[extropy-chat] Civilization and War
kerry_prez at yahoo.com
Sun Dec 3 05:20:57 UTC 2006
[Lee, you are right about changing the subject line,
but one person on another list says 'leave the subject
line as constant as possible so too many subject lines
are not on the screen', and another says to change it
as often as possible- matter of opinion]
It's not that you are morally wrong-- completely the
opposite-- but doesn't war have other (admittedly
reactionary) functions? doesn't war reduce population?
war can provide male bonding, individual and group
discipline for both sexes (many women are in Defense);
In '69 our family went to Vietnam protests, the
elderly people in the neighborhood saying: "you think
this is the last war? 25 years ago we thought WWII was
the last war, but it wasn't". They were right, we
protesters thought it was the last war, but we found
out later how war didn't think it needed our
permission to continue.
How long do you think the Iraq insurgency will go on?
5 years? 10? 20? 30? And what is the likely outcome?
We'll be forced to withdraw and instead of dozens
being killed in Iraq every day, the number will be in
the hundreds. You think?
> Not so! War no longer makes sense between healthy
> nations because it destroys everyone's wealth.
> That's the real
> reason that Germany and France, or France and
> England, are
> never warring with each other any more. In the old
> especially before the 1500s, one of the easier ways
> for a prince
> to secure more wealth was to seize his neighbor's.
> People found
> in the 19th and 20th centuries that war made even
> the winner poorer.
Want to start your own business?
Learn how on Yahoo! Small Business.
More information about the extropy-chat