The year is about to end so I'll do some bashing

[Pekka]

Uhm, I did say that this is so because one big reason is also, that people LIKE war.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

It doesn't matter whether people like or dislike the actions. The use of violence or even allusions to violent struggle are natural and replete within human history as well as nature. To claim them unique to one nation state is laughable.


As to whether it is cool to glorify violent struggle, that is a huge Duh. Given that the two biggest selling themes of all time are sex and violence. (not necessarily in that order)

[Drake Tungsten]

For example, no one in Asia will challenge China, and no one has realistically challenged China for a LOOOOONG time.

Dude, what are you talking about? Japan dominated China from at least 1894 until 1945. They would've continued to do so if America hadn't put them in their place. And China had been pwned by any number of other Asian powers before that (Manchus, Mongols, etc.).

[Straybow]

The Manchus don't count. They're Chinese.

[Impaler[WrG]]

WAR IS PEACE!!!

Realy Pekka, this is all so thouraly and butifully explained in 1984 I dont see how you can be asking, you have ofcorse read it, perhaps you need a re-fresh. That the masses are easily swayed is obvius, we have 2 full pages describing the ways that the mass is brought to the point of supporting the start of a war. The real question is why dose our leadership create perpetual war. If the worlds leaders steared their people towards peace rather then war the world would be almost unrecognizably different. Orwells insight on that issue has been the most piercgly insightfull political though of the 20th century.

[Drake Tungsten]

Orwell is overrated.

[TCO]

I think he is really quite interesting and thoughtful. Ever read any of his essays?

[Ned]

I haven't read through this whole thread, but I want to note that the US has been doing the heavy lifting for Japan and Europe since the end of WWII. To the extent they have peace, we have the burden.

I think it is high time for the Japanese and Europeans to be more active in fighting the bad guys that still exist in the world instead of just second-guessing and harping about US leadership.

[Patroklos]

While I agree with you in the past, both Japan and Europe are taking on much larger roles worldwide. Japan in particular considering certain restraints previously imposed on itself.

[Ned]

Pat, ditto the Germans. Their moves are in the right direction. NATO's involvement in Kosovo and Afghanistan are both welcome.

We all know the French are particularly active in its former colonies. That is as it should be.

But, in the face-off against Korea, where are the Europeans? And, given the global reach of NATO, why can't the Japanese join? If Russia become a problem, surely the East represents a theater in any such confrontation.

[Drake Tungsten]

I think he is really quite interesting and thoughtful.

I agree. I'm not saying he's bad, just that people overrate him (and 1984 in particular).

[Sandman]

Originally posted by Ned
I haven't read through this whole thread, but I want to note that the US has been doing the heavy lifting for Japan and Europe since the end of WWII. To the extent they have peace, we have the burden.

I think it is high time for the Japanese and Europeans to be more active in fighting the bad guys that still exist in the world instead of just second-guessing and harping about US leadership.

The states of Western Europe maintained considerable armed forces during the Cold War. How has the US being doing the 'heavy lifting'?

[Ned]

You seem to admit that the Europeans were not involved in world affairs outside their colonies or ex-colonies until recently. The only exception was Korea.