Anything Forums

Legend wrote: War is inevitable.  In a lot of cases, there's simply no other way to solve the problem other than "my guns are bigger than your guns."

It's the law of nature.

lol so true.

"sadam: I have weapons of mass destruction .... not!"
"bush: Well I have a bigger weapon of mass destruction then you, and I'm not afraid to show it to you"
"sadam: I so want to see it!"
*in AD 2003 war was beginning*

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1394, old post ID:17832

Legend wrote: War is inevitable. In a lot of cases, there's simply no other way to solve the problem other than "my guns are bigger than your guns."

I think you've been listening to a few too many Bush speeches.

Personally I'd like to think that at this point in history we're a little more advanced and intelligent than resorting to playing a life or death game of "Mine is bigger than yours."

Have we really found nothing more important than exhibiting our own strength and power over the weak?

Legend wrote: It's the law of nature.

Umm, I could be wrong, but I don't think guns exist in nature. Do they?

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1394, old post ID:17919

Not everyone can be pacified by reason and dialogue, sorry, but it's reality.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1394, old post ID:17922

Stasi wrote: Not everyone can be pacified by reason and dialogue, sorry, but it's reality.

Sure, not everyone can be, it's reality. But do you also think it's realistic to say

In a lot of cases, there's simply no other way to solve the problem other than "my guns are bigger than your guns."

All I was saying is that I'd like to think that those cases are not only very rare, but also that there are in fact other ways to solve most problems other than "mine is bigger than yours." If indeed it is the case that "a lot of cases" can only be solved by force, don't you think we'd have a lot more conflict in today's world than we do? Personally I think people that subscribe to such a view are also the people mostly responsible for the violence and hate.

I guess it's really just a question of the glass being half full or half empty and how we choose to view humanity. I honestly think Bush and much of the conservative right run to their guns far too quickly and it's mainly a result of attitudes like that.

"Hey, they won't listen to us so what else can we do? Nothing! So we're just gonna have to make 'em listen to us with our big, hard, powerful, manly guns!"



Plus, in no way will I ever surrender to the belief that "war is inevitable." Perhaps in our lifetimes, yes. Perhaps in our children's lifetimes, sure. But for the rest of all time? No way. I guess I just have a little more faith in mankind and what we can accomplish than to make or agree to such a claim.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1394, old post ID:17925

I agree shenbaw, there is always a more clever way of doing things, but most people don't want to use their brains to really develop a plan of action. The pen is mighter than the sword, but the brain is mighter than them all. The only time violence is neccesary is when you limit yourself by your options, or your society is so misinformed, miseducated, and mismanaged that there is no basis at all, no common ground. Thinking outside the box fixes almost everything.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1394, old post ID:17957

Re: the guns thing, don't be so literal, Shenbaw.

You guys are living in a fantasy land, not on Earth.

There's a very simple reality to life, people: resources are limited and scarce.

This fact makes war inevitable due to the fact the we as a species propagate like rabbits. And if you honestly think that the guy next door to you (figuratively speaking) is going to share his land and his food and his limited resources with you under dire straits, then you are sadly mistaken.

The only time that your idealized views of the world will hold true is when we have unlimited land and unlimited resources.

Which will never, ever occur.

Naturally, one wants to take care of their family and their people before worrying about taking care of others. So, during a surplus of resources (and as I said, resources can be anything from land to oil to food or money, etc) sure...war is potentially preventable.

However, all of the people cannot have a surplus all of the time.

Therefore, war is simply inevitable. Someone always wants what someone else has, and nobody is willing to give anything up without a fight.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1394, old post ID:17970

What a sad world to live in where your life is all that you concern yourself with.

There's a very simple reality to life, people: resources are limited and scarce.
Really, cause I'm pretty sure there are lots of resourses and they aren't all that scarce, unless you are talking only on a local level.

And if you honestly think that the guy next door to you (figuratively speaking) is going to share his land and his food and his limited resources with you under dire straits, then you are sadly mistaken.

If my neigbor came to me and mentioned getting together to conserve resourses, I would think it was a good idea, as would anyone intelligent and not completely self-centered. You are sadly mistaken if you think everyone would react like yourself. Your logic exist only is you assume people will always be self-centered and interested and nothing else, a bit much of the law of nature for me.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1394, old post ID:17973

You don't think resources are scarce??

