Someone Has To Die For Things To Change

Originally posted by Hopechest

• Has war of any kind, in all of history, ever created a long-lasting existence of Peace, Love, Abundance, Freedom, and Altruism? A truly happy and free society?

That's not a very good question because a truly happy society isn't possible even without war.

It is, just not in the current paradigm most minds find themselves in.

Our cultures breeds violence, change the culture and the behaviour changes with it.

Most "happy" societies only resolve to war in defence of their land or ideas.
War should only really be an option if another entity exists that has the intention of violence which is what we haven't been doing for some time now as we repeatedly CREATE those entities to begin with.

It would have to be Jesus like figure with an extraordinary message surpassing "I died for your sins". Something to give humanity more reason or an understanding of it's purpose.

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic

reply to post by darkbake


I deal with this every day. Sexism is a big one. I am currently having a panic attack because I am different than other people in Idaho and am afraid of being assaulted. PTSD.

Soviets have weapons better than nuclear ones. google tom bearden. Remember when Putin said he could put us all to sleep? yeah they can... I've been trying to spread this on ABTS but never gotten any evidence that anyone has listened.. please.. someone.. listen...

reply to post by darkbake


Original version was better imho and it was recorded in 528 hz so it had a more profound message encoded. He may have been killed just because of using the 528 hz.

The human race is stuck "holding the tiger behind the tale"

You can sum up what you are saying like this as well, "You put your gun down, then I'll put my down."

I don't agree with that, but I think its why the exact same cycle repeats throughout recorded history.

Excellent thread

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
reply to post by Kgnow

 

Originally posted by Kgnow
From the very recordings of history, mankind has been in a state of war. War, not only with foreign enemies, but also with politics, ideological or religious beliefs, physical appearance, class, caste, social status, wealth, intellect, gender, and sex. We have been at war with our neighbors, our families, and even with our own selves.

Imagine if the super-group of "mankind" gave up on belonging to sub-groups. Imagine if there were no political parties, no religion, no "separations" into various classes... We would all just be members of mankind - with our own unique and individual views.

The more we individualize and STOP joining groups, thinking that there's "strength in numbers" or feeling a need to defend our way of thinking, the more accepting of other individuals we'd be and the less we'd have to fight about.

Re-reading that, I realize how much it sounds like John Lennon. RIP...

edit on 5/4/2013 by Benevolent Heretic because: (no reason given)

You're not quite John Lennon but I can agree with what your saying.

If the media would stop labeling people I think a lot of the animosity we have towards each other would go away.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
reply to post by Kgnow

 

Originally posted by Kgnow
From the very recordings of history, mankind has been in a state of war. War, not only with foreign enemies, but also with politics, ideological or religious beliefs, physical appearance, class, caste, social status, wealth, intellect, gender, and sex. We have been at war with our neighbors, our families, and even with our own selves.

Imagine if the super-group of "mankind" gave up on belonging to sub-groups. Imagine if there were no political parties, no religion, no "separations" into various classes... We would all just be members of mankind - with our own unique and individual views.

The more we individualize and STOP joining groups, thinking that there's "strength in numbers" or feeling a need to defend our way of thinking, the more accepting of other individuals we'd be and the less we'd have to fight about.

Re-reading that, I realize how much it sounds like John Lennon. RIP...

edit on 5/4/2013 by Benevolent Heretic because: (no reason given)

While I believe you are right in what you say, I believe it is just as achievable a goal (that being 'possible, but verrry difficult') as a world without war while maintaining variation, subgroups, religion, differing political beliefs and systems, etc. Sure, we can eliminate war by eliminating all of the differentiation (and ensuring that no one group feels they have a shortage of resources - whether bbecause of an abundance of resources or because people throughout the world decide they would rather do with less.)

Personally, I would much rather people continue on with their chosen beliefs, continue on with the very natural process of "joining groups", etc., but stop fighting each other anyhow. Imagine President Reagan's dream of an outside threat (aliens?) banding humanity together under common purpose. Would this not be possible even if some folks were Christian, some Muslim, some atheist, Wiccan, Buddhist, Hindu, etc.? I would say it is not only possible, but that the differing systems and resultant effect on personality, skills, strengths and weaknesses, would be beneficial to the cause.

Originally posted by Bundy
Soviets have weapons better than nuclear ones. google tom bearden. Remember when Putin said he could put us all to sleep?

I am aware of Tom Bearden ( and others) who make such claims but you can perhaps send me a link to what you are reading , and putin's comments, by u2u.

yeah they can... I've been trying to spread this on ABTS but never gotten any evidence that anyone has listened.. please.. someone.. listen...

Hey i have done quite of posting on the threat that Russian might still pose ( or posed during Soviet times ) myself but people have a hard time believing that those with such great power would not abuse it as the American example so adequately illustrates. I suppose it's natural that people who have some knowledge of history thinks this way and i would point out that the US do have great conventional and nuclear firepower and may very well have sufficient 'secret' weapons of their own to keep the Russians form abusing their Scalar weaponry too overtly. That being said the last time i checked the weather engineering was still going strong so they do seem to be acting as best and as covertly as they can.

Who knew that the US would just keep making debt and keeping meddling in other people's affairs while the homeland decays? Hell who knew that they could get trough the various economic crisis and bubble economies of the last two years? We should be as surprised and no less perplexed than Putin may be at this point! No one wants a full scale war ( Russians would lynch Putin if he started one) and just because you have fantastic weapons does not mean you have the social control that the American ruling class seems to have over Americans....

