Would you go to war?

[Dylan]

I think there is a great difference between signing up to fight for a military and defending what would be your tribal unit, should the excrement hit the fan. I would not do the former, but would understand the latter as necessary in times of chaos. To put it bluntly, I'd be taking my family unit to the hills and starting a self sufficient community long before I'd be adorned with the flag of a nation whose authority I only accept out of social convention and the necessity to operate within the society writ large at this given time. Does that make me a coward? I don't think so.

 

[Nević Nenad]

I had a chance to go to war when I was in the army in the 1990s. I managed to escape from it. So, the answer is no.

But, if someone threatens and pose a danger to my family, people who I love, I would eliminate that person without any remorse. That’s why I think it is important to live your life in such a way that you never get in such situation.

 

[placematt]

wow, i went to bed last night and awoke to some amazing replies. Thanks everyone. I appreciate you taking the time to replying in this thread.

I think everyone is very similar in their beliefs. Most people don't believe in war but believe in defending their family and their way of life which i too believe.

Its interesting, because i have met people and worked with people who would deem us cowards because of our attitude. And yet the seeking of truth is anything but. To have the understanding that psychopaths send many to the slaughter it seems almost silly to take orders.

I've read a few statements that during wars, the majority of soldiers would not aim to fire at the enemy in order to kill, but instead miss on purpose. It make sense that normal human beings would be averse to kill each other even under extreme circumstances. Although the exception seems to be when leaders are present and directly commanding the soldiers. A similar effect that has been demonstrated by the Milgram experiment.

_http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S.L.A._Marshall

Marshall's work on infantry combat effectiveness in World War II, titled Men Against Fire, is his best-known and most controversial work. In the book, Marshall claimed that of the World War II U.S. troops in actual combat, 75% never fired at the enemy for the purpose of killing, even though they were engaged in combat and under direct threat. Marshall argued that the Army should devote significant training resources to increasing the percentage of soldiers willing to engage the enemy with direct fire.

Martha Stout, The Sociopath Next Door:

Studies of combat activity during the Napoleonic and Civil Wars revealed striking statistics. Given the ability of the men, their proximity to the enemy, and the capacity of their weapons, the number of enemy soldiers hit should have been well over 50 percent, resulting in a killing rate of hundreds per minute. Instead, however, the hit rate was only one o two per minute. And a similar phenomenon occurred during World War I: according to British Lieutenant George Roupell, the only way he could get his men to stop firing into the air was by drawing his sword, walking down the trench, "beating [them] on the backside and ... telling them to fire low". World War II fire rates were also remarkably low: historian and US Army Brigadier General S.L.A. Marshall reported that, during battle, the firing rate was a mere 15 to 20 percent; in other words, out of every hundred men engaged in a firefight, only fifteen to twenty actually used their weapons. And in Vietnam, for every enemy soldiers killed, more than fifty thousand bullets were fired.

Dave Grossman, On Killing: The Psychological Cost of Learning to Kill in war and Society

What these studies have taught the military is that in order to get soldiers to shoot to kill, to actively participate in violence, the soldiers must be sufficiently desensitized to the act of killing. In other words, they have to learn not to feel -- and not to feel responsible -- for their actions. They must be taught to override their own conscience. yet these studies also demonstrate that even in the face of immediate danger, in situations of extreme violence, most people are averse to killing. In other words, as Marshall concludes, "the vast majority of combatants throughout history, at the moment of truth when they could and should kill the enemy, have found themselves to be 'conscientious objectors'".

I have never heard of this before Tomiro, many thanks for the information. Didn't occur to me that humans who don't believe in war wouldn't necessarily follow through with it even when they are standing on the battle field. That seems courage i think!

That was then and this is now. Different times, different world.
I apologize for this noise but these are my thoughts of war.
I live in comfort and right now, I am embarrassed that I live so well.

edt: add a comma for clarity.

Al, i used to have a real issue with the fact i was here and other people suffered. I guess it was a sense of hopelessness/ guilt that i was afforded all this comfort and yet i still had issues, however, so many people had much bigger problems.

interesting discussion everyone!!

 

[Voyageur]

Just my thoughts:

There are a thousand and one quotes on reasons to not ever entertain the thought of going to war; such as this one on SoTT today:

Never think that war, no matter how necessary, nor how justified, is not a crime.

- Ernest Hemingway

I've read none that make war a justification.

