Blog: If war is the question... what is the answer?

[KiwiBiggles 114]

http://kiwibiggles.w...-is-the-answer/

 

 

Hope you can drop in.

 

All the best

Kiwi

Edited August 3, 2012 by KiwiBiggles

[Capitaine Vengeur 263]

When you have reached the Third Millenium and a supposed superior level of consciousness (connection to the planet, all of that...); when it still takes to rulers of a traumatized and weakened superpower just to brandish a test tube full of flour, and a handful of half-truths and full lies supported by flawed proofs, to have the large majority of their educated population support, with polls as evidence, a faraway trap war in a nowhere land (which by sheer coincidence is but a giant oil well); when you think that 22 centuries before, it took Cato just to brandish a bunch of grapes to get the same result and erase Carthago...

 

Enough said...

 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

 

"World War One: one civilian killed to one hundred soldiers. World War Two: one civilian killed to one soldier. Vietnam War: ten civilians killed to one soldier. Now, you know what to do to survive the next war: Enlist!!" (Pierre Desproges)

[B52STRATO 215]

I have nothing against people determinated for peace, but to post on a site of air combat simulation is a bit ... "bizarre". In that case why not propose a new mod where we can drop pink hearts from the loving bomb bay of plane piloted by a Care Bear and leaving a rainbow trail behind him ?

[+daddyairplanes 10,059]

well if we can have Snoopy on his doghouse in SF1 and 2 then why not the Care Bear B52 stare?

back on topic i'll throw out a movie quote from T2 when John Connor asks the Terminator if the human race is gonna make it.

"No," he replies. "It's in your nature to destroy yourselves." yea we're be nice and enlightened now. but war and disease have been what keep the human population down over the years given there are no predators to do it for us. with winding both down the population will spool up until the BIG bug and/or war come along and knock the human race into the next dark age. not a fan of war mind you (actually quite sick of it after 4 rounds of being target practice for the muslim artillery corps) but it the grand scheme of human affairs it has had it uses. thats not even going into how it spurs human development along( look at the advances going on in brain injury studies right now courtesy of IEDs). sorry going back to my morning coffee now and lose some of this cheery optimism.

[Lazarus1177 164]

War is never the question but,always the wrong answer to a right question.Besides,whats the point of talking when we simply cannot change anything practically?

[JediMaster 451]

People who think war can be eliminated are quite simply poor studies of human nature. They think they have evolved past that point, ergo the entire species must have. In all truth, however, it likely wouldn't take a large effort to get said proponent of mass peace to change their minds. Cripple them, kill a loved one, threaten to take all they have to give it to those who supposedly need it more...whatever, it's not hard.

 

I can tell you from watching 1 yr olds at play that humans are inherently violent when they don't get their way. When the US is becoming increasingly polarized to the extent that in a couple of decades I can see the party in power voting to outlaw the other party for "unAmerican" activities and instigating a full-scale civil war just so they don't have to COMPROMISE on their 100% correct beliefs (because obviously the others must then be horribly wrong and need to be put down), I say anyone who thinks we can just move past war in our lifetimes, or that of our children, or our grandchildren, is simply deluded.

 

You can't make all humans think the same thing. Since we are then wired to see those who disagree or do what we don't want as adversaries, we're stuck.

[+daddyairplanes 10,059]

Jedi, if i remember right Reagan mused near the end of the cold war that it would take something like an alien invasion to actually make everyone in the world band together. even then, if you think about it, it's for the purpose of fighting something else!

[RogerSmith 72]

In that case why not propose a new mod where we can drop pink hearts from the loving bomb bay of plane piloted by a Care Bear and leaving a rainbow trail behind him ?

 

this actually sounds interesting. Makes me stroke my chin and nod.

[+SupGen 78]

JediMaster, you are 100% correct except for one thing... If you look at the history of thr United States you'll see we were always extremely polarized, (to the point that we fought a very costly civil war over certain political differences). I'm not saying it would be impossible, but it would be very difficult for the "party in power" to outlaw the opposition (I agree they all have wanted to-back to the beginnings of the Republic). The reason Representatives are elected for two years, Senators for two, Presidents for four, and members of the Supreme Court for life is to prevent those cycles from synching and allowing that kind of power to accrue to either (any) side. The Founders were actually some pretty smart cookies; they knew that sometimes, gridlock is a good thing.

[+Gepard 11,072]

In that case why not propose a new mod where we can drop pink hearts from the loving bomb bay of plane piloted by a Care Bear and leaving a rainbow trail behind him ?

Some years ago i made a civil mod of FE for my son. Firefighting in the Vogesen mountains. You have to fight large woodfire etc with waterbombers. Its somewhere in the download area. http://combatace.com/files/file/9089-civil-mod-firefighters/

 

 

And by the way, a war is only seen as a good thing if you are on the winning side.

Edited August 4, 2012 by Gepard

[JediMaster 451]

JediMaster, you are 100% correct except for one thing... If you look at the history of thr United States you'll see we were always extremely polarized, (to the point that we fought a very costly civil war over certain political differences). I'm not saying it would be impossible, but it would be very difficult for the "party in power" to outlaw the opposition (I agree they all have wanted to-back to the beginnings of the Republic). The reason Representatives are elected for two years, Senators for two, Presidents for four, and members of the Supreme Court for life is to prevent those cycles from synching and allowing that kind of power to accrue to either (any) side. The Founders were actually some pretty smart cookies; they knew that sometimes, gridlock is a good thing.

 

Yes, IF there were also term limits on those people. When you have some serving for literally longer than some people's lifespans, you know it's just become a case of people voting for their party or the name they know. My preference would be 20 years. Three terms as a senator, 10 as a representative, and then you can't run anymore. Plus it would be cumulative, and you couldn't do 20 + 20. If you serve 5 terms in the House and then get elected senator, you only get 2 terms max.

 

Just 8 years ago, the GOP held the majority in all branches...yet every failing they blamed on the Democrats for not letting them do "anything" they needed to do to make things "right".

"Sorry, Presidency and both houses of Congress and the Supreme Court isn't enough! We have to concede too much to the Democrats!" In other words, they complained their power was insufficient. Every success was theirs, every failure was the fault of the other guys.

Two years later they lost Congress. Two years after that they lost the White House...and then what did they say? "The Democrats have too much power!"

Sauce for the goose is what, diamond-laced illegal drugs for the gander?

 

The Democrats are just as bad, but they only held the reins uncontested for 2 years this century as opposed to the GOP's 6...but still both sides blame the other 100% for everything wrong. When some publicly say that the only solution is for the members of the other party to think like THEY do (frankly the most stupid thing I'd ever heard, and someone like that should be impeached on the grounds of being too big an idiot to hold public office), or in other words making a sideways remark that a 1-party state, with their party as that 1 of course, is the best solution, you see the path to a dictatorship clear as day.

 

Neither side will give an inch because it makes THEM look bad, to hell with whether or not it's good for the country, and the people start to get fed up. Too much gridlock and people demand someone with the authority to steamroll over the blocks and get things done. If your public stance is not "you win some, you lose some" but "you win some, or at least you prevent the other side from winning even if you can't", you are actively promoting the conditions which led to the rise of people like Hitler and Stalin. An ineffective democracy that does not serve the people but only the politicians will not last.

[+Jug 99]

The greatest threat to begin a new war is a politician that cannot find another way to retain power. Once a war is declared, most are opposed to changing horses in the middle of the stream (no matter how deep the water runs).

 

Makes me fearful for our current election situation and the Iran problem.