[Discussion] War.

[Aim64C]

So i sit here and sometimes think why do people need to go to war to settle something?!

They kill 1000's of people in war and the soldiers who go to war are even more stupid , because why would you go put your only life in danger for something that isn't going to end.

I find people that go to war stupid (sopose fighting for their country).
They fight over stupid things i don't understand why everyone can't just share their shit and help each other out.
They want to kill , argue the whole day and when a kid kills somebody they want to blame video-games , it isn't video-games it's them killing each and everyday.

Because people have differing ideas on what, exactly, is up for being shared. I shouldn't be able to walk into your house and make myself a sandwich. But should I require you to pay me money so that I can buy what I need to make a sandwich? Is there really a difference?

People have different ideas on what it means to work together and live together. Not just people of different nations, but of different generations and backgrounds. This is why the United States was originally conceived as a union of nation-states that divide effective powers amongst various levels of government - to allow people in one region to live one way or another while still being part of a greater union with people who live a different way.

The reality is that killing is part of nature. This is going to go against a lot of the ridiculousness you're taught at school - but "peace" is a relative term and not necessarily a desirable state. For there to be peace, nothing must be happening. No one is making any decisions. No one has something another person wants. No one has ambitions....

Human beings are predators. It's in our blood to hunt and kill. It's no surprise that, when we feel threatened by each other, we default to those instincts. Only through accepting what we are can we learn to better control how we express our instincts so that we may achieve more ideal outcomes. Yes, sometimes, it will be more productive to kill than to negotiate. But many of our problems are caused by people being ignorant of their nature and having no awareness of the instincts that are driving them down a destructive path with no end-game benefit to them.

The decision to kill should be more grounded in logic than instinct. If you take a look around, there are plenty of people who need to be killed. But what ends up happening is you have people who are ignorant of their instincts who lose control and kill someone based on their instinctive response to frustration/anger.

 

[Aim64C]

you are absolutly right, i can't say we will be 100% better if the dark ages didn't happen. but i can say we would have a better chance then what we have today.

I would, actually, say that the Dark Age was more constructive on the long term than destructive.

Steel came out of the dark ages. The Medieval period simply wouldn't have existed had the Roman empire persisted; the arms races that ensued would have never led to the various advances in metallurgy - at least, not as quickly.

While some technologies and abilities were lost - others were preserved and the legends of Roman capability served as a goal to reach and overcome. The fall of the Roman Empire allowed for new growth.

See:

You must be registered for see links

You must be registered for see links

Those times were incredibly productive ones... but especially once:

You must be registered for see links

We get to the cause of the Renaissance: The Bubonic Plague.

Without the "Black Death" - the Renaissance wouldn't have happened. The industrial revolution wouldn't have occurred in the centuries that followed (perhaps in the millennia that followed...)

It's amazing how much people revere nature, yet fail to comprehend the lessons it teaches. The old forest burns down; new forests - new trees - grow in its place. All establishments must, eventually, come to an end so that new establishments may rise. This may happen peacefully and covertly... or it may be violent and overt. Everything follows this general cycle.

 

[EnDash]

I would, actually, say that the Dark Age was more constructive on the long term than destructive.

Steel came out of the dark ages. The Medieval period simply wouldn't have existed had the Roman empire persisted; the arms races that ensued would have never led to the various advances in metallurgy - at least, not as quickly.

While some technologies and abilities were lost - others were preserved and the legends of Roman capability served as a goal to reach and overcome. The fall of the Roman Empire allowed for new growth.

See:

You must be registered for see links

You must be registered for see links

Those times were incredibly productive ones... but especially once:

You must be registered for see links

We get to the cause of the Renaissance: The Bubonic Plague.

Without the "Black Death" - the Renaissance wouldn't have happened. The industrial revolution wouldn't have occurred in the centuries that followed (perhaps in the millennia that followed...)

It's amazing how much people revere nature, yet fail to comprehend the lessons it teaches. The old forest burns down; new forests - new trees - grow in its place. All establishments must, eventually, come to an end so that new establishments may rise. This may happen peacefully and covertly... or it may be violent and overt. Everything follows this general cycle.

steel was used before the dark ages, blacksmithing is a practice invented by the romans. it's true that it grew in the dark ages but at a very slow pace.

and it's a shame that the world needed the black plague to get out of the dark ages and into the renaissance, i truly believe if the roman empire would not have fallen technological advancement would continue in the pace it did (growing exponentionally). sure there were wars and poverty at times but they were quickly replaced by times of prosperity and ingenuity. the dark ages were a setback because technology advenced in a very slow pace constantly and withing hundreds of years. the growth that was before the dark ages and after was exponentioal while in the dark ages it was linear. growth always needs to be exponentioal.

 

[Aim64C]

steel was used before the dark ages, blacksmithing is a practice invented by the romans. it's true that it grew in the dark ages but at a very slow pace.

Slow pace?

The modern methods for steel working came out of the Medieval period. The basis for the entire steel industry came out of the Medieval period after having seen literally no development since the beginning of the Iron age.

