posted 06-19-99 04:35 PM ET     

Any Ideas?

posted 06-19-99 07:22 PM ET            

No matter how advanced our race becomes, there will always be war and violence in one form or another, and people who are in love with death and destruction. Movies during the 50's with John Wayne did nothing but tell the American public that war is a grand event where the men are seperated from the boys and the good guys always win. This couldnt be further from the truth. War does nothing but destroy life, land and dreams. I remember when Saving Private Ryan was released, Americans were outraged at the amount of violence in this movie. They wondered why Steven Speilberg found it neccesary to include such graphic violence in his picture. The response was obvious. To show the public was war is really like. There are no heros. There are no happy endings. There is death, nothing more.

When NATO was debating whether to send in ground invasion troops, many American citizens wanted this for the sole reason of "something exciting" to watch on T.V.

Whenever humans engage in conflict, whether in a petty, verbal fight to a massive, world-wide war, all of our achievements and priciples vanish. We become no better than our primitive counterparts.

posted 06-19-99 07:37 PM ET            

War? Entertaining? Perhaps, from a distance. I wouldn't, but i can't stop your enjoyment of it. On the other hand, I can list some "primal" things that are quite enjoyable first hand, among them paintball (just like war, but no casualties), intercourse, and camping.

I doubt war could be very entertaining up front. You're there, not knowing when you can sleep (since you're defenseless then). You have a heavy gun to lug around, potentially explosive items to carry around, and little or no protection save a hole in the ground or a hill or a tree in a convenient location. You have to be on guard, else you fall into an ambush, or a dumbtrap (punji sticks, etc.) and anybody with any sense wouldn't want to be in such a situation where their own survival could be threatened.

Then, consider the other aspects. Shoddy medical treatment by medics far too stressed for their own good. The possibility that you could be killed not by an explosion of conventional strength, but by toxic gas that gets into you and drowns you from the inside, or corrodes your skin until bone shows, or asphyxiates you by relaxing you too much. Or, you could die by a virulent illness, one that digests your insides and then spits it back out as a black goo - all while you're still quite concious, screaming for mercy, or another that exposes itself as a bunch of scabs; then a few more; then before you know it, your joints freeze, you can't move, can't think, can't breathe, all because of the pain wracking through your body. And let's not forget the classic atomic bomb. If you aren't vapourized by the searing heat, you get the sickness. You feel fine for a few hours, but then you get headaches. Then comes the pain in the gut, and the vomiting of blood. I bet you've didn't know you had that much blood. Then, you start feeling weak, and your hair (if you had any...) come out in irregular patches. A few hours later, you look at your skin, and realize that those burns are bad...and when you put a bandage on them, the skin falls right off! Imagine that! And as you're in the hospital bed (if it's still standing) you watch your body fall apart, bit by bit, until you're screaming silently as your own brain starts disentigrating.

Loads of "fun", i suppose. Quite a power rush. Now, it takes more power and humanity to not put that on other fellow humans.

posted 06-19-99 08:07 PM ET         

The dual nature of man theory is by Freud

Q-Cubed what were my better threads?

The power of authority and the short thrills of murder should be taken into account with battles. So don't bleat and whine at me about the conditions, only the effect it has on the Psyhe (sic)

posted 06-19-99 08:09 PM ET         

Theory
Substantiate
evidence
antithesis

posted 06-20-99 07:03 AM ET         

You deny the supremacy of our primal self, yet you appeal to it?

A computer game is conflict, but not as pure as war(ie we know it is not real) so it does appeal to us on the primitive level.
Conflict and the feeling of power and supremacy can either be artifical (drugs, games) or real, either is equal.
Conflict is what inevitablely makes us develop, and discover.

posted 06-20-99 09:33 PM ET            

That's one reason why you have these "enjoying" wars.

You, sir, are obviously in the Freudian camp. Freud was an odd duck. While he may have been the founding father of psychoanalysis, he didn't, and never did, have all of his feet on the floor, or if you prefer the more vulgar form, have his head out of his arse. Everything a sentient being does does not necessarily revolve around carnal pleasures. Everything a human (an intelligent one, i.e., smart emough to know what's good for him, smart enough to function in society) does, does not necessarily stem from a desire of the id.

And you wish to know the effects on the psyche? Do you wish to know the trauma nearly all vets go through? How they all love the thrill of the hunt, until they make their first kill, until they realize they are the hunted as well? Oh, sure, I have no doubt that the feeling of power murderers and killers get when they off someone is great. But the feeling you get, when your balls are to the wall, when you're being shot at mercilessly, I can say with confidence, that THAT is NOT good for the psyche. The feeling of terror one gets when one knows that there exists a good possibility that one will die isn't healthy. Ever wonder why many veterans come back to parades and honors, but in private and often get depressed? Ever wonder why they smile and act proud, but feel sad, shocked, and angered at what they've had to do? Tell me, I'd like to know how this qualifies as entertainment. Entertainment doesn't give you feelings of mental pain.

Eccles, you're obviously not a military person. I hope you never become one. Those people in charge of the military (the generals, the admirals) know what war is like. They know what hell they're sending their men into. They know that those men are going on a guided tour of the inferno with Beezelbub, and not just observing, but creating and being tortured in that godforsaken place. That's why they're almost never the ones who advocate the use of force.

Information is power. Information requires the advanced intellect of humans. Information is far more powerful than brute force, stronger than the blunt club of wealth, and that's why humans have intelligence. It's so we don't waste the frail bodies we've been given on some pointless excercise to "develop" the ability to brain (sic.) someone to the ultimate. It's so we can be social animals that get along, and advance, resolve differences peacefully, and use force only when necessary, only for survival.

War never starts because of survival, never because of altruism. It starts because of greed and other self-centered motivations.

I, and the rest of the civilized world, abhor War in any form.

True, conflict helps people to develop. Conflict, as in the ability not to use unnecessary force. Conflict, as in the capability to use mental powers to disagree and find an equitable solution. Not conflict as in the ultra-advanced, "You make me mad? ARRRGGHH!!!! I kill you now!".