Is War Ever Justified and What are the Aternatives?

[Imran Siddiqui]

Peaceful human societies have existed for thousands of years without wars (North America).

That's utterly riduculous, Sava! There were plenty of wars in North American. The Iriquois and Hurons fought a number of wars before the white man came in. The Creek and Cherokee, the same.

--

As for the question. Yes, war is justified, all the time actually, by the winner of the war. When the political costs of negotiation and diplomacy are greater than the poltical and economic costs of warfare, then warfare is even more justified.

[Sava]

Again... comparing a few native warriors killing each other to the utter civilian loss of life in modern wars is wrong.

[Velociryx]

GePap: When did I ever say that war was the natural state of human affairs, though?

Yes....the world has seen periods of relative calm and peace, but that does not speak to the question that spawned this thread...IS war justified.

My answer is still yes, for the reasons I have given.

I would contend that my "analysis" is not shallow at all, but directed to the question at hand.

-=Vel=-

[Velociryx]

Sava - War is war. Nothing in war's definition speaks to technology levels, or the scale of the conflict.

If you regard the native american tribal wars as being "too small to count" then you are certainly entitled to that opinion.

(but it won't change what they were....wars)

-=Vel=-

[Imran Siddiqui]

Again... comparing a few native warriors killing each other to the utter civilian loss of life in modern wars is wrong.

Because one group of people had superior technology (Europeans) and others didn't (Natives) you can't compare them both as warfare?

You're nuts.

[GePap]

But the question at hand is very vague:

Is war ever justifiable? yes, just like Genocide. are there alternatives? There are always other choices.

That is a totaly complete answer, no?

but it does not explain much, now does it?

Sava:

Again... comparing a few native warriors killing each other to the utter civilian loss of life in modern wars is wrong.

Natives many times took hostages, so forth and so on. Native Americans had organized violence. they ahd rules of engagement, taboos, so forth and so on. Was their method of war different than the western method? Yes, but only because they had very different aims which they wanted to achieve.

The Inca waged war just like europeans, for empire. The aztecs waged war incesently, but a very different kind of war, a ritualistic war meant to gather sacrifices to keep the world working. As I have said, war (roganized political violence) is a tool sued to ahcieve an aim, just like a hammer.

[Imran Siddiqui]

But the question at hand is very vague:

But that is why makes it fun!

If it was specific this thread would have been threadjacked or died a long while ago .

[Sava]

I never said they weren't wars. "Assumptions make an ass out of you and me" I forget who said this.

By saying the societies existed without wars, I mean, large organized nations weren't murdering each other. Sure conflict occurred. But not on the scale that they have occured in the last 300 years.

None of us know for sure, because the civilizations were wiped out, but IMO, most of the native conflicts were isolated, small, and didn't have large civilian losses. Warriors fought warriors. It wasn't a peaceful Utopia, but it sure was a hell of a lot better than living in Europe during the late 30's/early 40's.

[Dauphin]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
When the political costs of negotiation and diplomacy are greater than the poltical and economic costs of warfare, then warfare is even more justified.

I presume you are factoring in the loss of life as a political and economic cost, but I wonder how you can quantify it. How much is a human life worth?

[spiritof1202]

Originally posted by Big Crunch


I presume you are factoring in the loss of life as a political and economic cost, but I wonder how you can quantify it.

Well... we can compare the US/UK/Iraq war here. We'd have to go to some great lengths to "catch up" with the kind of genocide that Saddam has been practicing for a generation.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Big Crunch
I presume you are factoring in the loss of life as a political and economic cost, but I wonder how you can quantify it. How much is a human life worth?

Honestly, it is pricelss....which is why it can so easily be ignored.

25 million people at least died between the Elbe and the Volga btween 1939 and 1945. does that tally really change at all the inherent morality, or immorality, of what happend there?

It si easy to be moralistic, very easy. But as of today man is not ready, or willing, to actually live under the full implications of the moral doctrine you espouse.

[Imran Siddiqui]

I presume you are factoring in the loss of life as a political and economic cost, but I wonder how you can quantify it. How much is a human life worth?

Whatever you want it to be worth. Depends on who's in charge.

It wasn't a peaceful Utopia, but it sure was a hell of a lot better than living in Europe during the late 30's/early 40's.

If the Native civilizations had the tech of Europe in the 40s, I assure you, they'd rack up similar death counts as a percentage of their population.

[Velociryx]

Doesn't matter that the question was vague, it WAS the question asked.

As to the rest, in the periods of relative peace and calm that we have seen, what has come of it? Are we more apt to talk about Athens as the birthplace of philosophy and democracy, or are we more apt to talk about the war between Athens and Sparta?

And further, did the marvels of Democracy and Philosophy save Athens from Spartan might?

Was it poetry that stopped the Persian army at Thermopalye, or was it men with nerves of steel, hopelessly outnumbered, and yet more than willing to hold the line, *warring* on their enemies to deny them passage?

Do we remember the glory of the Great Library of Alexandria, or its sacking?

Our entire history has been made up of conflict.

We were born in it, and it is in us.

One day, we'll grow out of it....assuming we don't kill ourselves off along the way, but until then, we ARE war. We invented the term, and we perfected its execution.

It is in everything we do, and everything we touch.

Wanna know what the best selling business book of all time is?

It's not "Who moved my cheese" or "The seven habits of highly effective people" or "Chicken Soup for the Soul"

Nope.

None of those.

It is: "Sun Tzu's - The Art of War"

I find that....compelling and revealing in the extreme.

-=Vel=-

(edited to remove my stutter at the end...lol)

[Sinapus]

Originally posted by Sava
Again... comparing a few native warriors killing each other to the utter civilian loss of life in modern wars is wrong.

"A few native warriors"? Tell me, Sava: who destroyed the Huron tribe?

(Hint: it wasn't any people with white skin.)

[Az]

You all know my views on an ethical "worthness" of something, so I'll spare you.