I quote of Einstein's regret news:



Often I kept wondering, aliens will never invade such a dangerous planet like Earth where we are pointing our own weapons at ourselves.
Perhaps there will never be unity among all humans at all forever.
Again I quote from Einstein, "... so long as there are men, there will be war.."

Can there possibly be anything else more powerful and dangerous than the atomic bomb?
Of course there is, we just never caught glimpse of it yet.

To say powerful and dangerous, is quite subjective.
There are more than hundreds of categories of it, ranging from long range, to close-combat, to aerial, to land, to sea, to space, to psychological, to anything else unimaginable.

This is an open discussion on the current military weapons from all over the world and what lies in the future.
What has science done to us?!

I strongly believe the existence of the nuclear bomb isn't a bad thing, in fact it may be the main reason the world as we know it now isn't in a total world war.

Consider this, during the Cold War if there wasn't a nuclear deterrent the US and Soviets would have engaged in conventional warfare many many times over. The idea of MAD, Mutually Assured Destruction, is scary enough to deter either side from starting a war. It would be easier to NOT go to war and stay in peace then go to war and try to avoid using nukes.

Consider the amount of human fatalities in the hands of nukes compared to all the automated firearm technology which was based on the Gatling gun, nuclear weapons aren't as terrible as it seems.

Nukes aside, i would think the biggest threat that we have in terms of weapons are biological weapons and IEDs, the latter coupled with fanatics/psychos is a very real threat today.

On a side note, even a pencil is deadly in the hands of wrong people.

Such ideas for war it's about defending yourselves by attacking others who may seemed to appear to be capable of attacking FIRST.

So, in short:

Offense is the best defense.

Folks,

War is ONLY possible with the existence of LARGE number of STUPID and IGNORANCE people. Without that, the worst that can happen is small scale gangster warfare.

Dreamer

i find that statement true. moreover, war exists because of differences and greed in human. there is always insecurity among us even in our daily life. on a small scale, even sibling rivalry which cause negative result either jealousy, insecurity, spitefulness and others.

however, i dont think that we can solve this inferior complex desire of US HUMAN as it is built into us by our creator. maybe there will be a weapon SO POWERFUL, it removes the urge to be better than other people. then, maybe we will stop pointing weapon at each others.

with great power comes great responsibility, however human heart is insatiable

jcmf,

WAR is highly ORGANIZED and REQUIRED extreme amount of LOGISTIC. It can ONLY happen with LARGE SCALE of STUPIDITY with SUPPORT from large number of people.

Petty things like sibling rivalry can only result damage to a small number of people.

So, DO NOT COMPARE those things with WAR. They are TOTALLY DIFFERENT.

Dreamer

Unity is only an idea that not many people across culture, continent, religion, creed and so on may not share or even practice.

Biasness, prejudice, spite, jealousy and intolerance so on breeds the perfect ingredients for us to kill each other.

When ideas clash some may resort to a compromise, but some may use force to impose ideas on others. (thinking that it is right)

the sole purpose of having a military is to defend ones belief..

needless to say history presents us with numerous reasons why a country needs to have military until today.

-----

In the future, may be we will achieve unity, wars among civilisation may come to an abrupt end. Nevertheless, we will still need to retain our capability to fight...

who knows what lies beyond the last frontiers of space?

or may be a piece of coment hurling towards earth?

in the war agreement. nuclear weapons can't be drop during war technically..since the hagasaki and hiroshima incident..its actually a technological warfare race between countries(russia and usa during coldwar) then, everybody want to participate in the race. nuclear power=technological advance..but i fear later in future, this nuclear holocaust will soon be true, since some countries are not bonded with this agreement(n.korea and iran)

-Whoever said the pen is mightier than the sword obviously never encountered automatic weapons!

why not?
human oledi over population which being a threat to this planet
nuclear weapon is the best , fast and efficient way to reduce human population

Based on the first post in this thread, a letter written using a pen caused nuclear weapons to be created so a pen can be mightier than automatic weapons. Not to mention automatic weapons were probably designed by a pen wielding person.

