Before you answer, please read these two statements about the question, so that your answer is not inherently flawed by a misunderstanding.
[b][i][u]-CONSERVATIVE AND RADICAL ARE BEING USED HERE AS TERMS TO DEFINE YOUR PERSONAL PHILOSOPHICAL OUTLOOK ON SOCIETY AND LIFE AS A WHOLE AND NOT JUST POLITICS.
-"WAGING WAR" IS DESCRIBING THE PROCESS OF OFFENSIVE WARFARE, AND NOT DEFENSIVE WARFARE. WAGING WAR IS STARTING AN OFFENSIVE ON ANOTHER IN ORDER FOR THE WAR WAGER TO GAIN SOMETHING. NOT TO DEFEND ONES SECURITY. [/u][/i][/b]
[b]Is Waging War justifiable?[/b]
Also, every time you vote in a poll and don't comment, you will receive paper cuts in between each of your toes. And then you will be forced to run a marathon.
-
Yes radical. I'm not happy with the way our society works and if it came to it I would fight for change I agree with
-
-
*Doesnt comment*
-
Yes, conservative. Anybody who offers a different answer to that is, in my view, silly.
-
Edited by fraggumz: 2/10/2015 9:43:07 PMLOL I love how you have "conservative" and "Radical." You know the christian conservatives of the far right are the radicals right now, don't you?
-
Why is everything so black and white?
-
No (kind of confused about the 'conservative' and 'radical' thing) If, as you describe, the war is only for personal gain, then it would seem to be extremely immoral and selfish and thus, I would need [b]a lot[/b] of convincing to see it as a justifiable act.
-
It all depends on the circumstances.
-
Yes but only if your trying to avenge something or someone. For example the war on Isis is justifiable. They burned a man ALIVE. if that's not a reason to wage war then I don't know what is.
-
Radical because some men just want to see the world burn >:) (me :p)
-
Every country should constantly be at war with every other country so we can find out who real men are
-
Paper cuts are the worst cuts. Easily.
-
There are certain circumstances where it is justifiable. An example I'd include, is when a country is being severely oppressed by an unjust ruler, such as some in the continent of Africa. There is no denying there is an unnecessary amount of bloodshed in War, but it's to prevent further Human Rights violations.
-
I guess I'm gonna go with apathetic, as I do not know what it means and will make me seem smarter for doing so. In all seriousness, the only reason one should go to war is to help and protect other people, whether it be to defend oneself or to defend others who require help. However, the benefits of war, when you disregard the loss of life (which is awful), is great for commercial entities, and in the case of major standoffs/wars, the competition for development of new technological advancements. I am an atheist independent, so I don't know where this classifies me, but who gives a hoot-its off topic anyway.
-
No. I'm a conservative politically and ethically. Nothing is justifiable in an offensive situation unless its a battle tactic. Waging war offensively just because we [i]can[/i] is a waste of tax payers money, economical stress, a flex of power and innocents losing their lives.
-
No it is not justifiable to wage war on anyone unprovoked. However similar to the events of pearl harbor it would then be justifiable to wage war.( just like we did in Japan). The war in Iraq and Afghanistan is unjustifiable. We have no place there.
-
I'd say yes, but I have no idea what being conservative or radical means.
-
Nuke em all. If there is no opposition there is peace. I think.
-
Edited by angry0lbgrampa: 2/4/2015 4:34:10 AMWar is a necessary evil.
-
Was gonna comment, until I saw that tidbit at the end. If we need food and living space, a country has to care for its people.
-
I'd like a better definition of your conservative and radical, if its all the same. A little too vague. And I find war to be a pointless exercise in this day and age. We don't really fight for much any more; ever since the end of the Napoleonic era, wars for territorial gains have taken a sharp decrease. Wars are really only good for slowing population increase, and if we allocated the funds from military budgets to science, we'd probably be able to adjust for the higher population anyway. We live in a society that does everything it can to keep one human alive. And yet, we regularly kill each other with almost no second thoughts. What the actual -blam!-?
-
Edited by Masque of Night: 2/4/2015 4:06:35 AMThe only type of war i'd support is one waged defensively, any other form i'd likely be apathetic toward unless it directly affected me or my life.
-
Like another person said I don't see the need it tagging these polls as social experiments, but regardless. War is sometimes necessary, but it doesn't make it any less silly.
-
War! What is it good for?
-
Please stop calling it these social experiments. They are just controversial polls.
-
War is horrible. Most the people in this forum, including me, can't imagine what it is like to have their home destroyed or to be forced around by people from another country just because of some leaders political views. To put it in perspective for most I want you all to imagine that you have a newborn child. Would you want your child to grow up to go to another country and kill other people. These people that they would be killing would be just like you and me. Just because they dress differently or speak another language doesn't make them not human. If you said yes then you need to ask yourself if you are okay with your child becoming a serial killer. There is a life out there that is unborn and in the future he will grow up and kill for your leader. And I'm not just asking you, an american or European or some ONE else. If I asked every person in the world this question what do you think the majority answer would be?