Name one resource that isn't?

Conserving resources is only delaying the inevitable. It's simple mathematics, really...if you have 20 people and only one piece of bread, somebody is going to have to die.

And that's how the world is...that's how nature is...if you don't accept and participate in that, then you will be one of the first to go when/if the herd needs to be thinned.

Unless of course you're proposing we limit people in their ability to procreate?

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1394, old post ID:17978

Legend wrote: Name one resource that isn't?

Air seems to be quite common these days, and water is plentifull thanks to the wonderfull companies that bottle and sell it

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1394, old post ID:17980

lmao...yeah, but even those are limited resources.

Although it might seem large to us, this planet is pretty small...and inevitably even those resources that seem plenty will be drained.

This universe might be vast, but it (and absolutely nothing) is not unlimited.

As long as that holds true, there will be war.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1394, old post ID:17983

THE ONLY THING THAT WILL NEVER END IS HAMSTER LOVIN'.

DEAL WITH IT, PEOPLE!!

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1394, old post ID:17984

Legend wrote: THE ONLY THING THAT WILL NEVER END IS HAMSTER LOVIN'.

DEAL WITH IT, PEOPLE!!

I, for one, welcome our new Microsoft Mouse humping overlords!

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1394, old post ID:17985

Resources replenish, they didn't just get there magically, there is a process that creates them.

If I have one piece of bread, I grow more wheat to bake more, your examples aren't very complex. If you deal with what a person needs to operate any given situation, there is more than enough resources to provide for everyone, think outside of the box, man... <--- (stoner ending)

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1394, old post ID:17987

And what if the land that you need to grow wheat is infertile or already occupied?

Not to mention that you still have to purchase the seeds, provide the labor, provide the means to distribute the wheat after it has grown, process the wheat into bread, buy an oven to bake it, pay for gas to heat your oven, etc etc...all of which costs another scarce resource: money.

And the 20 people are hungry NOW, they can't wait for you to get this process started.

If it was all so simple, we would not have starvation in this world.

Look at some of the countries around the world that cannot even sustain themselves due to their high population and population growth and land being too infertile.

Resources do not all replenish, either. Some are, for all intents and purposes, gone once they are used.

It takes hundreds of years for a forest to grow, but only one day for us to completely destroy it for furniture and notebook paper.

Replenish that.

And no amount of conservation can account for the exponential growth of our species.

To say that there are more than enough resources to accommodate everyone is untrue.

Again replying to your statement: "If my neigbor came to me and mentioned getting together to conserve resourses, I would think it was a good idea, as would anyone intelligent and not completely self-centered. You are sadly mistaken if you think everyone would react like yourself. Your logic exist only is you assume people will always be self-centered and interested and nothing else, a bit much of the law of nature for me."

Then tell me why whenever there is any kind of natural disaster or storm warning whatsoever, people rush out to buy the "necessities"? Stock up on them?

I have yet to see a man at the grocery store during a winter storm warning put back a carton of milk and some toilet paper since he already has two and the guy in the line behind him has none (and the store has run out)...

And why do stores always run out?

Why are there never enough flu shots during the winter? You see people actually fighting for them. Maryland/DC area had to institute a "lotto" for them.

We're not even talking about a truly dire situation here, as we've never really had one in the US.

But if the ever hits the fan, know this: people don't care about you, they care about themselves and their family first and foremost.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1394, old post ID:17996

Wow Legend, you need to learn to stick to one subject. What are you talking about? Food? Is that you "limited resource?" Well the fact of the matter is, that there is plenty of food for the starving people in every part of the world, it's getting the food there that is the problem. Americans waste more food in one day than some countries consume. And your trying to tell me we don't have enough of it? I don't buy it. As far as energy goes, there are plenty of renewable sources of that as well (i.e. wind power, solar power, hydrogen power, etc.), it's the implementation of these forms of energy that is the problem. But again Legend (and you'll no doubt disagree with me on this cause your obviously very convinced of your view), I really think it's just a question of the glass being half full or half empty and how we choose to view humanity. We are a problem solving creature Legend, it's what we've always done and what we'll always do, our brains are what separate us from the rest of the animal kingdom. When you claim that war is inevitable, to me, your saying that we are no different than the primitive creatures we evolved from. (Red, you don't need to comment on that)

I think we are.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1394, old post ID:18029

Legend wrote: And what if the land that you need to grow wheat is infertile or already occupied?