Naw.. in today's paper-less office. They're all done via computer.

ya, everyone noe that. actually the quote was by General MacArthur..he's a general..
sos

On the other hand, if humankind wasn't constantly thinking of new ways for killing each other, we'll probably be still in the stone ages.

Think penicillin, jet engine, anti-biotics, surgery, advancement in computers etc..... and Band of Brothers, COD franchise, Gundams, Macross.... and the list goes on.

War causes inflation and military weapons kills humans indirectly too.
Every resources spent on making weapons doesn't gives anything in return, e.g. you build a school, your children get to use the school. But you build a missile and fires it, it's gone.

Wrong.

The US War effort during WW2 directly pulled them out of the great depression.

When u give ppl a war, u give them an enemy. In other words a sense of direction. Even if they lose, they have the potential to come out of it better than they were. Japan would be an excellent case studyl.

who cares about war????????!!!


if there's a war at the place tat u r residing, then move away lah...wat for wait to be bomb??>>

anyway...we wun live forever, so if humans wanna fight, let them fight lah...let our children of the future fight among themselves and self-destruct lah...

wat for care so much when u dun even live forever at all???!!...


this issue is like discussing about the environemtn...

Please explain.

When a war occurs, there will be death, hunger, spreading of diseases, poverty, fear, basically everything that humans naturally avoid. So, of course war is something that people care about, and try to avoid. If people could just move about freely during a war, not so many lives would not have been lost. During the Japanese invasion of Malaysia, do you think Malaysians could just go wherever they like? There were checkpoints everywhere and they had strict control on movement and curfews.

Just because we are all going to die doesn't mean we should just war happen. Death is unavoidable, but the number of deaths during a war is much higher than during peace time. The effects of war are undesirable so why do you advocate war?



It's just like saying since we will get hungry eventually, even after eating, why bother eating?

This post has been edited by Thinkingfox: Jul 15 2009, 12:56 AM

Deadlocks,

WAR is a HIGHLY ORGANIZED affair involving LARGE NUMBER of people. It can ONLY happen with the support of LARGE NUMBER of people. Only if LARGE NUMBER of PEOPLE are STUPID and IGNORANCE, they can be ORGANIZED into waging WAR. Anything less than that, you cannot have LARGE SCALE WAR. It is just a small scale skirmishes.

Gangster are NOT capable of waging full scale war. Only a country with the support of LARGE NUMBER of STUPID and IGNORANCE PEOPLE can do that.

So, STUPIDITY and IGNORANCE in a LARGE SCALE is the cause of WAR. As to whether people use sword, rock, arrows, guns to fight, it is IRRELEVANT.

Dreamer

Let me rephrase my question.

How do you justify your perception of this STUPIDITY and IGNORANCE that you see?

Deadlocks,

Let me throw the question back to YOU.

Is WAR justifiable??

If not, isn't it STUPID and IGNORANCE for LARGE NUMBER of PEOPLE to waste their lives and resource on this effort?? The RULING CLASS has something to gain. But, how do the PEASANTS get of this?? Nothing...

Read chapter 1 of "Art of War" by Sun Tzu

Dreamer

This post has been edited by dreamer101: Jul 15 2009, 08:55 AM

War does not end strife - it sows it. War does not end hatred - it feeds it. For those who argue war is a necessary evil, I say you are half right. War is evil (where strife, there every evil work: Bible, James 3:16). But it is not necessary. War cannot be a necessary evil, because non-violence is a necessary good. The two cannot co-exist.

---

Added on July 15, 2009, 10:39 amWe make war so that we may live in peace.

---

Added on July 15, 2009, 10:45 amNobody is driven in to war by ignorance, and no one who thinks he will gain anything from it is deterred by fear.

This post has been edited by tentenko: Jul 15 2009, 10:45 AM

this have become quite RWIish.

You're asking the wrong question.

You don't ask: "Is WAR justifiable?"

You ask: "How does one CHOOSES war, as a CHOICE, and a RESOLUTION, whether or not his personal justifications are VALID or NOT, and whether he foresees the consequences as GOOD or BAD?"

