Is war necessary?

...

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=TIQynsWpBpQ
youtube.com/watch?v=Avp2nR4OtDs
nickbostrom.com/information-hazards.pdf
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

Yes, war pushes all technology forward and gives reason to live or fight to live as well as put people in check. Mutual destruction destroyed that and no we will see humany eat itself worse than any war could.

necessary for what?

Often the best alternative.

>Their is no God, We need war to justify our existence and advance.
>I believe in subjective, utilitarian morality.

Not when it is inspired by the insipid greed of unjust nations.

But I'll fuck you up if you talk shit about my mom

In a perfect world, no.

Where did i say there was no god autist? War gets people way closer to god than your shitposting does.

War is the only thing that matters.

Yes

Leftists are monsters who love death.

So yes.

>I have no reading comprehension, the post

Second question:

Does anyone know where this drawing is from?

youtube.com/watch?v=TIQynsWpBpQ

No.

Prove me wrong.

Yes, given human nature.

No.

War is where old rich people send the young and poor and warriors off to die so that they can become richer, gain fame, or capitalize on national pride.

Meanwhile, countless civilians and innocents are caught in the crossfire. And we don't even vote to go to war anymore.

Every cent that goes to a bomb or a tank or a fighter jet is a theft from the citizens.

WAR, HUH YEAH...

WHAT IS IT GOOD FOR????!?!?!?

Resources are finite and not every ethnic group on the face of this planet can get along with each other. The Superpowers that currently exist are all looking out for their best interests, which means taking care of their own people over foreigners. Valuable commodities such as oil, water, minerals, and land will always be warred over because they are well sought after. Human nature is inherently ambitious, always wanting more and more like a hungry, bottomless pit. Peace is a naive, foolish but admirable desire among our kind but it will never happen given human nature. Not only that, but hundreds of ethnic groups have deep rooted animosity towards one another given history. You can't expect them to drop their guns, shake hands, and have a jolly good time at their nearest pub because they will forever hate one another because they have taken lives from both sides. Conflict has been a part of human history since the dawn of man.

Is it necessary? No
Is it something we can stop? No
With human nature, as long as there are two people or groups with power and they have some sort of confict wars will happen.

If we weren't meant to seperate and form our own groups and interests why would humans even have seperate languages and natural barriers? Even cats across the world meow the same. Dogs bark the same. Horses ney the same. Humans do not talk the same languages at all. We make similar noises but that means nothing. War was made for humans. It is what seperates us from animals and what gives us God.

Doesn't mean you should fight each other over it.

As a matter of fact, according to game theory, our future evolution lies in moderating these destructive drives.

>Is it something we can stop? No
We can.

>As a matter of fact, according to game theory, our future evolution lies in moderating these destructive drives.
Tell that to the chinks building artificial islands in the South Pacific pissing off the surrounding gook nations. Tell that to the hundreds of nigger tribes in Africa warring with each other. Tell that to the sandnigger groups in the middle east beheading each other on a daily basis. Until one group conquers everyone else on this planet and wipes out the barbarians, war will always happen amigo.

The best way to meet God is via death in battle.

You are an ape if you think the only way to control violence is with violence.

Control and channel them. Make their efforts futile. Frustrate their resources. A master tactician never has to fight a single battle.

Were the Romans apes? Was Great Britannia filled with apes? Humans are apes so you're technically right.
>Control and channel them. Make their efforts futile. Frustrate their resources. A master tactician never has to fight a single battle.
How? With capitalism? You give vague advice, why don't you head to your nearest Aussie general and ask if you can get into a meeting with our generals within the nearest war room? I'm sure you'll solve the issue of war and find world peace.

The amount of liberals, trannies, faggots, and beta men are the cause of lack of war.

Is war necessary? Sometimes, after all some level of violence is always necessary to maintain order and insure that your society has enough resources to survive and thrive. But more than necessary, its just inevitable. 10 minutes this thai weaving board should be enough to demonstrate the depth of disagreement between human beings and the futility of us all getting along. So might as well make the best of it and secure the best possible existence, especially at the expense of shitskins.

