War. HU! What is it good for? Absolutely Nothing.

Coward Of The County by Kenny Rogers Everyone considered him the coward of the county. He'd never stood one single time to prove the county wrong. His mama named him Tommy, the folks just called him yellow, But something always told me they were reading Tommy wrong. He was only ten years old when his daddy died in prison. I looked after Tommy 'cause he was my brothers son. I still recall the final words my brother said to Tommy: "Son, my life is over, but yours is just begun. Promise me, son, not to do the things I've done. Walk away from trouble if you can. It wont mean you're weak if you turn the other cheek. I hope youre old enough to understand: Son, you dont have to fight to be a man." Theres someone for everyone and Tommy's love was Becky. In her arms he didnt have to prove he was a man. One day while he was workin the Gatlin boys came callin. They took turns at Becky.... there was three of them! Tommy opened up the door and saw his Becky cryin. The torn dress, the shattered look was more than he could stand. He reached above the fireplace and took down his daddy's picture. As his tears fell on his daddys face, he heard these words again: Promise me, son, not to do the things I've done. Walk away from trouble if you can. It wont mean you're weak if you turn the other cheek. I hope youre old enough to understand: Son, you dont have to fight to be a man. The Gatlin boys just laughed at him when he walked into the barroom. One of them got up and met him halfway cross the floor. When Tommy turned around they said, "Hey look! old yeller's leavin." But you coulda heard a pin drop when Tommy stopped and blocked the door. Twenty years of crawlin was bottled up inside him. He wasn't holdin nothin back; he let 'em have it all. When Tommy left the barroom not a Gatlin boy was standin. He said, "This one's for Becky," as he watched the last one fall. And I heard him say, I promised you, dad, not to do the things you'd done. I walk away from trouble when I can. Now please dont think Im weak, I didnt turn the other cheek, And papa, I sure hope you understand: Sometimes you gotta fight when you're a man. Everyone considered him the coward of the county. Although this applies only to one individual, many of the conflicts previously mentioned could be analagous. After all, what was the conflict in Scotland during the late 13th and early 14th centuries if not a case of the Gatlin boys picking on someone? The only difference is that there were larger numbers on both sides. Even the rape of Becky took place in the form of prima nocte. I have read through your arguments, and I suppose the main problem I have with them is your over-optimistic viewpoints. Of course if there are two viable options: one being war and the other being a logical discussion to work out the differences, the discussion is to be preferred. The problem is that there are many people that do not have the intellectual capacity to discuss things or to bother to try and understand an opposing viewpoint. When you state "Hindsight shows us the mistakes of the past" I must ask what the 'us' refers to. If it refers to you and I, then you are correct. But if it refers to the human population in general, I beg to differ. Despite the many claims you may hear about humans being a superior species, I can assure you that most humans are actually quite lacking in intelligence. Not only are there many that cannot see the mistakes of the past, they will almost certainly repeat those same mistakes in the future. You say "All the examples you have stated so far are all situations [where] reason and understanding could have just as well have prevailed over the gun, spear, and guillotine." Is this really true? Do you really believe that the Scots could've said "Hey wait! Let's talk this out nicely."? Even if they could, would you want to resolve the issue with a nice discussion after somebody had just raped your wife? Of course they would claim that it was a legal right, but this it is still unacceptable. As the penultimate line of Coward of the County states: "Sometimes you gotta fight when you're a man." My main point is that reason and understanding cannot be implanted into the minds of others. When you state "The aristocracy of France should just have let the lower class into their political system. The British shouldn't have invaded Scotland or Zulu territory" you are absolutely correct. They shouldn't have done these things. The problem is they did. If a child decides to stick up for himself and hit a bully back after the bully starts with him, the child that fought back cannot be condemned. Of course anyone can still make the correct statement "The bully should've never started with him in the first place." This is true, but it is what bullies do. Similarly, when the British invade Zulu territory, the Zulus cannot be condemned for starting the Anglo-Zulu war. Did the war have to be fought? No. But that doesn't make it wrong. The child could've let the bully pick on him and avoid a fight as well. But letting issues get resolved through such passive action is not good. People should have the right to defend themselves. You claim "Any issue can be resolved with words, yet we still resort to death." This is not the case. There are a great many people in this world that will not be affected by words. They either won't care or they won't have the intelligence to understand them. I know this may seem like an extremely uncivilized and savage claim, but bullets, missiles and bombs are the only reasoning that many of these brutes will understand. As unsophisticated as this may sound, it is sadly the truth. I don't have the space to reiterate all of the lyrics to War and go through them all once more, but there are a few other points I'd like to make concerning some of them. "Who wants to die?" You claim that it is only an escape for a temporary situation. But an excellent point is made in the movie V for Vendetta. When the character V tortures Natalie Portman he shows her that death is actually not the worst thing. There are some principles that exist that are worth dying for. This ultimate realization came to her, as it did to V at the end of the movie. He knew that he would die on that final night, and yet that paled in comparison to his goal of changing the corrupt government and giving hope to the other citizens. You ask "Beside, wouldn't they prefer to see the effects of their sacrifice?" Perhaps if they could, but this is an impossibility. The point of many of these sacrifices is that the principle was worth more than life. "Life is much to short and precious to spend fighting wars these days" To this you state "Again, without the distrust, with a little brains rather than brawn, with compassion, we would never have had to fight the wars of the past." Now this may be true, but not realistic. Brains cannot be instilled in those that are not learned. Your view is extremely optimistic, but in reality a leopard cannot fully change its spots. Those without brains will never become intellectual. And when these unintellectual brutes start trouble, no amount of compassion or brain can persuade them. "War can't give life it can only take it away" You say to me "You've only viewed the outcomes of the wars, but those all could have been reached with diplomacy." Once again, the intelligence needed to reach a conclusion through diplomacy is not present. It would've been better, but it simply cannot happen. You also say in reference to this "The acts and treaties came after all the death. Why not skip a step?" I'll tell you why they couldn't skip a step. It is not that it was physically impossible. It is that it was impossible in terms of the mental capacity required for such acts. I have no space left, but my main point is that your optimistic views are not realistic.