How dreamer101?

How does one even afford to think of such a CHOICE in life?

You spend extensive time in psycho therapy don't you? You should know better about the human psyche, I presume.

Deadlocks,

People do not CHOOSE WAR. The ruler choose it for them. Then, they use PROPAGANDA to CON them into supporting IT. So, STUPID and IGNORANCE people get CONNED into supporting the WAR. Then, WAR is possible.

Have you EVER really study history of WARS to begin with?? Stop buying into those PROPAGANDA BS that people choose WAR.

So, it was not a PERSONAL choice. A person cannot WAGE WAR. It takes a COUNTRY.

Dreamer

This post has been edited by dreamer101: Jul 15 2009, 07:13 PM

IMO, it would be better if a humanities sub-forum is opened as this discussion is not really science-based but more ethics, moral and philosophy based.

Anti-Matter bombs. Not yet made because we can't mass produce anti-matter yet and we don't have practical means of storing anti-matter.

In the future, I'm very certain that humans will no longer go to war directly. I believe we will go to war using legions of robots ranging from AI robots to robots that are controlled by humans. The most probable transition I can foresee is robots accompanying and aiding humans and eventually battalions of robots going to war with semi-AI capability and controlled by controllers from a distance.

Already we're seeing technologies like Global Hawk, Ripsaw MS1, SWORDS and BigDog. I'm especially impressed with Global Hawk and Ripsaw, they have a great potential in replacing conventional ground troops, but not yet for special ops.


Yup, I agree with this. The threat of a nuclear attack is strong enough to prevent a war, but the danger is that nuclear weapons can be misused by lunatics like Kim Jong-il and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.


Nuclear weapons = fallout = inhospitable/contaminated land = less place to live as fallout can go very far if there's a wind or ground water


how to move away whem airports are closed, no flights in or out, ships blocked borders closed, etc?

anyway, why is this thread going into how bad war is and etc? Isn't this about weapons and tech?

Note the two bolded statements. Contradictory much? How is a ruler's choice, isn't a personal choice? Isn't that, the ruler's personal choice?

Was Hitler's decision to go to war not a PERSONAL CHOICE?

Was Abraham Lincoln's decision to FIGHT in the WAR, not a PERSONAL CHOICE?

Do you know why a phenomenon such as WAR, MUST EXIST? The phenomenon that condones violence?

This post has been edited by Deadlocks: Jul 16 2009, 01:07 AM

Science hasn't done anything to us that wasn't already within us to begin with.

Well maybe not entirely. Technology has enabled humanity to isolate one's own conscience from one's conduct, be it directly or indirectly. We just tend to realize it far too late to be of any practical use.

Killing a person up close and personal with a melee weapon would have, to some people, a different effect from killing the same person from afar, with a rifle perhaps. Not the best of analogies but there is the faint example of how the tool acts as a psychological divide (however slight), distancing the act from the conscientious consequences in the perpetrator's mind. (Of course, given to deeper reflection, the perpetrator may just end up with the exact same feelings of...guilt? Apathy? You decide)

That's why ethics and principles are essential to pretty much anything related to humanistic activities. Albert Speer, Minister of Armaments in National Socialist Germany, remarked on this, as a reflection during his incarceration in Spandau prison.

//
Short of delving into the psychology of politics, sabre-rattling, international diplomatic reputation and whathaveyou, that's my take on the technical aspect of military weapons.

military sciences are there to protect against ourselves. humans are evil.

Deadlocks,

<<Was Hitler's decision to go to war not a PERSONAL CHOICE?>>

If MAJORITY of German people do not support Hitler, is WAR possible??

<<Was Abraham Lincoln's decision to FIGHT in the WAR, not a PERSONAL CHOICE?>>

Ditto, if MAJORITY of the North in USA do not support Abraham Lincoln, is WAR possible??

Isn't this BASIC common sense?? WAR is NOT possible without the support of LARGE number of people.

