I just don’t get it (War -- Huh! What is it good for?!)

[capri0mni]

I know the arguments (I’ve heard them ever since Elementary School, when History Class was called “Social Studies”): that armed forces and war are unfortunate but necessary evils for a stable and functioning State, and therefore, Society.

But lately, as I wake up to news of yet another airstrike against a hospital, or a terrorist bombing of a school, or kidnappings or torture, or the burning down of villages, I only come away more baffled and more sad.

I mean, even if it were true that War is an ugly but necessary Means to a better End, I’m left asking:

A Means to What End?

Some killing, I understand.

• Killing another living thing for food, or shelter -- I get that (And there’s a growing realization that plants have some form of sentience, so vegans aren’t off the hook on that point, either).
  
• I understand using antibiotics to kill off microbes that make us sick.
  
• And I understand the rationale behind herbicides and insecticides -- even though I think they’re used too much and that the rationale is often misguided -- I can still see the logic behind them.
  
• Or killing lab animals so we can better understand disease and help find treatments for things like cancer; I understand that, too.
  
• I understand when a person decides to have an abortion.
  
I even understand the death penalty for certain crimes (though I don’t often agree with it).

So I understand that killing is often a necessary means to better ends. I get that bit.

But War? The systematic creation and maintaining of entire sections of society dedicated to the purpose of being cannon fodder?

Killing citizens (whether soldier or civilian) because you don’t like the policies of their leaders? Or killing people because you don’t like how they pray? Or, for whatever reason, you’re squicked whenever you think about the place where their ancestors came from? Or they speak the “wrong” language? Or they have the “wrong” skin color?

I just don’t get it...

Because whatever ends the means of war is meant to achieve, I’ve never seen any of the wars in my lifetime (since the invention of the telephone, radio, and television) actually work (If wars did work for solving problems, we wouldn’t have to keep trying them over and over, and over, and over, and over...).

Comments

[capri0mni]

Well, that's why I specified "in my lifetime" at the end... Because, yeah: Maybe the American Civil War was necessary (though the Constitutional Amendment that ended slavery [the 14th] makes an exception for prisoners. And the majority of American prisoners are Black, so there's a fairly convincing argument that racial slavery hasn't really ended as decisively as we tell ourselves).

As for WW2 -- Germany invaded other countries to gain an End (for some purpose) and it didn't work. From what I understand of the history I learned, Hitler's desire for German purity was so deep that he couldn't abide the idea of trade with other nations, or of negotiation, or compromise, So if he wanted Germany to have resources it needed, he need to invade other countries and make them "German," too.

And it didn't work. War did not make Germany stronger.

On the small scale, on a case-by-case basis, I can see how joining a war for self-defense may be necessary.

But I don't get the "Institution of War" as a whole.

Also, I'm writing this as the citizen of a country where the leaders of the political party now in power are planning to put lifetime caps on medical insurance for the poor, and sending agents of the government, armed as if for battle, into hospitals to arrest parents for being illegal immigrants while their children are in surgery.

And our "Commander in Chief" wants to undo nuclear disarmament, and create whole new classes of nuclear weapons.

And I just don't get it.

[lilysea]

Oh, no, I didn't mean Germany invading everyone was a good idea:

I meant everyone else *fighting back in self defense* when Germany tried to invade them was a good idea.

[capri0mni]

I realize that.

I'm just wondering how and why anyone continues to insist wars are necessary -- as a concept -- to such an extent that the existence of military social classes are taken for granted. And anyone who's a soldier is automatically considered a "hero" and "inspiring," regardless of how they conduct themselves or whether they enjoy killing other people or are repulsed by it.

(Of course, I'm looking at this as an American, with a culture that seems to celebrate its military more than any other democracy, and that's contributing to my bafflement.