Fwiw, behind each and every aggressor war there is pathology of some sort that is operating behind the scenes. Awareness of the mechanisms and (as has been said above) with an aim to survive and also help others when possible, is always preferable - war, as they say, creates death and dead is dead.

In this video ( http://youtu.be/in-GUuFTyJA ) in the Eastern Ukraine, you can hear Zakharchenko telling the mother of a captured soldier, as advice, to get him out of the country. And he basically said, 5 years in prison is another option. On the other hand, an evil neo-Nazi junta is on the doorstep of his home - this evil ties to the West, yet he is helping to lead a resistance and like Caesar, he has a heart.

Going to war should not be a big question, nonetheless, it requires some context, and circumstance plays its role, such as what Zakharchenko is facing, although he would rather be raising his family. :(

 

[will01]

This is an issue which I have given a great deal of thought on quite a number of occasions. When I was younger, I had a great desire to join the military. Looking back now, my motivations were to live a life of adventure, just as most military advertisements promote. Never at any time did I consider the possibility of having to kill another human being. In fact, I never "thought" much at all back then.

Since discovering this forum and learning of the psychopathic control of this world, there is no way I would have any part of a war. But, a recurring thought I have is, what if these psychos do start a war and the country you are living in is invaded and people are called upon to defend it? It is one thing to go to war, but another to have it land on your doorstep.

 

[Thebull]

"War what is it good for, Absolutely nothing!"

When I was a child we used to play armies pretending to shoot the Germans or the Japanese. We had not been presented with the truth and were programmed by the old war films and the hero's in them.
As my knowledge and consciousness grew over time my views on war and conflict changed. As Will01 stated it looks attractive to live a life of adventure and of course the ptb know who they want to attract to the armed forces. Young youths 16-18 years old with no opportunity's who find the advertised armed forces career a chance to get out of there city's and towns where normally there are no prospects to work. Funnily enough the adverts don't show people's legs been blown off and innocent family's been murdered. There is a military training camp near us in Yorkshire and when you see the soldiers training they look like children in uniform which is frightening. You realize it won't be long until there sent to a war zone to defend our freedom, sickening isn't it. (Canon fodder as someone mentioned in an earlier post)
I used to believe I would fight if the country was invaded but now I would probably head for the hills and just try to protect my family or the group I was with. Also I have realized although Many of us are not affected physically by war, the world is at war and has been since the twin towers went down and in a way everyone is involved though most aren't aware of this fact.

I want to tell you a story my late grandad told me about during the First World War. He lived in Grassington in Yorkshire which would of been a remote rural community in those days. The army came to play the local rugby team Wharfedale my grandad was a small boy at the time. He remembered when the match finished the parole officer came onto the pitch to sign the wharfedale players up for service. He laughed telling me that 15 people disappeared in all directions jumping the walls to get away and not one signed up. This story stayed with me I wondered how they knew how bad it was fighting at that time, my thoughts were that obviously people went but didn't come back so a simple choice really.

 

[wattsup]

I would go to war if and only if I lived in a village back in time where there where no city's meaning way back... Today, society as we know it, does not need war. It is now a fact that war only serve a few and is never beneficial to the populace.

We said that we have evolved and that war was not a solution after WW2 yet, the PTB are prepping us via all means of communication events for it.

 

[placematt]

I would go to war if and only if I lived in a village back in time where there where no city's meaning way back... Today, society as we know it, does not need war. It is now a fact that war only serve a few and is never beneficial to the populace.

We said that we have evolved and that war was not a solution after WW2 yet, the PTB are prepping us via all means of communication events for it.

I think video games and media play a huge part in preparing, conditioning us to go to war.

Just my thoughts:

Going to war should not be a big question, nonetheless, it requires some context, and circumstance plays its role, such as what Zakharchenko is facing, although he would rather be raising his family. :(

I really like what you mean by that Voyageur. That it shouldn't be in big question in regards to principle!!! I guess i need to stick to my guns more and understand that although my grand mother may think I'm a coward for wanting no part in such way, its the opposite. Thanks everyone for your thoughts :)

 

[DavidHP]

A long time ago when I was in my late teens, I used to think that yes, I would go to war if needed. Then I visited the military academy, where all future officers are trained, and felt such an oppressive atmosphere as soon as I stepped in, whatever the " aura " was in the area repulsed me. That changed my attitude completely. later in life, I came to the conclusion that we the " regular " people never know why they are being asked or told to go to war.

We only know what TPTB tell us. That is not sufficient reason.