<<Do you know why a phenomenon such as WAR, MUST EXIST[[size=9]? >>

Who say so?? WAR is ORGANIZED Violence. It is ONLY possible with the ORGANIZATION and SUPPORT of large number of people. Only with the existence of country aka nation state, WAR is possible. In the old day, the largest conflist is ONLY between one tribe / village versus another.

Dreamer

I'm sure some of you have heard of this somewhere before.

"War is a continuation of politics by other means." - Von Clausewitz.

Yes, the purpose of war is to serve a political end, but the true nature of war is to serve itself.

In other words, the soldier who is most likely to win the war is the one most willing to part company with the politicians and ignores everything except the destruction of the enemy.

But in a nuclear war, the true enemy cannot be defeated. Because in my humble opinion, in a nuclear war, the true enemy is war itself.

as long there is human, there will be war..
and "As long as we are human, there will still be work to do". war is a thing to do but politically, war is a master plan by politician to achieve their goal whether bad of good..technology(nuke weapon and all) is just a tool to achieve the goal..

but not all war r promote by human. war such as the crusade, it was a god's command..you dare to defy god command?

This post has been edited by tentenko: Jul 16 2009, 09:40 AM

Did you know Hitler rose to power legitimately and DEMOCRATICALLY?

If he did not have the support of the German people, how do you think the bolded is possible?



This post has been edited by befitozi: Jul 16 2009, 09:59 AM

well, hitler was a high profile person and very charismatic man.. i've watch this ww2 documentaries..the promote of ww2 occurred not rightafter hitler become fuhrer of german nor because of his hatred for the ally and jews(bcoz he's a war veteran of ww1) but his vision for germany to seize living space and resources that lead to ww2..and his speeches are quite religious and also convincing for mere citizen..such like the genocide of Jews are necessary and the invasion of polands..
well, some do oppose him including his own fellow party members..but only realized after the killings of millions civilian..

This post has been edited by tentenko: Jul 16 2009, 10:26 AM

@tentenko,

Using the excuse of god command is one of the most influential reason to gather many people to the cause of war, but that is just not right. It is the manipulation of religion.

yes true, religion itself despise war, sometime people confuse what is written on books and speeches by the corrupted..but war become necessary when defending nation from invasion or exploitation..but i think the crusade is madness..killing civilian for religion, its madness..religion that always protect and become guidance somehow leads people to kill..
hitler really manipulate religion for his vision kaw kaw..thus, driving people to war..but he's not a true catholic at all . he never go to church and despise the taxes collected by church at that time...these kind of ppl bring chaos to the world..

This post has been edited by tentenko: Jul 16 2009, 04:24 PM

Yes, Crimson Tide, Lieutenant Commander Hunter.

Crusades...religion, all religion as we know it on this terrestrial ball, is but humankind's interpretation of what we consider to be a divine firmament/mandate. Why else would there be variations on the concept of a divine being, even a monotheistic one?

//Moderate off-topic

His own party members, if you meant the crowd who initially followed the Socialist line of National Socialism, became uh...district leaders (translation from Gauleiter?), and were soon left to complacent administrative roles. The ones who could directly do anything, didn't care or didn't dare. The ones who tried ended up dead (July 20 1944, White Rose, to name but two).

World War 2 occurred because too few people saw National Socialism as Hitler presented it for what it was. Post-WW1, Germany was in a state of disarray. Not helping was the fact that certain circles of society (the military brass not the least) considered Germany's loss a result of being backstabbed, by Jewry, by the politicians, take your pick: kind of depends on whose story you find credible. The war reparations levied on Germany (Soon to suffer the effects of the Great Depression) by the victors post-WW1 certainly compounded things. All in all...the people in Germany weren't exactly all smiles day in, day out. Primal discontent lurked, and Hitler just so happened to eventually arrive at the helm of what became a provider of various outlets for the populace's discontent.

With regards to one of the esteemed posters above, Hitler's decision to go to war was both a personal decision backed by...political ideologies. Not public opinion, not entirely. Bearing in mind this was prior to the advent of mass-marketed mainstream computers, never mind the Internet, most people relied on official sources of information to form their ideas on what's right and wrong, what's black and white. Given that the Propaganda Ministry/Ministry of Public...Enlightenment (or Entertainment? Can't remember the exact name offhand) was under Nazi control, it would hardly be easy to form a realistic view of the situation. Even if one did...there's always the Gestapo and the SD to 're-educate'.

