Amazon.com Widgets

Peace through Strength? (Yes) or Strength through Peace? (No)

Asked by: marviniscool
  • Unfortunately, strength is needed to enforce the peace.

    You'll notice that the most militarily powerful countries are doing well, economically, socially and so on.

    Weaker countries with no strong military or powerful allies have been toyed with and pushed around since the dawn of time.

    If you want your neighbours to respect you, you had better have strength in something. Strenght in military, strength in economics, or strength in allies.

    If you have no strength, there will be no peace.

  • Unfortunately, strength has led us to chaos, not peace.

    We tried "peace through strength" when invading Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, etc. and that clearly didn't work. It only led to the creation of more terrorists like ISIS and more.

    We need to exercise restraint and resort to diplomacy as the main initiative for diffusing conflict rather than shooting first and asking questions later.

    By using reason and words as our main weapons, we demonstrate actual strength and confidence in our ideas when we're not resorting to military interventions over them. That would make us no better than the jihadists who shout "Allahu Akbar" and bomb people in the name of their radical ideology.

    We should only use our military in cases of self-defense when our country is under attack by enemy forces. Only then should we demonstrate our military might.

    If all you do is send drone strikes and bomb foreign lands, there will be no peace.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.