Is War Obsolete?

Is War Obsolete?

People are realizing these days that, in war, the only people that win are the ones selling the arms to both sides, in war there in only degrees of loss. It’s not hard to figure this out with trillions of dollars of debt, and many dead.

War is the result of desperate leaders trying to control the masses. Think about it. To divide, conquer and control a stage must be set by making people angry, financial insolvent, hungry, frustrated with government, so the powers that be can solve the problem they create, thus being hero’s.

Can the masses be sold on this again? Off course they can, unless they completely acknowledge what is transpiring. Our worlds, countries, town, are all founded on labels, teams, sides, races, religions, it is very easy to get the masses to buy into pick a side mentality.

Look at elections. Are people naive enough to think that a side or party makes a difference? The powers that be fund both sides, so no matter what the outcome they get their agendas handled. Why would someone want to ever chance a loss or pick the wrong side? If you have the money, fund both sides. This process is no different with war, powers that be, will fund and sell to both sides this way they never lose.

What happens when the masses wise up and do not buy into the BS and decide not to fight, but see the real truth?

What happens if people actually start to reason and know that they have the power themselves to make life peaceful?

What is the answer? To be aware of manipulation on a wide scale and not react like we have in the repeats of history.

Who wins in War? Answer: only the people controlling the masses, because they will profit from the chaos and never see the war themselves.

Due to the current arrogance of the US administration, and their actions, I feel the masses are coming to the rude awakening that “War is Obsolete”.



[edit on 20-3-2008 by Realtruth]

In the eyes of those that believe that peace can be successful if we simply try to stay peaceful, yes - war is obselete.

But until everyone agrees on that point, we will continue to take advantage of one another and refuse to help anyone except those who look like they can be manipulated.

War is obsolete.

But if you have nothing better to do, or can't understand that in order to have a war, 2 armies are needed, it will still be around.

People will believe that they are 'going' to be attacked by side A and join up to 'protect freedoms' in areas that are not close to home at all. Side B hears the same story, and are told to defend to the death their land which is being invaded.

The people in the middle lose the most.

Why don't we see dolphins or whales killing each other for the open sea?

Why don't we see birds killing their own kind for the open skies?

It's one thing to kill someone because of self-defense, food, or to protect one's family.

It's a different reason when it's to kill someone because someone ELSE tells you they are going to kill you first. It also helps if the people you are fighting are classified as anything BUT human. Cockroaches, insurgents, terrorists, etc. It eases the task of 'taking out the garbage'.

I have never served in the army, and I think that is a good thing. I would make a lousy soldier, asking too many questions, and caring for my fellow man. (I am not implying that soldiers are the opposite, but if you look at their responsibilities, they can't question an order, they can't empathize with the enemy)

I would imagine that if you take 1 soldier of side A and 1 soldier of side B, they can peacefully co-exist.

So what does it come down to? Group mentality. Mob rules. Democracy.