 

[Dave_P]

I was in the army for a year, I'm from Argentina. obviously the training and teaching values depend on the country, but personally my experience was not so bad after all, I learned many things such as survival techniques, recognition of the natural terrain and how to survive extreme environmental conditions. As for your question, I think it depends a lot of that going to war. War is a terrible thing, but if you got your personal reasons to go to war do it.

 

[anothermagyar]

[quote author=Renaissance]When I was in high school I joined JROTC, which is an American youth indoctrination program for the military. I remember joining because it offered camping activities and physical fitness training which I was into at the time. Throughout most of high school I didn't consider actually considered joining the military, however that changed when I was began facing graduation. I didn't know what I wanted to do, and eventually I caved and applied for a ROTC scholarship, which trains military officers in college. I also applied to West Point since it was in the area. Thankfully the competition was extremely high and I wasn't accepted.
[/quote]

I guess, you're not a psychopath, Thank God, that's why you weren't excepted! ;)

Reminds me, I live in the US, my boss's private exercise trainer, young man, in his 20 something years old, he wanted to go to Iraq, but he wasn't excepted,
I guess not because his physical strength( he is very strong and healthy), but I think the psychological aspect. He is not a psychopath.
There is no draft, so it's a big: NO.
The situation is totally different in Ukraine.
I heard videos when Ukrainian captured soldier was asked why he was fighting against his own people and he said they were forced to go to war,
they were threatened.

Different situations, but I would escape, if I could.
I agree with Percival.

 

[syldan]

In this uncertain times, that is a good question.

I think that there are two basic scenarios which are very different though to take into perspective.

What if the war came to me? If i put myself in the shoes of the people of east Ukraine for example, as in being attacked by their own government, i feel that i would do everything in my power to help the resistance and those around me. Even if that meant, taking arms in order to protect my friends and family. YES!!!

Otherwise, joining the army, (now at age 55 today) the thought had never entered my mind once!

 

[luc]

Gurdjieff says that everything going against your aim is 'evil', and everything which contributes to your aim is 'good'. Confronted with such a war situation, one must formulate such an aim and act accordingly, as tough as it may be. The aim is the key and determines everything else. Try to imagine a couple of scenarios/aims where you would answer the question "Should I go to war?" with either "yes" or "no".

I think this is a very useful exercise. I used to think that going to war is always a bad idea, and I guess today this is true in 99% of the cases. However, recent events in Ukraine got me thinking, as well as the wars Cesar fought... And so, maybe this...

War is always a lie, is destruction, violence, sadism, canon fodder, the continuity of ignorance, traumas that will perdure for generations. The face of war is very ugly.

..., although certainly true, may not exclude the possibility that going to war can be the right thing in some (limited) cases. I try to train myself not to think in black and white terms - so maybe there are exceptions? I don't mean fighting for some psychopathic government, but for your very life, for your very soul? What about those people in Eastern Ukraine? I'm not sure...

I came to think that morality has less to do with "rule books", although they can be useful, but, as someone (Chu? unfortunately, it was in a Session threat) pointed out, with the question "what does the universe want?", or "what does the universe want from me?". So I guess there can exist exceptions to the very useful rule of thumb "never go to war!".

As for desertion, I've heard stories about people during WW2 in Germany breaking their own arms or legs to avoid being drafted. I imagine that if you really want something, there are ways. The biggest danger I think is falling for the propaganda, feeling bad about yourself for "not serving your country" if everyone around you goes to war and thinks this is the right, patriotic, heroic thing to do.

 

[Goemon_]

As for desertion, I've heard stories about people during WW2 in Germany breaking their own arms or legs to avoid being drafted. I imagine that if you really want something, there are ways. The biggest danger I think is falling for the propaganda, feeling bad about yourself for "not serving your country" if everyone around you goes to war and thinks this is the right, patriotic, heroic thing to do.

I heard people on the french side get executed for this kind of behavior, maybe it was only in WWI.

 

[Shinzenbi]

Would you go to war ?

I'm not sure this is really the issue, or it is an incomplete question. Currently, what holds everything is nuclear weapons. For instance we can see it between India and Pakistan (warring at the border but no declared war "thanks to" nux), and same applies to US and Russia. The outcome of a world conflict would be the resort to nukes, so a more relevant question would be "Would you go to war, or would you wait for it to come"?

Those who talk about world war should really have it in mind. I think that WW3 would have started at least 2 years ago if there had not been nuclearized countries.