posted by luiz

Is it? Pax Romana was basically peace by fear, and it did perfectly well.
And the Cold War? There was no nuclear holocaust mainly because both parts had fear of each other.

PS: I'm not advocating a weapon race here, I'm merely pointing out that Pax Romana is a concept still modern.

Yet during the Pax Romana they didn't have suicide bombers. They had to have a large number of people pissed at Rome to actually assemble an army and do a little damage. Now you can do a lot of damage with very few people.

The Cold War is also not a good example. Peace was held by a hairthread. I would rather have a second WW2 instead a nuclear arms race. Nuclear holocaust was averted just as much by pure chance as it was by diplomacy and espionage.

 

[luiz]

Originally posted by Aphex_Twin


Yet during the Pax Romana they didn't have suicide bombers. They had to have a large number of people pissed at Rome to actually assemble an army and do a little damage. Now you can do a lot of damage with very few people.

With this I can agree

Originally posted by Aphex_Twin

The Cold War is also not a good example. Peace was held by a hairthread. I would rather have a second WW2 instead a nuclear arms race. Nuclear holocaust was averted just as much by pure chance as it was by diplomacy and espionage.

With this I can't. If you think about it, even during the Cuban Missile Crisis the chance of a nuclear war was really small. In the rest of the Cold War it was nearly non-existent. It' human nature not to take an action that would lead to your own destruction. I would rather have 10 nuclear races then to have the horror of dozen of millions killed in a new WW2

 

[privatehudson]

I personally consider myself a peacemonger as such, but would advocate war if I felt it was needed and/or justified.

 

[GenMarshall]

Originally posted by bobgote

That doesn't make you a "peacemonger"
if you were against war no matter what, you would be a peacemonger, not just because you want a reason for that war.

Yes it does make me a Peacemonger. So therefore I am a peacemonger.

Is there a test somewhere online to see if I am truely a Peacemonger since I would like to prove it to bobgote and to anyone that would doubt me.

 

[bobgote]

Originally posted by CivGeneral
Yes it does make me a Peacemonger. So therefore I am a peacemonger.

Is there a test somewhere online to see if I am truely a Peacemonger since I would like to prove it to bobgote and to anyone that would doubt me.

If you war without a reason, you are beyond a warmonger. you'd be psychotic.

 

[Pontiuth Pilate]

I'll never hesitate to sacrifice someone else's life.