Can peace kept without war?
Debate Rounds (4)
By your logic, peace is only possible if all countries, men, women and other entities are willing to negotiate and compromise. The key word there being willing;not all participants are involved of their own volition. Prime examples include ethnic cleansings with the the Holocaust being the most widely accepted (and known) example. There was no peace in these times, Nazi supporters may have believed that the mass murder of what they deemed to be undesirable factions within society would bring them ultimate peace, there was no peace for the Jews, the homosexuals, the disabled, the gypsies who feared for their lives and their families every second of the day. Millions were murdered; negotiation was not an option, what could be used as compromise? War was the only option to achieve some sembelence of peace for the victims of the pogroms and the world at large. The only solution to the problem posed by Hitler and his regime was to fight against it. The time between the end of WWI and the start of WWII was in general peaceful (if we use the definition as being without violence), but it was in way a time where people experienced peace. Millions struggled through the Great Depression, which was not a strictly North American phenomena. Germany suffered post-war with poverty and debt, they were required to reimburse WWI war expenses; personalities like Hitler laid blame on German hardships on Jewish people. He began his pogroms between the wars.
The act of war does not destroy nations or cause poverty; war results from the clash of personalities and ideologies. War is caused by the victimization of a group of people. Peace causes war. The Treaty of Versailles, an international agreement for peace closing WWI, can easily be blamed for resentments and triggers of WWII. Peace is never equal, never satisfied. Decades pass and heartache is still felt for the innocent men, women and children lost to the gases at Aushwitz and Buchenwald. November still stands as a time of remembrance for the brave sacrifices made on behalf of nations during war. The worlds scars continue to heal from the lashes of inequality, intolerance, hate, conflict and misinformation. This is not peace, this is recovery dreaming of the impossibility of peace.
Does anyone ever really win a war or do both sides just get to tired and depleted to continue. How come its a crime to kill one person and yet our government can order our soldiers to kill thousands in another country.
Using WWII as an example again, millions more innocent people would have been murdered by Nazis had Britain, Russia, the United States and other countries not stood up against the regime. What else could have been done? Nothing, Hitler would not have stopped expanding his hate propaganda. His trail of death would cross the globe had he been allowed to continue. There is no reasoning/negotiation/compromise to be had with those who seek what Hitler and his followers sought.
War may not be seen to achieve much outside of rivers of blood and mountains of dead, but the United States would not be what it is today without war (not going into that debate, just stating a fact); billions across the world would have been massacred had countries not gone to war against the Nazi regime, entire cultures and religions completely wiped off the face of the planet. You and I may not have been doing this right now had there not been a war.
It is not simple as it seems to say that war is bad, war does no good, war is to be avoided at all costs. No one wants to go to war, no one wants to see millions killed, young men brought home to mothers in wooden caskets, child martyrs faces splashed across every news broadcast and newspaper killed on their way to school. No one wants that. It is an undesired product of a war caused by people's ambitions, ideas, grabs for power.
Obviously, there isn't always a clear winner in war. But to those down-trodden, tortured people are living in fear of their neighbours and their leaders; when they witness their children forced into train cars like cattle to the slaughterhouse, the victor will be those that defeat the feared tyrants and killers. Our government (I'm assuming you're American, I'm American but living in Canada) does not wantonly order our soldiers to kill thousands in another country, our government orders our soldiers to defend our country. There is no direction that says kill thousands in XYZ country.
Killing can be morally and ethically justified, war can be justified, terrorism can be justified. Every thing a nation or person does can be justified in someway. It is not illogical to say that war brings peace because peace is an impossibility. A notion to strive for in all affairs and situations; a dream to hope comes true. As stated, peace is undefinable as it depends solely on the situation and parties involved. We can argue that it is the absence of violence, but that would be a flawed definition. Peace can only be defined if we assume that all peoples and nations have put aside intolerance, misinformation, inequality, desires for power and dominance. Then perhaps, we can experience some semblance of peace; but until then, peace will be the elusive hope/prayer/dream we seek everyday in our own lives and for our greater good. This peace we seek will have to encompass equality amongst all nations, no poverty or famine, no desire for power, no money woes, no jealousy. I could go on, but you get the picture. The impossible temptress that is peace will continue to elude our capture until the end of time.
No votes have been placed for this debate.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.