Stellar

reply to post by Kgnow


Hello, Kgnow:

Appreciate your OP.
But whom would the "someone" be? Because all that war has been about killing someone, hasn't it, and still hasn't changed a thing, has it?

Fish do not blossom from apple trees. Only an apple can blossom from an apple tree. Like begets like. Similar things produce similar things. War creates future war. Peace creates future peace.

If we keep "changing" things through force,... nothing has really changed.

I agree with your latter statement, completely. And agree as well that nothing has really ever changed.

As to your former statement that "Like begets like," I think you may have hit on exactly why this doesn't work, really. Because we've been fed an impression of what "like is like," and sold on what that is "like" in order for our survival, which was precisely to foment war, as we were then told to learn to live in "peace." Really, these are not dichotomous statements, though they would seem to be given the circumstances when anyone tries to do just that. But they are simplistic, phoenetic code,, IMHO, fomented by those who intend us to keep killing and keep losing, everything, especially our humanity.
Regards,
Tetra50

Originally posted by Hopechest
They wouldn't relinquish their Emporer however and that was one of our conditions.

Didn't know that?

Well the fact is that the final surrender terms allowed the Emperor to keep his station and since he had very limited 'real' powers it was no great concession to make. What this boils down to is that there could very probably have been a peace treaty in May ( or earlier) if the same terms were offered then as was accepted in August; the terms of surrender were 'lowered' after the dropping of the nuclear weapons which among many other indicators strongly suggested ( to observers at the time) that no additional displays of power had been or were required to end the war with Japan.

Stellar

Originally posted by SQUEALER
People die every day. So the world is changing all the time. It always puzzles me why men find it necessary to hurry up the process, at all costs, just to effect the change today instead of tomorrow.

Because people are dying every day? You answered yourself by providing the greatest motive force of all in that all men have limited time to fulfill their dreams!

Why was it necessary to invade Iraq, just to get rid of Saddam Husein, when God had already set the time of his exit from earth, and we all know he had to go anyway.

I would suggest that wealthy men in other countries of the world saw an opportunity to enrich themselves and achieve their goals/dreams and since they too are slowly dying they did not care to wait any longer to attempt achieving greater wealth or other goals. What the $##%%$ does this have to do with god anyways? Truly god fearing men hardly need nuclear weapons, aircraft carriers or similar weaponry as god will provide and god will determine what happens with or without them. Only the inhuman/godless types build these weapons as only they fear their fellows on earth rightly suspecting that their actions were to be widely known or understood nothing short of such means would safeguard them. A person who acts righteously will not have enemies of consequence and would not fear death sufficiently to treat others so cruelly in inhumanely.

All those hundreds of thousands of young lives lost in war, to remove one guy who was already old, and had limited time left to rule. Why the hurry? If they had just sent in an assignation team to take the one guy out, it could probably be justified. But, at the cost of all those other lives, it just doesn't seem to make any sense.

If they assassinated just the one person many many others would take his place and try to maintain some kind of national independence for Iraq. Since the aim was to bring Iraq under western economic and cultural control the most expedient means is to utterly destroy it trough sanctions/infrastructure destruction or in failing at that then to invade it and utterly lay waste to it thus making it dependent on the west for it's mere survival.

The fact that it is not that easy to kill someone like SH hardly comes in to it as the US national security state have for some years now decided that they can get away with ever bolder actions on the world scene which is certainly more expedient and also MUCH more profitable for American business and industrial interests.

Stellar

What I find funny is that you live in the most peaceful, free and prosperous time in human history and some how you have the impression things have not changed. I know history is not something people care much about but, it might give some real perspective on things.

Originally posted by MrSpad
What I find funny is that you live in the most peaceful, free and prosperous time in human history and some how you have the impression things have not changed. I know history is not something people care much about but, it might give some real perspective on things.

Oh i can agree that 'we' the people of ATS are doing pretty well but i am not sure where you have come by the rest of your qualifications about how humanity is doing. I think we can agree that things may be 'better' for most than it was 100 years ago but is that the case for 70 or 40 years ago? I think we have been going backwards in the last several decades and given the low base there is certainly adequate room for things to get progressively worse and unequal.

As for not caring about history just blame the state of the various educational establishments which are doing more than their fair share to make people as ignorant of history as they need to be for this system to keep exploiting them.

As for 'real' perspectives i don't think you will find 1 in a hundred people who have an accurate perspective of either what is going on or, worse yet, what to do about it to change it for the better. Many of that 1% are obviously the people busy enriching themselves at breakneck pace since how to do that is certainly easier to understand than the alternative of trying to change it.

Stellar

Someone Has To Die For Things To Change

Kill their ego/pride/self-worth/value
humiliate
attack the core
these beings have no emotions so
launch a high-frequency attack of their soul
and leave the puppets but spiritually bomb the masters
Impeach, debase, bankrupt, infect family, defame,
congressional trials, FBI investigations, inquiries ?


Is that what you mean?
die to the ego ?

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic




Imagine there's no heaven
It's easy if you try
No hell below us,
Above us only sky

Imagine all the people
Living for today

Imagine there's no countries
And isn't hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
No religion, too

Imagine all the people
Living life in peace

You may say I'm a dreamer
But I'm not the only one
I hope some day you will join us
In the world as one