Can War be a good thing? - Page 5

Good things come from war - yes

Bad things also come from war.

So you have not proven that war is a good thing, only that good things can come from war.

Next question. Any good that may come from war, could not the same good come from elswhere?

quote:

---

you should get off this site

---

After you

sometimes war is necessary for the good of the whole.

'you should get off this site'

that was taken completly out of context. the point was, that because good comes from war, regardless if we could get it from somewhere else, it is completly justified to call war a good thing. because it is up to perspective to decide wether the good or bad wiegh more.

quote:

---

because good comes from war, regardless if we could get it from somewhere else, it is completly justified to call war a good thing

---

So anywhere that good may come from must be considered good?

yeah. if someone says that the good from something out ways the bad, who are we to tell them they are wrong.

That is poor logic. If one million people die in order that you may have a cheeseburger then you could call that a good thing. Because if you did not know any of the dead but still got your cheeseburger then all would be effectively right with the world. That is a very sick mindset.
To an individual good and bad may be relative but one must consider all persons effected by war and then figure if it is good or bad based on the collective idea rather than an individual one.

War can be good or bad depending on why it was started and what it accomplished.

your right, that is sick. but its the truth. i dont have to do anything. but i do do it my way.

What if both sides of the war are right, at least from their own prespectives.

quote:

---

sometimes war is necessary for the good of the whole.

---

Yes, when more people are saved then killed.

Supposedly we went to Iraq because of 9/11. I think in 9/11 three thousand died. Now we know that Saddam had no connection with Al Quada and the person responsible is still free. Yet we've killed over 100 thousand Iraqis.

Some think this is a religious thing, an attempt to wipe out Islam, weird thing is we're actually helping to create another Islamic state with a touch of democracy, something like Iran who is our enemy. So we're building a bigger enemy, not to mention this has been a great opportunity for terrorists recruiters who are meeting and exceeding their goals by 200 percent. Unfortunately, can't say the same about our recruiters. Lots of people want to send our soldiers to war but to few are willing to be one.

Once again you are correct, sometimes war is necessary.

Just as the bible says - there is a time for war
AND
there is a time for peace.

It is time for peace - to many children have died for nothing. We're not even getting the oil we wanted. Halliburton and Cheney has made eight million but promises to give it to the charity of his choice, I want to see the receipt.

Even though we didn't get the oil we wanted - the oil companies managed a 79 percent profit.

So this has been good for some who worship mammon (there's is the spoils of war bought by blood). Don't believe in God because then you don't have to feel guilty. Justify it by saying you wished everybody could be so lucky.

Everybody could be if we didn't go to war.

Each his own - we'll all reap what we sow, here or after whether you believe in it or not.

But I have absolutely no respect for someone who will support a war their not willing to fight in. When I was in the Navy, we called that one way, and that's what they are "One Way".

I will make reference to Christians and the Iraqi war, considering this is a hot topic currently and in the past few years. The evil Bush went to war in the name of the 'Christian God'. And for one prime reason- power for money & oil. He believes that this was just, and I'll explain how I think this was utterely wrong.

Despite the dominant view of war as something inherently ignoble and incompatible with Christian living, most Christians still approve of wars from time to time (such as Bush), deeming them 'necessary evils.' This is a paradox.

Popular opinion on the matter tells us that resorting to force in certain situations is 'necessary' to save the lives of victims of injustice (including ourselves). Yet such actions are also held to be 'evil' because warlike acts are 'inhuman' and do not follow the model of Christian living found in the life of Jesus nor do they model the morals of most non-religious people (such as myself).

I believe that warfare is viewed not as a possible positive good but as a necessary evil (unfortunately) that taints all who touch it. A particular war may be a 'necessary evil'- either to protect some good or, best of all, to banish war altogether. But such a 'necessary' war will not be a 'just' war. When we say that we will allow an evil deed (such as fighting a war) in order to end a greater evil (such as the murderous policies of a government), the former is not transformed into an act of justice. It is certainly a permissible act, but it is not a just one. On this view, then, there can be no 'just' wars.

The military does not want to remind people that military service can involve fighting, dying, and killing for one's country. And therefore the prospect of a soldiers opportunity is downplayed. The Armed Forces are ashamed to admit that they are in the business of using lethal force. Which is rather sad.

I believe there are three requirements for a war to be just (which no major war that I'm aware of has ever fullfilled): right authority, just cause, and right intention. And in regards to the Iraqi war, the US and its allies certainly did not fullfill any of these requirements at all. A failure to engage in a just war is a failure of virtue, a failure to act well. Iraqis death toll estimates are about 100,000- 128,000 (that is probably an underestimate) and is increasing. That is a failure whatever your evil feebleminded reasons are Mr. George Bush.

Make Love not War.

quote:

---

I believe there are three requirements for a war to be just (which no major war that I'm aware of has ever fullfilled): right authority, just cause, and right intention.

---

As much as I normally respect your opinion, I have to disagree this time. Just cause, is the cause of freedom not enough?. Saddam used the families of the soilders agianst the soilders to get the military to fight for him. He also paid 25K to the families of people who would blow themselves up. They have also found proof that he gave state support to al-Quida. Right intention, when clinton was in office the WTC was bombed and he did nothing even though he had the chance to get osama then. This war is necessary to protect the US. Right Authority, the people of power need to help those without when they can.

100,000 - 128,0000, they kill more of each other then that all the time.

quote:

---

I believe there are three requirements for a war to be just (which no major war that I'm aware of has ever fullfilled): right authority, just cause, and right intention

---

Please define these requirements.

war is natural and necesary. certain people have to die while others live. peace is also necesary they both cancel out. with the current population it is presently impossible let alone inplausible to not have war.

So is war simply a way of keeping the population at an acceptable level?