Jump to content

The Forum- A Debate Group For Logical Thinking


Caine Ghest

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 100
  • Created
  • Last Reply

depends, if a nation was caught in the middel of a struggle, they'd obviously be in a bad position, but... then again, war is never a good thing, and if it was a small nation, it coudn't win, if it was a large nation, it could become an enemy, which would be worse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

depends' date=' if a nation was caught in the middel of a struggle, they'd obviously be in a bad position, but... then again, war is never a good thing, and if it was a small nation, it coudn't win, if it was a large nation, it could become an enemy, which would be worse.

[/quote']

 

The advantages far outweigh this disadvantages, if the war is already commenced. Remaining neutral has very few benefits

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@ kurushi

Good point, it would be best to avoid war at Some costs, like if they threatened you for 10billion dollars it would cost much less for the people to go to war, but i know your going to say people die in war so i got backup

 

More people will die / lose there home / lose there possessions if everybody goes into debt by the government skyrocketing taxes

Link to comment
Share on other sites

War is unavoidable, staying neutral only results in you becoming nothing more then a puppet to the winning side. One should always take a side in a conflict so that they are not left under the thumb of oppression. That being said those who actively oppose war should keep it to themselves as they are doing nothing but causing trouble on the home front when they should be supporting their military regardless of their opinions of war. America is a shining example, people actively oppose war and as a result politicians must represent them in Washington, resulting in our military lacking what they need to fight the war outside of America.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nuetrality is impossible in our world today. The image of Nuetrality is used to prevent people from opposing your power. Yet secertly you are doing more to futher the war than anyone. Also even if you side with one view you will ultimatly be left under oppression of another. The only active way to oppose war is go to war. That may seem like a contradiction but the only way to bring about peace is through conflict. The people do not understand this, they only think with their hearts not their heads. In America the people want their family back, they don't care if peace is achived or not as long as they have their family. However a military lacking what it needs is not the fault of the people but of the Government. The government is to insure that the nation is well protected, both at home and on foreign soil. Thus there are flaws in all of your aguements, yet one truth remains; The people are narrow minded. Only true leaders will go against the people and do what is right for the future, not the present.

 

Also if you didn't know I'm joining this club.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Clap clap clap, you hit the nail right on the head Lulu, a leader needs to focus on the future not the present. When only focusing on the present you lose sight of the future. It is impossible to stay neutral in war, die fighting or die surrendering, I know personally I would rather go down fighting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Neutrility in war? Not the right way to go when, after it's over, you could be the next target. Aside from that, you could get raided or become a battlefield without being a part of the war. Pick a side and you can get some protection and take away the threat of being the next target. Also, for some, going down fighting is "honorable". Going back to becoming a battlefield, if your neutral and war is happening in your frontyard, you're just standing there and innocent people are going to die because you can't pick a side. Also, if your cause is to oppose war: how are you opposing it if you sit back and watch it destroy the land? As Creator said, the only way to oppose war is to go to war!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Government will always fear the people. For without the people there is no Govenrment. All the politicians require 1 thing: The Support of the people. Without this, it becomes impossible to do their job. On the flip side however, every politician has their own agenda. Government is a single word to describe a system that is in place to keep all those power hungry people in check. If the people are constantly watching you, you are much more cautious or you risk losing their support. As long as there is a seperation of power between the people and the Government, politicians will always fear the people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To quote Thomas Jefferson "When the government fears the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny."

 

Currently the government does not fear us, instead we fear them, that means we are currently living under Tyranny disguised as a Democracy. Somewhere along our course of a country both parties discovered that they don't need the people to get votes, they have a political machine which they use to get their votes. Republicans will vote for the Republican Candidate and Democrats will vote for the Democratic Candidate. Each side by default has 48% (Give or take depending on the year) percent of the vote, they are effectively fighting for 2% (Again give or take) of the vote from the undecided/Independents. They don't fear us when it comes to elections, because they know they have our votes because we don't want to vote for the other guy and if we vote for any other party it is considered a wasted vote. If we are able to break the Political machine the Government will begin to fear us again once again restoring our Liberty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...