Not to mention that you still have to purchase the seeds, provide the labor, provide the means to distribute the wheat after it has grown, process the wheat into bread, buy an oven to bake it, pay for gas to heat your oven, etc etc...all of which costs another scarce resource:  money.

And the 20 people are hungry NOW, they can't wait for you to get this process started.

Guess they should have done something productive before they were hungry. That's their fault

If it was all so simple, we would not have starvation in this world.

Look at some of the countries around the world that cannot even sustain themselves due to their high population and population growth and land being too infertile.

Resources do not all replenish, either.  Some are, for all intents and purposes, gone once they are used.

It takes hundreds of years for a forest to grow, but only one day for us to completely destroy it for furniture and notebook paper.

Replenish that.

And no amount of conservation can account for the exponential growth of our species.

To say that there are more than enough resources to accommodate everyone is untrue.

Again replying to your statement:  "If my neigbor came to me and mentioned getting together to conserve resourses, I would think it was a good idea, as would anyone intelligent and not completely self-centered. You are sadly mistaken if you think everyone would react like yourself. Your logic exist only is you assume people will always be self-centered and interested and nothing else, a bit much of the law of nature for me."

Then tell me why whenever there is any kind of natural disaster or storm warning whatsoever, people rush out to buy the "necessities"?  Stock up on them?

That's only relevant if every person stocks up, and every person does not. Most people obviously can't survive in nature.

I have yet to see a man at the grocery store during a winter storm warning put back a carton of milk and some toilet paper since he already has two and the guy in the line behind him has none (and the store has run out)...

And why do stores always run out?

Why are there never enough flu shots during the winter?  You see people actually fighting for them.  Maryland/DC area had to institute a "lotto" for them.

We're not even talking about a truly dire situation here, as we've never really had one in the US. 

But if the ever hits the fan, know this:  people don't care about you, they care about themselves and their family first and foremost.

No crap? Really? hmmm.... guess I'll just have be a self-centered, ignorant drone like everyone else.... Or not, I think I'll continue to try to look our for someone other than #1. But feel free to continue to only to think about yourself, that gets the world far!

Because it is alway more effecient for 2 people to work together than it is for one, barring few exceptions. When groups of individuals band together for a common cause, for they together can achieve much more than any individual could ever hope to, they form society. Those that are born into society but choose not to participate are driven by biological drives of nature. You can exist there, as some do and many relapse to in dramatic circumstances, but the idea is still to work for the betterment of everyone. That's the basis for our government, otherwise our insecurities and fears, as you describe them to be constant for the majority, would drive everyone to prefer the self interest of anarchy over any rule.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1394, old post ID:18034

But isn't it true that a few people can ruin the benefits of society for everyone else? Ninety-five out of one hundred people (or countries) may wish to work together and share resources, but the 5 that are only interested in self can get weapons and take the resources by force and they need to be stopped. Or perhaps you think they don't need to be stopped. I know, we'll just ask them politely to stop. That'll work.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1394, old post ID:18231

No, i see what you're saying, but you can plan around that and the 95 can work together with a plan if the 5 don't and still succeed. The effeciency added when people work together definately outweighs what the minority usually does. There are obviously examples where a few have ruined it, but the better the system, the few people it takes to work. Our society is a product of much sculpting.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1394, old post ID:18236

MrSelf wrote: There are obviously examples where a few have ruined it, but the better the system, the few people it takes to work. Our society is a product of much sculpting.

Does that "better system" actually exist in reality, or are we just hoping that we can some day sculpt that system into existence. Until we can, There WILL be wars. And the process of sculpting society is fraught with hazards. Just look at our attempts in Iraq.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1394, old post ID:18241

MrSelf wrote:
No crap? Really? hmmm.... guess I'll just have be a self-centered, ignorant drone like everyone else.... Or not, I think I'll continue to try to look our for someone other than #1. But feel free to continue to only to think about yourself, that gets the world far!

Heh.