T. Kiddo.

Read about history or warfare in general or quit beig retarded. If you want to fuck with someones resources or ideologies they will tear themselves apart until they figure out who ruined their country/culture and then they will go after them.

There is no way to accomplish anything like that without violence. Go ahead and call him a gorilla but if we wanted all gorillas dead in a week we could do it. Quit thinking like an animal.

Or it could be Nuclear weapons.WWII would have been followed a Soviet Invasion of Western Europe if not for the bomb. The threat of mutual nuclear annihilation more than anything keeps major countries from having direct wars with each other.

An armed society is a polite society.

War is the failure of diplomacy.

Sometimes war is necessary for the greater good of people and nations. The destruction caused by it is terrible as it shows the worst of human nature on a scale not usually seen by society, but the peace that can arrive afterwards based on the side who will do the least damage is worth it.

A world without war would be nice and something to continuously aim for, even it seems impossible. I hate war and its suffering, but if peace can be achieved with the least amount of damage and a brighter future. It is worth it.

This is just my 2 cents, user. I hopefully I don't get shitted at.

Silly argument. Why don't you go and win every war single highhandedly with your individual violence?

Were the Romans apes?
Romans were smart and adaptive. They did not rely on violence. Roman slaves are a good example. They would not exist if only violence was a solution to criminals.

>There is no way to accomplish anything like that without violence.
Deterrence is one example.

An imagined deterrence is even better. Do you know what counter-intelligence is and how effective it is?

More or less it's just inevitable as people expand outwards , which is why the Malthusian theory of population growth and how it affects the world is important to take notice of.

More people , more starvation, more war.

No, but it's fun.
youtube.com/watch?v=Avp2nR4OtDs

>Romans were smart and adaptive. They did not rely on violence.
I'm fairly sure they did to conquer nearby territories and to slay rebels that did not assimilate. Romans didn't obtain their might via selling girl scout cookies, they did it with military conquest.
>Silly argument. Why don't you go and win every war single highhandedly with your individual violence?
You're the one talking about how war isn't necessary and can be prevented. You're the one speaking as if peace is so easy to achieve. You are a naive fool that thinks every single group can get along with each other. I am no four star general, however I do not need to start conflict as it is already inevitable. I am simply waiting.

>romans didn't rely on violence
>most war savy ancient civilization ever
>reformed the entirety of war
>conquered everyone around them
>had spectacles of fighting to the death
>enslaved those that they didn't kill and threatened them with death if they didnt

Totally not violent or warring at all.

Malthusian theory has a bunch of holes in it user. One of the biggest is the advances in technology and living. Which actually drops the amount of people who are born in a nation as people live longer.

It also doesn't take in the fact that a lot of nations can deal with the issue of starvation if we fucking put more effort into fixing our efficiency in the distribution of food, production isn't a problem.

Technology isnt a good thing. Im sorry as much as i love it, its doing more harm then good.

Sometimes.
There's really no deeper answer I can give because it isn't that deep of a question, and you're a 1 post faggot.

Yes i'm sure you'd love dying from simple cuts.

>You're the one talking about how war isn't necessary and can be prevented. You're the one speaking as if peace is so easy to achieve.
There is a diference between not-easy and necessary. War is not necessary. A future AI will not win by violence, but manipulation and deep understanding of human psychology. It is simply more efficient.

>Totally not violent or warring at all.
Violence is too volatile without organisation and administration. You need the latter, it is more important. This is why nignogs don't have a state worth shit.

copycat

Fuck off i was never an ape. Maybe your ancestors where, but mine were not.

>A future AI will not win by violence, but manipulation and deep understanding of human psychology. It is simply more efficient.
>AI will magically solve all of humanities problems
Alright, this has been a waste of time. Have a good one.

...

>without organization and adminstration

Hmm you mean like some sort of group who goes to fight for something they are trained in a nd believe in. Something that will give them discipline and some sort of reason to live and fight to live for what they love. Like some kind of army that might be in some kind of war???

And without that grand plan they devolve into savages??? Well you don't say!