You must be registered for see links

You must be registered for see links

and it's a shame that the world needed the black plague to get out of the dark ages and into the renaissance, i truly believe if the roman empire would not have fallen technological advancement would continue in the pace it did (growing exponentionally). sure there were wars and poverty at times but they were quickly replaced by times of prosperity and ingenuity. the dark ages were a setback because technology advenced in a very slow pace constantly and withing hundreds of years. the growth that was before the dark ages and after was exponentioal while in the dark ages it was linear. growth always needs to be exponentioal.

Growth won't always be exponential. The rewards of growth eventually clutter and compete with the system of growth.

Take a simple fruit. A plant (or tree) grows so that it may fruit. In many cases, the plant dies after bearing fruit. In other cases, seedlings cluster about the base of a tree until the entire system becomes prone to outbreaks of fire.

In each case - the system becomes a victim of its own success. It is then removed so that the seeds of its success can take its place.

Take a look around you. Metropolises sprawl this way and that. Many of them are still using the basic road structures/plans that were laid out before automobiles. Conventions of industry persist despite advances in technology and 'revolutionary' new methods based upon that technology. We've grown and advanced so much... but the base from which we started is still around, and we are still fundamentally limited by it.

When this world is gone - but our legend and some of our knowledge remains... it will form the basis - the core - for a new growth.

The wars and conflicts that come from the "competition for succession" will drive the development of technologies we have paid little attention to. Metal-impregnated ceramics, for example, might become a new wave of structural material that ends up spawning an industry we couldn't even envision, today. The drive to recover automobiles without the precise machinery necessary for making internal combustion engines (or stable supply lines of fuels for them) might shift focus onto fuel cells and battery/capacitor technology. A biologically derived solar power system might come out of attempts to realize the legend of solar power (that would be melodramatically told to sound as if we powered everything off of solar panels) - unknowingly superior and far more viable than the solutions we have today.

Genetic engineering may get a huge amount of focus - or simply a new era of selected crop and animal-companion breeding could bring about Lord only knows what.

But stop and look around. How many people expect the government to take care of them? How many people expect an employer to be responsible for their income/expenses? We're reaching a point where people believe they can live within a sort of utopia. It breeds complacency and the real growth begins to stagnate and actually reverse.

We're on that downward slope. We're generating ideas but not results. Our responsibility is to ensure our children have as many of the ideas preserved so that they may achieve the results we could not. They will need those ideas to build a better framework for the society that will emerge from their efforts and children.

 

[Crutch Kaguya]

War is a political tool. No different than a speech or an amendment. It is used when the government thinks its required to maintain power, strengthen the economy, or gain territory. Few wars, if any, are as simple as settling one issue.

 

[EnDash]

Slow pace?

The modern methods for steel working came out of the Medieval period. The basis for the entire steel industry came out of the Medieval period after having seen literally no development since the beginning of the Iron age.

You must be registered for see links

You must be registered for see links

Growth won't always be exponential. The rewards of growth eventually clutter and compete with the system of growth.

Take a simple fruit. A plant (or tree) grows so that it may fruit. In many cases, the plant dies after bearing fruit. In other cases, seedlings cluster about the base of a tree until the entire system becomes prone to outbreaks of fire.

In each case - the system becomes a victim of its own success. It is then removed so that the seeds of its success can take its place.

Take a look around you. Metropolises sprawl this way and that. Many of them are still using the basic road structures/plans that were laid out before automobiles. Conventions of industry persist despite advances in technology and 'revolutionary' new methods based upon that technology. We've grown and advanced so much... but the base from which we started is still around, and we are still fundamentally limited by it.

When this world is gone - but our legend and some of our knowledge remains... it will form the basis - the core - for a new growth.

The wars and conflicts that come from the "competition for succession" will drive the development of technologies we have paid little attention to. Metal-impregnated ceramics, for example, might become a new wave of structural material that ends up spawning an industry we couldn't even envision, today. The drive to recover automobiles without the precise machinery necessary for making internal combustion engines (or stable supply lines of fuels for them) might shift focus onto fuel cells and battery/capacitor technology. A biologically derived solar power system might come out of attempts to realize the legend of solar power (that would be melodramatically told to sound as if we powered everything off of solar panels) - unknowingly superior and far more viable than the solutions we have today.

Genetic engineering may get a huge amount of focus - or simply a new era of selected crop and animal-companion breeding could bring about Lord only knows what.

But stop and look around. How many people expect the government to take care of them? How many people expect an employer to be responsible for their income/expenses? We're reaching a point where people believe they can live within a sort of utopia. It breeds complacency and the real growth begins to stagnate and actually reverse.

We're on that downward slope. We're generating ideas but not results. Our responsibility is to ensure our children have as many of the ideas preserved so that they may achieve the results we could not. They will need those ideas to build a better framework for the society that will emerge from their efforts and children.

i'm tired of arguing with you, your war of attrition won. i will not reply to your comments anymore.

OP: There will always be war because there will always be people who prefer war to peace, that is my opinion.

 

[~Yubel~]

War is war, there are evil and greedy political leaders who'll do whatever it takes to maintain the status quo. Cheap bastards but ain't nothing you can do about it.