Okay, mr. Jesus, mr. I-can-think-of-others, let me ask you this: when the survival hormones kick in, as they always will, what are you going to do? Nothing. Your hormonal instinct will force you to think of your own safety. And you can't beat hormones.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1394, old post ID:18243

Actually, it's quite possible to overcome biology, but you are correct that most will give into biology.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1394, old post ID:18263

I'd like to know what kind of hormones cause people to be selfish?

Testosterone?

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1394, old post ID:18264

Bookworm wrote:

MrSelf wrote: There are obviously examples where a few have ruined it, but the better the system, the few people it takes to work. Our society is a product of much sculpting.

Does that "better system" actually exist in reality, or are we just hoping that we can some day sculpt that system into existence. Until we can, There WILL be wars. And the process of sculpting society is fraught with hazards. Just look at our attempts in Iraq.

The better the system (such as communistic government or republic government) is formed, the more we can overcome biology because there can be more personal gain from helping others than doing it yourself. The system we have now in America is a great system, making it much more favorable to have peace than war. Governments before ours often had wars from the lack of stability ours has. Some say the role of government is to make it more favorable to do right, than to do wrong. Certainly much of our government is, one of the main argueing point between communism and capitalism is that capitalism is the only place where greed can be utilized for the greater good, its the only place where anything good comes out of personal greed.

The other factor in making society more important than self-interest is our biology itself; we can use it in our favor. Our biology makes survival of ourselves important, very important, but also includes our family. Family can be taken differently and, because of our capacity for rational though, is variable. Family can be you birth family, adopted family, friends, surroundsings, even country or planet. Different people use there biological drives in different, sometimes even warped ways. Some people feel a connection to their friends that would apply as a biological drive to protect family, some feel this way about the world, its all a matter of perspective. Very often this is the case with groups like PETA, or other semi-extreme-ideology groups.

Also, obviously our biology can be overcome in this area, for example, if they were not, you would not be able to kill your family because of biology. This has obviously happened before, but you could argue that in a case where it was you or them, your survival instincts won out. Of course then suicide would be biologically impossible, which it is not.

Edit: grammer, a couple of sentances

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1394, old post ID:18266

William Wallace wrote:

MrSelf wrote:
No crap? Really? hmmm.... guess I'll just have be a self-centered, ignorant drone like everyone else.... Or not, I think I'll continue to try to look our for someone other than #1. But feel free to continue to only to think about yourself, that gets the world far!

Heh.

Okay, mr. Jesus, mr. I-can-think-of-others, let me ask you this: when the survival hormones kick in, as they always will, what are you going to do? Nothing. Your hormonal instinct will force you to think of your own safety. And you can't beat hormones.

What kind of situation have you put yourself in where survival "hormones" are an issue? I think of my own safety now, I know that when certain chemicals kick in, it makes certain situations seem more grave that they are, but that doesn't change my outlook for others. But again, if you are having issues with survival, then you are at the lowest rung of society, and your problems stem much deeper than biological responses.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1394, old post ID:18267

Bookworm wrote:

MrSelf wrote: There are obviously examples where a few have ruined it, but the better the system, the few people it takes to work. Our society is a product of much sculpting.

Does that "better system" actually exist in reality, or are we just hoping that we can some day sculpt that system into existence. Until we can, There WILL be wars. And the process of sculpting society is fraught with hazards. Just look at our attempts in Iraq.

Let me expand on this for a second:

What I mean is this, as the system gets better and more stable, it takes fewer people to run and can stand up to more abuse while still providing for the people. In you example, you mentioned 95 people working and 5 ruining it. How many people have screwed up in Iraq? Lots, right? and our nation still stands, Iraq has not crumbled yet, despite perhaps our best efforts. That is a testament to the system. In the 60's, the outcome would have been much different, certainly no hope for the sability and elections that are still possible. 200 years before that, checks and balances where just coming into governments as a standard. Back in these days, it took a much smaller percenage of the population to ruin it for everyone. As government becomes more accountable it takes more people to ruin it for everyone because it become more effecient and take fewer people to keep in line.

So in conclusion, by 'better system', I mean the system we have now is much better, in terms of effeciency and stability, than those before it under any time period. As we continue to advance the system, wars do decrease, as history has shown. Whereas the system would have crumbled under pressure 200 years ago from X percentage (or amount) of people going against the system, now the system survives without completely falling into chaos, which is an environment that breeds conflict and war.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1394, old post ID:18268