War

[Quimby]

And yes, sometimes there are good reasons for this, like say, those fuckers want to kill us all, but in that case, the *other* side has to engage in sheep hate.

IMO unless you have met, face to face, any person that you have decided to hate, and judged them to be worthy of said hate, then  you are a participator of this "sheep hate." For it is easy to say that our side is always right, and much harder to see their side.. It's all bullshit opinions in the end. (like my post)

But you know what else is broken?  Broad-brush characterizations.

Well said.

[Honey]

I kinda like what Mark Twain says about war here:

"Man is the only animal that deals in that atrocity of atrocities, War. He is the only one that gathers his brethren about him and goes forth in cold blood and calm pulse to exterminate his kind. He is the only animal that for sordid wages will march out...and help to slaughter strangers of his own species who have done him no harm and with whom he has no quarrel. ..And in the intervals between campaigns he washes the blood off his hands and works for "the universal brotherhood of man" - with his mouth."

- Mark Twain, What Is Man?

Having quoted that, it also seems to me that war creates chaos.  Where there is war, there is mayhem, much confusion et cetera.  Playing the mind games.  However, & especially in the current climate, it does not seem to me that chaos creates war.  Most wars seem to be a carefully plotted & organized attempt to control conditions.   

Wars in the past have led to total destruction of peoples, cultures, & technology including that peoples' entire knowledge base.  Destruction in these cases is not random.  It usually consists of swaths of destruction where certain targeted civilizations become extinct, the "good" along with the "bad."  In these wars the "collateral damage" including the peoples killed, raped, etc., are reduced to "spoils of war."  The effects of certain wars often mimic natural disasters like hurricanes, tornadoes, tsunamis, earthquakes, floods, etc.

Many times I think it's more difficult & takes more courage to give up an idea than to give up your life.  It seems as if it's easier to convince people to potentially give up their lives than it is to convince them to give up entrenched dogma.  The theory of communal reinforcement explains this process rather well I think.  George Orwell's writings too:

"But if thought corrupts language, language can also corrupt thought. A bad usage can spread by tradition and imitation even among people who should and do know better."

— George Orwell "Politics and Language" 1946

Much easier to convince people to give up their lives for a cause than it is to convince them to give up their thoughts, notions, ideology & chains of hurtful dogma, et cetera.  Plus there's always the possibility of becoming a martyr for your cause?  People want to be applauded for their sacrifices.  Giving up the tired old clichés, being willing to take real risks, changing your mind, inspiring people to attempt original thought, in short being asked to think or to re-think.  & then actually having to live with your choices day after day.  More difficult & there's no applause for your heroism.  It's easier to glorify war.   (There was an old cigarette commercial – people with "black eyes" & such – the slogan was "I'd rather fight than switch" (brands))

War blanks out the slate in order to re-write.  Being asked to think involves giving up your broken illusions & is more like erasing some of the things written on the slate.  Keeping some of the illusions, erasing others & writing or re-writing some new ones.  & going back to the old drawing board, day after day.  Not as much glory in that.  It's a solitary endeavor with no applause.   

On a more personal note, I have a 17 year old son & get phone calls & mailings from the Marines on a pretty regular basis encouraging him to join.  2 of my cousins went to medical school through the military (couldn't afford to go otherwise.)  1 is stationed in Hawaii (still in the military) the other went to medical school in NY, remained in the military for the conscripted # of years, left the service & now practices in Boston.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

So... apparently the solution to partial world peace is for people to hate *more*?

Yes, and in a more pure way.

[Kai]

Pure hate doesn't discriminate.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Pure hate doesn't discriminate.

Precisely.

[wade]

Many people in the service see it as the only way out of hell.

I joined because at the time, it seemed like the best option for me.
Now they are paying me to stay fit and learn an electronics trade.  (to keep the troops cool, and so the tank, arty and 5.56 rounds hit their target)  
Plus, I also believed that a strong government requires people who are ready to kill a motherfucker for them at a moments notice...(not that this is the only thing a strong government requires...  a good and strong government requires a lot of shit I myself can not give it...)
So I volunteered anyways...
I'm servomg my time.
I almost felt obligated because of the fact I am a fairly spoiled person in comparison to the rest of the fucked world.
It is too bad a lot of people think it is the military who helps keep the rest of the world fuckked..  
that thinking kind of opposes my origional line of thought...
meh.


I was talking to a childhood friend who has already been over there, he is back only because his guts were blown out of him.  ...   He was telling me about some of teh firefights he was in.  Hearing it described to me from him was pertty terrifying, he basically described a hopeless/helpless senario, which made me pretty sad.....  I can't imagine what it would be like having someone shoot at you... even after hearing it from him, i still joined.




people suck and I'm not helping. maybe someday I will try harder.