PDA

View Full Version : What justifies warfare



pizzadust
01-03-2014, 08:47 PM
What is morally needed to justify a country waging war on another?

Pimp of Pimps
01-03-2014, 08:48 PM
Legitimately wanting to stop oppression.

Crispinianus
01-03-2014, 08:49 PM
Everyone has a different sense of morals, so this question is weird.

But most people think if it saves innocent lives, then it's worth fighting for.

pizzadust
01-03-2014, 08:58 PM
The thing I find oddest about war is that the army and usually the citizens as well both think that they are fighting for a just cause.

Pimp of Pimps
01-03-2014, 09:00 PM
Well no one is going to fight for something they think is wrong.

Cake
01-03-2014, 09:00 PM
fighting for peace is like fucking for virginity.

Pimp of Pimps
01-03-2014, 09:02 PM
Fighting for peace is perfectly valid.

pizzadust
01-03-2014, 09:02 PM
fighting for peace is like fucking for virginity.

There are situations in which that is the only option.

Crispinianus
01-03-2014, 09:02 PM
fighting for peace is like fucking for virginity.

:rotfl

Cake is the greatest

Allara
01-03-2014, 09:03 PM
Why dont you google the just war theory

pizzadust
01-03-2014, 09:04 PM
Well no one is going to fight for something they think is wrong.

I just donīt understand how a soilder would personally justify fighting for Nazi germany or a country of similar corruption.

Cake
01-03-2014, 09:05 PM
Fighting for peace is perfectly valid.


Violence is never the answer.

Pimp of Pimps
01-03-2014, 09:06 PM
I just donīt understand how a soilder would personally justify fighting for Nazi germany or a country of similar corruption.

Hitler was extremely charismatic and persuasive. Some of us would have probably joined his cause if we were in that environment.

Pimp of Pimps
01-03-2014, 09:07 PM
Violence is never the answer.

That's not a realistic view. Violence is part of the answer because peace isn't always going to be able to stop oppression.

In fact, I'd go a step further and say that not resorting to violence in certain situations is outright immoral.

pizzadust
01-03-2014, 09:07 PM
Violence is never the answer.

So self defense is never justified?

Allara
01-03-2014, 09:08 PM
Because your less likely to get caught for plagarism when you copy/paste from TMF then copy/pasting from Wikipedia. :maybe

True dat

Cake
01-03-2014, 09:11 PM
That's not a realistic view. Violence is part of the answer because peace isn't always going to be able to stop oppression.

In fact, I'd go a step further and say that not resorting to violence in certain situations is outright immoral.


Uh, ok, let's be realistic here.

You have a dictator with tons of soldiers who would kill. These soldiers know that this guy is giving the rest of the country the worst life they could get, unhapiness, etc... but still, they would protect him because they are part of the few priviliged. If these soldiers could man up and not obey and "fight" aka "oppose" this dictator there wouldn't be a need of using violence.

Violence only calls more violence in my point of view. You did this to me, well i'll do this to you, it would be a never ending chain of events and vendettas.

Pimp of Pimps
01-03-2014, 09:14 PM
Uh, ok, let's be realistic here.

You have a dictator with tons of soldiers who would kill. These soldiers know that this guy is giving the rest of the country the worst life they could get, unhapiness, etc... but still, they would protect him because they are part of the few priviliged. If these soldiers could man up and not obey and "fight" aka "oppose" this dictator there wouldn't be a need of using violence.

Violence only calls more violence in my point of view. You did this to me, well i'll do this to you, it would be a never ending chain of events and vendettas.

That has nothing to do with what we're discussing.

And in this case fighting for peace would be opposing the dictator.

Although not resorting to violence is always preferred, the fact of the matter is that nonviolent methods will not always work and violence is necessary at times no matter how much we may hate it.

pizzadust
01-03-2014, 09:14 PM
Uh, ok, let's be realistic here.

You have a dictator with tons of soldiers who would kill. These soldiers know that this guy is giving the rest of the country the worst life they could get, unhapiness, etc... but still, they would protect him because they are part of the few priviliged. If these soldiers could man up and not obey and "fight" aka "oppose" this dictator there wouldn't be a need of using violence.

Violence only calls more violence in my point of view. You did this to me, well i'll do this to you, it would be a never ending chain of events and vendettas.

No it doesnīt , any decent leader wouldnīt go to war out of vengance. The only way to stop a mad man like stalin from crushing your country is to either submit or fight.

Allara
01-03-2014, 09:27 PM
Legitimately wanting to stop oppression.