But where does such a choice comes from in the first place?

Did you read what my questions properly? I asked: "How does one bring about the choice of starting, or fighting a war, in his/her psyche?"

You can keep on saying how people are influenced by propaganda and hence supported the decision of war-mongers.

But what really is going on in the minds of war-mongers that lead to choose such an option that condones violence?

That is the question.

And do you understand why ORGANIZED VIOLENCE is needed? Do you understand why words of logic, common sense, and fact, sometimes DO NOT WORK?

Deadlocks,

<<And do you understand why ORGANIZED VIOLENCE is needed?>>

Organized Violence is NOT needed.

Human may have violence tendency. But, in order for ORGANIZED VIOLENCE such as WAR to happen, it needs

A) The ORGANIZER

B) People willing to be ORGANIZED

Without (A) and (B), it cannot happen.

And, for (B), the PEASANT aka FOOLS, they GAINED NOTHING from WAR. They lose their lives and much munch more. So, it is KIND to call them STUPID and IGNORANCE.

Stupid is Stupid does.
- Forrest Gump


It is VERY SIMPLE. If you want to stop WAR, we need to get rid of the mind set that WAR is necessary and needed. Now, if you do not want to stop WAR, what is there to discuss?? People can blame rock, stone, arrows, and guns for killing people in the WAR.

Read "Art of War" by Sun Tzu. Sun Tzu has a very impartial and honest view of what war is. It is JUST a political tool by the ruler.

Dreamer

Yes, it is a political tool, war is something that needs support from the your UNJUSTIFIED stupidity and ignorance, and no, I'm not trying to stop war, neither am I trying to support one.

What I am really trying to make you understand is why an individual or a.k.a. the organizer/the war-starter can SURPASS his/her own CONSCIENCE and make strong RESOLVES to NOT CARE about the casualties of war, and decided to start one anyway.

It is to understand why individuals choose/react/resort to violence.

That is my question.

This post has been edited by Deadlocks: Jul 19 2009, 05:57 AM

There is too many man want to lead and rule the world as they wish.
and
195 country still no enuf for man, that is why internal war still happen

Deadlocks,

<< What I am really trying to make you understand is why an individual or a.k.a. the organizer/the war-starter can SURPASS his/her own CONSCIENCE and make strong RESOLVES to NOT CARE about the casualties of war, and decided to start one anyway.>>

I understand perfectly well about that. It is VERY SIMPLE. Some people are BUSYBODY. They like to have the POWER to interfere with other people's life. So, when they have the POWER, they do it. They THINK and BELIEVE that they SHOULD tell people how to live their lives. And, if people disagree, they deserve to die.

Those people always existed. They could only do the greatest EVIL if others do not stand up to them.

Some BUDYBODIES justify their action by the basis of RACE, RELIGION and so on. But, the TRUTH is they like the power. It has NOTHING to do with RACE, RELIGION and so on. But, the masses are STUPID and IGNORANCE to buy into that.

Dreamer

Knowing that they BELIEVE in such things, haven't it occurred to you that WAR never changes, and never ends? It does not exists from THIN AIR.

IT EXISTS FROM HUMAN WEAKNESS, i.e. the lust for power.

And HUMAN WEAKNESS is not something you can stop.

Deadlocks,

I TIRED of repeating myself over and over again. If the MASSES do not support those busybodies, WAR cannot happen. It is as simple as that. Why can't you understand that??

WAR only allow provide POWER to the ruler and no one else. The MASSES have nothing to gain.

Dreamer

You're the one who went out of track here. You kept explaining how war is POSSIBLE with people supporting them when I was only, specifically asking you:

"What makes a man to start war?", NOT "How does war happen?" (hence answers provided by you that it needed the support of the people)

And that's how I questioned your initial justifications of when you stated that these war-starters are stupid, and ignorant.

