To begin, he was not condoning war, he was explaining the human psyche. We should do a lot of the things we do, but we do them anyway, because the human psyche is designed so as to rationolise it's actions, so in matters of war, pollution etc., in other words, No-one wants to be evil it is a justified action in the perpatrators mind

You've seen too many movies, son.

Okay, what is about humanity that you love then? What does it looks like to you? I want to know! You've picked my brain, now let me pick yours! Dazzle me with your intellect, Veeno!

In actual fact, I never said war was good, just that it was necessary. I view war as more than just taking up arms. That is the most brutal of all resolutions and it is but one part of it. Military force does not encompass what I feel is the true definition of war. You know the Islamic term of "jihad" - an internal struggle to maintain your ideals, the struggle to improve the society, or the struggle to export your brand of ideals to other people's homes, hearts and minds, etc. That's what I feel war is. Everyone is constantly at war. Everything is a fight. Some fights even have rules but there is always a winner. In every relationship that exists between two parties, there will be a dominant force that will pressure and a submissive one that will yield. Its the too and fro of it all that defines humanity. It is a struggle to maintain a working relationship, balancing it so that you get what you want whilst playing but some arbitrary set of rules that won't allow both parties to walk away with nothing. Think of it as a Game theory scenario. You make compromises all the time for a net result that is beneficial to all.

:rolleyes:

I'll argue my case for the most... hmmmm... I don't condone war by any means (being the peaceful Canuck I am ) but it is something I study from an academic standpoint and plan to for the rest of my life along with the reasons, effects and politics behind them.

As for most interesting IMO: The Greek-Persian Wars. I have debated with several fellow students that it is one of the most influential outcome to a war in the world. I know many may argue against it and I respect that, but I stand by my belief that it is. It's place in the timeline of the world obviously helps its influential-ness but IMO, Western Civ as we know it today would be drastically changed. I'm a "what-if" historian

EDIT: *reads OP* SilverEagle, you do realize that Thermopylae was just one part of a much larger war right?

Nami, can you please stop making clever comebacks before me? Coming up with a different response becomes more difficult.


To the above, the enemies are exactly the same, so you might as well celebrate the honor and bravery that they have as well for being willing to fight on behalf of their country/ideal/pile of rocks/whatever.

To the side note, I don't know what [censored] point you're trying to get across, because it only proves all of mine correct. It's propaganda meant to dehumanize the enemy and make them that much easier to kill, which has always been done. Never in war at any point in time will you ever see a country paint whoever it's fighting against in a positive or respectful light: they will always be demonized and vilified. And if it's something that you truly buy, then you're contradicting what you've been saying since the very beginning and...reinforce what I've been saying the whole time, and destroy the notion of fair play you seem to be extolling.

You don't want me to get started on that, although I could because this thread already has a serious amount of political discussion so I guess bringing religion into it as well wouldn't really hurt it that much.


If you seriously think that way I don't even want to think about what kind of relationship you have with your boyfriend/girlfriend/spouse. Especially the last sentence in that quote - that is really not the case. I myself have many relationships with people in which neither I nor the other person are the "dominant force" nor the "submissive one that yields". It is true that in majority of international relationships in the history that has been the case, but not always and it definitely doesn't need to be that way as you seem to imply.

Er, obviously, this theory falls down when it comes to interpersonal relationships.

But its still valid in business!

C'mon Veeno, you're not trying.

Don't sweat it, that was good.

The Submissiveness and dominance is not as obvious in most cases, and nor is te fight it is all small things, but it amounts to the same, with fire we test the gold is a good prverb for this, humanity becomes better when under strain, just as you see the quality of gold when it is in fire, that is why fighting (not wars or violence) but some kind of struggle, is necessary

*opens mouth*
*closes mouth*

......

*slowly backs out of the thread*

:lol:

Its okay, we don't bite. Not unless you want us to!

I don't have nor want to. What do you want me to think, that you're testing me and I have to prove something to you? Don't be ridiculous.


I see random false anologies are making an appearance as well, eh?

C'mon folks, lets not devolve into barbarianism here. I just wanted to discuss military history with people I respect (though have never met or had any real lengthy discussion with....) and suddenly people are getting all philosophical and "meaning-of-life-and-human-condition-ieny"

War is heavy [censored] man.

:P

You can't just say I'm wrong and leave it at that.
I'm interested in hearing what you think. But if you don't want to play, that's fine too.

Only cuz y'all intellectuals are making it. This thread did not really have to get to the point of questioning the morals of each other and thus the morals of a man as a whole but some people just seem to think they are Socrates reborn or something and seem to believe they are of superior intellect because of their opinion

I just like to have an excuse to use big words , I don't think I am 'Socrates Reborn' nor do I think I have a higher intellect than you, I wou;dn't know, I don't know you, and if I did, I wouldn't base your IQ on your opinion

Generalization is bad 'mkay.

...

...

...
Off topic and such...