Thats a very one dimensional answer. How would you define oppression? Many wars have fundamentally boiled down to wanting stop oppression in one form or another. Hitler wanted Germany to be free, in his mind, from the jewish oppression. The entirety of the cold war context was fought because America feared that Communism and communist expansion equated to some form of oppression.

There is rarely one true right answer for war. War is just a clash of ideologies

Cake
01-03-2014, 09:28 PM
Thats a very one dimensional answer. How would you define oppression? Many wars have fundamentally boiled down to wanting stop oppression in one form or another. Hitler wanted Germany to be free, in his mind, from the jewish oppression. The entirety of the cold war context was fought because America feared that Communism and communist expansion equated to some form of oppression.

There is rarely one true right answer for war. War is just a clash of ideologies

Germany was destroyed after WWI and felt like losers, jewish started to take over. Hittler only feed the "vendetta feeling" for them.

Pimp of Pimps
01-03-2014, 09:28 PM
Thats a very one dimensional answer. How would you define oppression? Many wars have fundamentally boiled down to wanting stop oppression in one form or another. Hitler wanted Germany to be free, in his mind, from the jewish oppression. The entirety of the cold war context was fought because America feared that Communism and communist expansion equated to some form of oppression.

There is rarely one true right answer for war. War is just a clash of ideologies

Pretty much all wars boil down to stopping oppression.

Differentiating between what is and isn't oppression as well as making sure you don't also end up oppressing is another topic entirely.

Live Fast Eat Ass
01-03-2014, 09:30 PM
What is morally needed to justify a country waging war on another?
Not losing said war.

Cake
01-03-2014, 09:31 PM
[dumb comment]

we should all fight the illuminati

the christians, muslims, catholics, atheists, etc should unite to destroy it

they are the only enemy

[/dumb comment]

Allara
01-03-2014, 09:37 PM
Germany was destroyed after WWI and felt like losers, jewish started to take over. Hittler only feed the "vendetta feeling" for them.

Hitler firmly believed that the cause and the reason why Germany lost WWI was because of the jews. No matter how misguided Hitler we can say Hitler was, he still genuinely felt that his actions were for the greater good of his people. In fact I'm sure almost everyone on this forum would hail Hitler as their saviour if they lived in Weimar Germany at the time, because of what he did in areas like their economy. There will always be blurred lines when youre talking about motives.

火拳
01-03-2014, 09:44 PM
war has turned into childs play, the weapons have gotten too strong. what happened to the good ol' fisticuffs

Cake
01-03-2014, 09:46 PM
Hitler firmly believed that the cause and the reason why Germany lost WWI was because of the jews. No matter how misguided Hitler we can say Hitler was, he still genuinely felt that his actions were for the greater good of his people. In fact I'm sure almost everyone on this forum would hail Hitler as their saviour if they lived in Weimar Germany at the time, because of what he did in areas like their economy. There will always be blurred lines when youre talking about motives.

anyone who makes soap with babies of course honestly thinks he is doing a good for humanity.

Pimp of Pimps
01-03-2014, 09:51 PM
Hitler did actually think he was doing good. Not sure what'd odd about this, it's human nature to think that.

Pacifista
01-03-2014, 09:53 PM
Warfare is unavoidable on many levels (not just country to country), however it can be waged in such a way that countries don't get caught in the revenge spiral.

Live Fast Eat Ass
01-03-2014, 09:54 PM
Hitler was a drugged, diseased, feeble minded puppet.

pizzadust
01-03-2014, 10:00 PM
Hitler did actually think he was doing good. Not sure what'd odd about this, it's human nature to think that.

Hitlers motive for the jewish genocide is unknown. He got funded by the rothchild and I think heīs part Jewish.

Big Boss
01-03-2014, 10:06 PM
Nothing. Wars are retarded.

Halaros 536
01-03-2014, 10:07 PM
Hitler did actually think he was doing good. Not sure what'd odd about this, it's human nature to think that.

Nah, Hitler was probably acting as if he was thinking that. We will never know what was going on in his mind.

Monstrous Vegetation
01-20-2014, 10:43 PM
I just donīt understand how a soilder would personally justify fighting for Nazi germany or a country of similar corruption.

Initially, you had plenty of support among Germans to join and defeat the Polish, as they had a long standing quarrel. Then there was the promise of land and prosperity. Those were very enticing to the impoverished and culturally neurotic German commoners. Those who were in the SS were usually a good bit more zealous and perhaps even were looking for an excuse to murder people. For sure, they tended to have a clear hatred for Jews and made for very effective members.

X
02-25-2014, 07:49 PM
If someone is forcibly taking over your land, or killing your people, I do think that fighting back is necessary. Saving lives should always be the number one, and perhaps only, reason for engaging in warfare.