Happy Atheist Forum

Take this question and interpret it any way you want?

That's a big question. I could say, "I'm against war," but that seems nonspecific. Everyone's against war when they can afford to be. I think the question is under what circumstances you would fight. I would only fight if there was absolutely no possible alternative and not just I, but people I felt responsible for beyond the basic responsibility to my fellow man were in absolute mortal danger. I would not fight to defend my own life and I would not fight against a circumstance in which I or even people I love might be just captured and imprisoned.

I would not have fought in Afghanistan or Iraq. I would not have fought in Desert Storm. I would not have fought in Vietnam or Korea. I might have fought in World War II, but I would have done so knowing that the entire thing was completely unnecessary and incredibly childish. In response to abject poverty, some Germans turned to a madman and the rest went along with it out of absolute fear.

War is the ultimate incarnation of immaturity. War is the circumstance in which someone loses track of themselves so badly that they value something significantly higher human life. It's not as simple as madness because sane people go to war every day. It's the failure to be an adult and seek a mature resolution.

We all have a desire to live free of pain. Therefore, we should respect other's desire to live peacefully. Peace is life free of pain. For those of you who would correct that by saying peace is life free of fear, I respect your opinion. You're further right than my view. War should only be waged if it is assumed that more lives will be lost otherwise. There are several examples of this in history, and they are all very sad. So, the question is when do we assume the general majority is in danger? When the President says so, and the Senate agrees. Why? It's assumed that one of them is smarter than the rest of us.

There isn't any official atheist view on anything, is there?

My own view on war is this: it's fucking stupid. But plenty of people certainly do seem to think it's necessary. I think some people even like it. Myself, I think it's stupid.

Quote from: "i_am_i"There isn't any official atheist view on anything, is there?

My own view on war is this: it's fucking stupid. But plenty of people certainly do seem to think it's necessary. I think some people even like it. Myself, I think it's stupid.

QFT


(he really does think that)



And I agree.


 

It is very rarely necessary.  It is often appealed to needlessly. It is always awful.

Quote from: "Will"I would not fight to defend my own life and I would not fight against a circumstance in which I or even people I love might be just captured and imprisoned.

Out of curiosity - Why not?

My own attitude toward war would be - Don't start it but be sure it's you who wins it.  Thus I embrace self-defense, and effective strategy, tactics, and logistics, and the virtues of bravery and perseverence, and the nobility of the honorable soldier.  In self-defense I uphold not only defense of the body, but also of property, dignity, freedom of movement, freedom of thought, freedom of association, and freedom of consentual delight.  I deplore the suffering and waste of war, but I bequeath suffering and waste unto any who would put me in a position of self-defense, and to those who deal suffering and waste in my name unto those who plot my demise, my loss, my humiliation, or my oppression, to the soldiers of my nation, I say thank you, and I mean it.  May war one day be no more, if such is possible without the oblivion of man, but until then, may my nation be the best at war, never starting it, but ever winning what it didn't start.

Quote from: "Inevitable Droid"

Quote from: "Will"I would not fight to defend my own life and I would not fight against a circumstance in which I or even people I love might be just captured and imprisoned.

Out of curiosity - Why not?

The value of human life. When principles, ideologies, and such are placed above the value of human life, it becomes easier to take a life. I'd be giving myself permission to consider killing. Once you cross that bridge, it's very, very difficult to get back. I care a great deal about liberty and such, but despite the fact I care so much about it, I care about the sanctity of human life even more. I will not kill unless it is to prevent much more killing. That's the only way I can keep my principles intact.

We all agree that was is bad and should be avoided whenever possible, but there are sometimes when it is necessary to declare war (to defend against an unprovoked attack).

Though, I wish some people would understand that there it's not always a choice between war and peace: it's sometimes a choice between war and appeasement.

The main problem with war/violence/killing is that it is an effective tool for change. It works extremely well (and quickly) as opposed to peaceful and/or non-violent methods. Because of this, warfare is the preferred method for human beings. We have not evolved enough to get rid of the violence inherent in our species.  

War and violence is bad enough, but many time religion is mixed in and then it gets really ugly. I'm reminded of a favorite quote from Kurt Vonnegut:

QuoteThere are plenty of good reasons for fighting, but no good reason ever to hate without reservation, to imagine that God Almighty Himself hates with you, too.

So my personal view? Ultimately war is wrong. The untold suffering it causes, devastation, the complete waste of human life. If humanity spent as much time working towards peace as stockpiling weapons, training armies, and waging war on those whose ideologies differ, we as a species would be so much farther ahead. But it seems like it is always the same: "my god is greater than your god. My god hates your people and sanctions their destruction."

Going back to my original premise, I've always wondered how a non-violent society would protect itself from violence? I don't have an answer, although I think about it a lot.

Personally, I think war is a necessary evil. Sometimes the only thing that can be done is to draw a line in the sand and use violence if someone crosses it. I certainly don't like that stance, but I don't see a way around it.

But when war is used to secure oil rights, remove natives from their land, cause genocide, then it is absolutely morally wrong.

Kind of depends... Far off, as long as those who start a war are honest about their causes and don't use WMDs, I don't really mind. Close to home or a place we import a whole mess of stuff from or export a whole mess of stuff to, bad news.

Atheism doesnt effect your point of view about war.

Like the rest of humanity,  I am against war, unless someone is trying to take mine.

Anotherwords, we are all selfish.

MENTAL NOTE-Reality is what it is, not what anyone wants it to be, and not what anyone thinks it is.

Quote from: "Inevitable Droid"

Quote from: "Will"I would not fight to defend my own life and I would not fight against a circumstance in which I or even people I love might be just captured and imprisoned.