Whatever you say homo

thats true, but what i was saying is those degenerates are the effect from a lack of war

Right now, yes. But when Europe and its outposts (USA/Canada/etc) unite in solidarity, war will no longer be necessary, at least in-group fighting.

I WILL SEE VALHALLA
I WILL DIE A GLORIOUS DEATH IN THE RACE WAR OF 2020

It is hard to identify the true path of righteousness.
Ponder it yourself, but keep in mind your mortal suffering is temporary and meaningless in the grand scheme.

I'm sure most people would enjoy dying of common illness far more often.

It is a thought experiment.

If you knew how to reach an end state in the most efficient way possible, it would not be with violence. You would bump things this way or that to achieve an ends and then checkmate your enemies.

What causes people to want to fight you? Change those conditions and they will not be violent. Put flouride in the water, fill their head with MTV, you see how this works?

Except you can't do that without killing off pawns, knights, bishops, castles, and queens. Come back when we all the means to achieve everything without having to knock off a bunch of pieces.

well, sometimes its unavoidable. lets say your neighbor nation is full of kiddy diddlers and they just wont stop and they start being pedo on you children. gime for war. you can swap that out for piracy, different relegion, economic system, or whatever. sometimes you need clay and they wont give it to you. time for war.

war itself can help reduce than boost population, spur ecomonic/tech growth, and refresh the human spirit

(((they))) are trying to stop yhis natural action from taking place by having open boarders, eu style government, and world markets. cant have things disrupting the flow of shekels

So long as people who crave power over others are allowed to lead, so long will war be inevitable.

There is no other way of resolving serious conflict

No it doesn't. Threatening to blast everyone into dust though does.

Stop posting on Sup Forums, Apollyon.

>chess is like reality
This is your mindset. Everything is attrition.

No. If your child gets really angry and starts punching you in a fit of rage, what do you do? You love them, you are not going to punch them back. You contain them and resolve the conflict. Push them back a little and tell them to calm down.

So you agree deterrence works. The thread of violence. What if you only thought the enemy had the capability? Deterrence is psychological not actual.

>Yes, war pushes all technology forward and gives reason to live or fight to live as well as put people in check.

WTF, I love the Shadows now?

The basis of all development is based on competition.

Unfortunately, war is a really fucking effective form of competition.

Thats what pussies do. Try to fight someone bigger than you and typically you get you teeth kicked in.

The argument is what war is good for. Which is pushing society forward. War reached the point where it would cuse absolure destruction. We are more at peace than ever and being a puss bag like you had nothing to do with it.

Continuing to be puss bags will not work, we are wired for war.

>The argument is what war is good for. Which is pushing society forward.
Progress is is relative. There are instances where progress is bad. There is always progress-leak that fuels arms races that may end badly for everyone.

The question is, what progress improves the human condition? Progress for its own sake is not a 'fix all' solution. It is merely treading water.

Zeppelin. A comic by Pepe Moreno

We are human.

War is life.

Malthus was right about everything especially when you take into account race and IQ desu. There is a saturation point of the world's population in terms of overall behavior and sustainability, and our food production will always be finite whereas our desire to expand will be infinite.

We're currently in the process of seriously destroying the wrath in our rapid expansion and it's only going to get far worse if we seriously plan to industrialized the 3rd world.

The problem is that we can't and won't fix our fucking ability to sustain food production because the only way to increase our population to such saturates levels necessitates that we ignore or future. Even then there are some folk who just can't compete with others.

Food production will always be a problem just as war. The only way to prevent ww3 scenarios is total population control and the mass starvation of Africans

Progress is bad for who? There is always a benefactor especially in war. Treading water is what we have been doing by not being at war. A basic human fundamental that has been around since we have been here. We are just trying to keep afloat doing something we didn't do forever and we will all go under now.

You haven't thought about this enough.

nickbostrom.com/information-hazards.pdf

Wow why did i even try to argue with a tardo like you.

Sorry that answer wasn't add enough.

Unknown unknowns, have you heard about this? This is a hazard.

