Is war an inescapable condition of mankind?

Is war an inescapable condition of mankind?

With or without our willpower, is mankind destined for war?

it's an inescapable part of our development, but social evolution will continue to where war is never an issue in the world any longer

Yes. War has been integral to how societies form, interact, and evolve for as long as history has been recorded.

Is War god?

>never an issue anymore

Red flag! Red flag!

More like a demigod.

No God is an abstraction of incomprehensible power, a philosophical compression algorithm for what would break our minds to understand. This is why God is concieved as both infinitely powerful and completely unknowable. Sorry for the recursive definition, it's god we're talking about here.

...

What remains idle for long just withers and dies.
Spears can alleviate the pain of old age.

Is War god manifested in the material world? God as a real corporeal phenomenon rather than abstraction, although it can be abstracted as war.

Very nice input, thanks leafbro

War is human's very nature. It shows that we are truly above animals. We are capable of caring for something that deeply, that we actually would kill hundreds of people only to protect it. It doesn't even matter what that thing we want to protect is, be it one's nation, one's family or even just wealth, being able to put something above else like this is in a twisted way very beautiful.

Yes. Humanity has always and will always be in a constant state of competition. It is within our nature as a species, and likely will until we cease to exist. It is how we managed to become a species in the first place, and our intelligence only fuels the need to secure resources another controls to ensure survival in the future.

In fact, it could be said that conflict, and thus war, is a symptom specifically held in greater part because of our intelligence, and not in spite of it. It is our intelligence that allows us to perceive the possibility of gain by attacking another group.

[Janus] also has a temple at Rome with double doors, which they call the gates of war; for the temple always stands open in time of war, but is closed when peace has come. The latter was a difficult matter, and it rarely happened, since the realm was always engaged in some war, as its increasing size brought it into collision with the barbarous nations which encompassed it round about. But in the time of Augustus it was closed, after he had overthrown Mark Antony; and before that, when Marcus Atilius and Titus Manlius were consuls, it was closed a short time; then war broke out again at once, and it was opened.[1]

Man has free will. The Choice is ours. Pax Romana was still peace.

...

War is how we test ourselves.

Yes

...

>ITT: young men living in literally the safest period in human history

The proportion of people being killed in idle wars or plague or starvation is lower than it's ever been. Your fief isn't going to accidentally go to war with the one next door because they blame you for their wells going bad. Your food is safe, your car is safe, if you cut your finger while cutting onions you won't die of infection.

I don't know what kind of Warhammer novels you faggots have been reading, but 99% of humans would rather avoid dying of sepsis if possible. Your boredom isn't the same as human nature being perverted.

>Is it in mankind's nature to try to kill each other wherever our territories and claims overlap?
Yes

War will always happen, but the frequency and character of war has and will continue to change. The overall arc of history has been one of declining violence, such that we now live in the most peaceful period in human history and any individual born now is far less likely to die violently at the hands of another human than ever before.

While we have invented great machines of war and terrible weapons, we have also created elaborate rules regarding proper and improper means of conducting warfare such that powerful third party countries are willing to intervene in a conflict if they feel that it is not being fought in an appropriate manner. Putin's political victory in Syria still involved an internationally supervised destruction of chemical weapon stockpiles. Targeting of civilians is near universally condemned. Victorious state armies are much less likely to rape, loot, and pillage conquered cities and territories. State armies are far more likely to treat prisoners of war humanely now than at any other time in history. Modern conflicts are more likely to be civil conflicts rather than the more dangerous and destructive state versus state warfare. They are also more likely to end due to a political agreement brokered by powerful patrons rather than complete military domination. Democratic countries rarely wage war against other democratic countries, and the general trend in the past century has been a rise in the number of nations governed by democracy.

Chivalry isn't dead. Chivalry as a code of conduct regarding etiquette in warfare is more alive and elaborate than it has ever been with the Geneva Convention.

Except chimpanzees engage in tribal warfare and ants engage in large scale societal warfare that can involve enslaving a conquered populace.

That is solely about practical reasons. Only humans are able to fight for something bigger than themselves.

Then the difference is more that humans are able to conceive of something bigger than themselves more than it is the fact that they're willing to fight over it. Just as unique to humans is our ability to delude ourselves into thinking we're fighting for something bigger than ourselves when really we're just fighting for practical reasons dictated by realpolitik and justified by moral and ideological arguments.