Out of curiosity - Why not?

My own attitude toward war would be - Don't start it but be sure it's you who wins it.  Thus I embrace self-defense, and effective strategy, tactics, and logistics, and the virtues of bravery and perseverence, and the nobility of the honorable soldier.  In self-defense I uphold not only defense of the body, but also of property, dignity, freedom of movement, freedom of thought, freedom of association, and freedom of consentual delight.  I deplore the suffering and waste of war, but I bequeath suffering and waste unto any who would put me in a position of self-defense, and to those who deal suffering and waste in my name unto those who plot my demise, my loss, my humiliation, or my oppression, to the soldiers of my nation, I say thank you, and I mean it.  May war one day be no more, if such is possible without the oblivion of man, but until then, may my nation be the best at war, never starting it, but ever winning what it didn't start.

Emotional.    Well said though.

I don't know, I was opposed to war but my views have changed. I think that sometimes it's necessary, because it's the only way it seems. War is what you resort to when all else has failed but you're not willing to give in.

From a comfortable standpoint, war is horrible and best avoided. But sometimes we don't find ourselves in comfortable positions.

Quote from: "xSilverPhinx"I don't know, I was opposed to war but my views have changed. I think that sometimes it's necessary, because it's the only way it seems. War is what you resort to when all else has failed but you're not willing to give in.

From a comfortable standpoint, war is horrible and best avoided. But sometimes we don't find ourselves in comfortable positions.

...So under what circumstances should North Korea invade China?  

Quote from: "Asmodean"

Quote from: "xSilverPhinx"I don't know, I was opposed to war but my views have changed. I think that sometimes it's necessary, because it's the only way it seems. War is what you resort to when all else has failed but you're not willing to give in.

From a comfortable standpoint, war is horrible and best avoided. But sometimes we don't find ourselves in comfortable positions.

...So under what circumstances should North Korea invade China?  lol  Firstly, if they want to invade a country with more than a billion people I would like to see them try!

Hypothetically, if you were in charge of a country who is going to use weapons of mass destruction (real and verified) to obliterate your nation, what would you do?

Quote from: "Asmodean"...So under what circumstances should North Korea invade China?  

Through 100 million years of continental drift?
If there is not bark left on the trees to eat?

Quote from: "xSilverPhinx"Hypothetically, if you were in charge of a country who is going to use weapons of mass destruction (real and verified) to obliterate your nation, what would you do?

If I was in charge of WMD's to be launched against my own nation... Well, I suppose I'd launch.  

Wording of the question aside, I'd prepare to defend and, once attacked, counter.

Quote from: "Asmodean"

Quote from: "xSilverPhinx"Hypothetically, if you were in charge of a country who is going to use weapons of mass destruction (real and verified) to obliterate your nation, what would you do?

If I was in charge of WMD's to be launched against my own nation... Well, I suppose I'd launch.  :hide:

Exactly, there's one circumstance where war is justifiable. People need to defend themselves against demise and sometimes offense is the best defense.  

Movies like Saving Private Ryan and Rambo IV are great anti war movies.
Show it for what it is, a horrible pointless mess.

Also songs like Iron Maiden's Afraid to Shoot Strangers, or Run to the Hills.

I really do think people ought to read books on WWI and WWII, otherwise it is hard to understand what went on and why. It must have been bloody terrifying when the Japanese were attacking Darwin with NZ yet to come after Australia and at that point the Japanese hadn't had lost any of their battles.
There was a similar story with the Germans and Italians who where beating everyone.

It was a race against time, for the allies to develop technology and weapons before the Axis took over the world.
We were just lucky that Britan was an island and had dominance over the channel and that the American's discovered the Japanese ocean fleet before the Japanese discovered the Americans.

From my point of view as an atheist, war and religion are the two big universal aberrations of mankind.  When christians come at me with the old argument of spirituality being universal among humans, I can reply "So is war, and that's not good either".

The Quakers got to me growing up...I am a pacifist...I would give my life to protect .. not take one

War if a fact sadly even if we do not believe ...it is there

My husband is a vet but was an electronics instructor so he never saw combat thank goodness...

I believe in building up not breaking down

Environmentally war is horrific!..in fact I can not think of a "good" reason for it...but a milion and two  excuses for "why" ...I guess we as human beings in general think it is valuable because we keep doing it?

Kind of like hitting a kid to teach them not to hit?

Violence begets violence as far as my very limited view of all this goes....I do not see that changing...mainly because of God and religion...not to sound fatalistic or anything...but I do feel this will not stop until everything is gone

It bothers me that we still fight over the stupid things we do.  I sort of get America's invasion to secure the petroleum fields in the middle east, although it makes me sick that my country would devastate another just for oil. it's definitley not a legitimite reason to kill so many people.

The next big, possibly global conflict will be over water supplies as our populations continue to rise and we continue to waste on an epic scale.  Soon there will not be enough even for the "haves". 

Yep, the next big conflict will be one of desperation..... I guess I can understand that one.

war is the deformed child of Neccesity.

In our living history Greed and not Circumstance raped Necessity

War is a tribalist act of penis enlargement, is what it is.

well, all humans are intrinsically and truly atheist
war statistics prove it, pushing us below the urangotang
that is an appropriate model deity, for a personal god

although religion is used to conduct the war, it never serves as a real cause.
high ranking priests like key generals cannot be religious. Power does not allow for irrelevant nonsense

the crunch is that even without religion is war inevitable? or has it got to do simply with wallet  (and penis) size???

The Logos has nothing to do with love, it is but a fight to the death for the minds of people.