Deadlocks,

<<And that's how I questioned your initial justifications of when you stated that these war-starters are stupid, and u]ignorant[/u].>>

You DO NOT READ very well. I said (B) are STUPID and IGNORANT. I did not say (A).

Dreamer

If you knew that the people who supported the war were STUPID and IGNORANT, doesn't that make the same for the war-starters as well?

Hence your overall actual point is REALLY:

WAR = STUPIDITY & IGNORANCE. Is this correct?

And my point to you is:

WAR = STUPIDITY & IGNORANCE = HUMAN WEAKNESS = WAR IS INEVITABLE.

This post has been edited by Deadlocks: Jul 20 2009, 12:13 AM

even here i cOuld see a war happening. haiz..

Mahathir say we should label war as a criminal action. I support him

---

Added on July 21, 2009, 1:46 amWar is the last resort when diplomacy aggreement cant be establish

This post has been edited by kuroman84: Jul 21 2009, 01:46 AM

aggreement? which country will agree with others country? except the weak.

kuroman84,

This is coming from someone that ISA anyone that disagree with him. How NAIVE can a person be to believe this kind of BS from him??

Dreamer

We are really the going to die at our own hand one day. I m sure one day someone will develop some new weapon that may get out of hand in testing and cause world wide destruction. I'm sure there are many cases going around everywhere and one day it will just kill us all.

But the quote from Einstein, he was pretty much regretful on the last days of his life for inventing the Atom bomb.

I concur, Only North korea can pull us out from depression right now...

---

Added on July 23, 2009, 12:23 amIf he never invented Atom Bomb we will be writing and speaking Japanese now...


This post has been edited by OlgaC4: Jul 23 2009, 12:23 AM

it's not a military weapon per se, but google up "large hadron collider". according to critics it has a small mathemethical chance of creating a black hole or strangelet on earth.

This post has been edited by rockets: Jul 23 2009, 10:22 AM

War is just another tool in the box of trinkets we can use. Actually one of the most effective as violence is primal and fear of violence shakes individuals to their core. The only solution is counter violence sometimes, and people who don't believe in it's application and use and certainly foolish.

In a world of peaceful people, the 1 man willing to use violence to further his means is king.

It's all politics.

People need to understand that words of logic, reason, and fact sometimes DON'T WORK.

However, violence on the other hand, always work for the one who remain standing, i.e. the victor.

Both have consequences, nevertheless.

What works, works. And sometimes the ends do justify the means. Even logic and reason sometimes dictate the use of force at certain points.

Not all the world is filled with egalitarians. If i wanted to harm your family for my own material advantage, wouldn't it be logical you react with force?

I'm not going to reason with the robber entering my house at night, do what you want peaceniks, if he doesn't leave when challenged, i will open fire.

Exactly my point.

Too bad I'm actually directing this to dreamer101, at the expense of your intellect.

And I dodge bullets.

we war for land. greed of mankind

we war fer power

Now for a science related view for this thread

war, or rather the expectation of it, spurs modern non-health based tech research. Certainly not the only form of encouragement, but definitely a major one.

remember, teh nets came from DARPA, which was there for the MILITARY research(ok, so its defense, which brings us back to the expectation of war). and GPS came from US air force.

without military funding, those fat cats in business suits will probably squeeze the scientists and researchers. Not all research generates profit, and as long as it doesn't generate immediate profit, most business aren't going to fund such research. Honda seems to be the only exception i can think of.

Oh, and don't forget the space race, which was during the cold WAR. We got satellites and space travel from that. Though I admit the arms race went in the wrong direction...

Some ppl here seem to be implying that experiments might wipe us all out, so what? stop all the big and pioneering experiments just because there are risks involved? if everyone thought like that, all research can stop since there are always ways to abuse technology.

ME WANTS EXOSKEL NAIW

This post has been edited by ngwinnie: Jul 26 2009, 03:46 AM

If religions are the monument of self-importance, then war must be the epitome of self-importance.

have you guys watched Zeitgeist the movie?