Why don't you link me more out of touch retarded "philosophers" i'm sure a conspiritard "intellectual" like yourself has everything figured out.

Not after the jews have been defeated

>stop using sources
This is not a response.

Enjoy your post-modern slavery. You will never utilise the violent truth which you worship. Keep lying to yourself about being a new age tough guy.

yes, sometimes you have to defend yourself, other times you want to defend others

>stop using sources
>an actual swedecuck who believes in consiracy ass dumbshit like simulation universe

If you honestly think moderm subversion is more effective than actual war you are a complete dipshit.

>The wrath

The environment but same shit nature is scary as fuck

>Implying you shouldn't want people like him to rapidly expanding while you stay innawoods Varg pilled as fuck watching people kill each other from afar.

Varg pill is best pill

You are a complete dipshit for thinking this isn't a post-violent age.

Rome will never return.

>post violent age
>savages still running around
>proxy wars still being fought
>ideologies completely different
>subversion completely ineffective

Keep treading that water.

Violence is no longer able to reshape this world.

It is a storm in a tea cup now. All wars are fought by proxy.

Non violent solutions don't reshape it though, but keep holding onto thoughs views because they will burst. The only reason absolute war doesn't is because of absolute destruction. The only way that came about is war. The only reason non violent has done nothing to change the world is because of that threat of absolute destruction war.

You still don't get it conspiritard. It isn't anything in the water. It isn't some kind of secret code being send across the world. It isn't any subversion method. It is the fact that war reached its end that this "non violent" era of absolute war started. Now that there is no war to fix things they will devolve into it does break out to counteract that. The only thing we can hope for at this point is that it won't be absolute destruction.

Yes Goyim, keep on fighting each other over boundary stones ! Gotta keep the gentile bloo... I mean, the patriotic spirit flowing ! Don't you want to stand up against your white brother ? He's your greatest enemy, after all ! And who's you best ally ? That's right Goy, it's us. And we'll be more than happy to lend you all the money you need to fight your wars against your white friends. With interests, of course...

>this level of sophistry and semantic gymnastics.
Do you understand how much you are trying to split hairs here?

There is no practical difference between perpetual standoff and peace. If there is please explain it to me.

Because perpetual peace is not going to happen dumfuck

Enjoy your violent death.

You American deserve it.

Enjoy living in lala land you liberal pawn.

To answer your question, anything that benefits the people that have entrusted in your guidance and protection is necessary.

But everything can be solved with a compromise. However, some people stand to gain and others stand to lose from such comprises, or at least they will feel so. That is why conflict exists and always will, even in so called utopias.

Look in the mirror dipshit.

Okay quit drinking so much flouride dumb dumb, maybe you'll quit praising how non violent we will be once (((they))) make everything okay. Oh wait subversion doesn't work stupid fuck.

Aussies were on the same boat in WW2. Ha how could the japs ever get to us? Ha how could we ever be affected by war? Oh fuck Americans save us. Oh fuck have our women for stopping their airfields and naval bases. Oh god we are an island of savages and criminals but war is not the solution please ignore we have been untouched thanks to others.

Eat shit in la la land you dumbfuck conspiritard jew slave.

Only actual jews want war gone because they suffer the most from it due to banks and others finding out they know their schemes and from kicking them out of so many countries during war. Keep it up fuck tard

ods are gods and I am grateful that they made explicit the already attaining forbidding of redundant threads BUT
The biggest problem here was not redundant threads, it is one-line writing prompt one-posts. This format allows a spammer to quickly bombard us with brainless spam and drive good threads off the board before they can be archived. The brainlessness of the non-discussion offends the character of the board.
Imagine trying to have a substantive discussion while surrounded by robots who constantly demand to know your favorite color. /s/ has a minimum thread set-up requirement -- you cannot demand that everyone else write your thread for you -- and Sup Forums needs one too.

how else are we going to destroy the world

Absolutely Not. War is slavery. If you want to kill do it for your own pleasure and no one else`s.

Weaponized Jews

it happens and it has happened throughout history; the thing speaks for itself