The past year has seen a flood of articles commemorating the end of the Cold War, and the fact that "peace" seems to be breaking out in many regions of the world. Most of these analyses lack any larger conceptual framework for distinguishing between what is essential and what is contingent or accidental in world history, and are predictably superficial. Gorbachev were ousted from the Kremlin or a new Ayatollah proclaimed the millennium from a desolate Middle Eastern capital, these same commentators would scramble to announce the rebirth of a new era of conflict. And yet, all of these people sense dimly that there is some larger process at work, a process that gives coherence and order to the daily headlines.
Share via Email Iraqi soldiers in Baghdad, April Sean Smith A lucky accident got me thinking about one of the most important questions a person could ask: Or can human beings ever abolish war? I was thinking about war, but in more ambivalent terms. I was thinking how horrible it could be for Afghans the next few years, whether the US stays or goes.
Pick off terrorist warriors one by one and stop invading whole countries? Maybe, a good idea. But the withdrawal of all US combat forces from Iraq in December was a rare and stunning moment: My country had been at war in Iraq sinceafter the invasion of Kuwait.
I watched in dismay as that war for oil lit up CNN like a video game console, and Americans cheered like it was a Fourth of July fireworks show. That was bad enough. To me, one of the worst things about the argument for war in Iraq was that it consciously sought to lower the moral standard for a just war.
They told us that preventive war is just when it saves lives, using Hitler as an analogy.
But stopping Hitler in, say,as he was already on the march, was hardly the same thing. The argument for war in Iraq was that after 11 Septemberwe had to invade and occupy the country because Saddam Hussein, though already penned in by us, might someday develop nuclear weapons, which he might someday share with al-Qaida, with which he had no discernible relationship or affinity.
That was no war of prevention. It was a war of hypothesis. A giant step backward for just war theory. AnotherIraqis or more would have to die for that? Actually, when the final withdrawal came in late December, I was so numb from watching the year horror show that I hardly felt any relief or sense of drama.
But two producers of my program, Paige Cowett and Megan Ryan, were less burnt-out and more in touch with their feelings about the momentousness of the turning point.
They were inspired to think the ultimate thought: Then came the lucky accident. Just as they were thinking that thought, in came the new book by science writer John Horgan, The End of War.
Paige and Megan decided it was time to go big — to recruit John Horgan and use our privileged position as producers of a major talk show to break free from the shallow drip of the news cycle and aim for the sky.
He thinks humanity can abolish war, in part because we abolished slavery. If slavery was such an ordinary part of human culture that it was accepted as a given in the Bible, but today, no nation or person could ever admit they hold a slave, then culture could change enough to abolish war, too — and maybe, more quickly than we think.
Most people who even flirt with the idea conclude that certain things need to happen first: But Horgan says no. To end war, just advocate for the unacceptability of war. In all countries, at all times, especially when tensions rise. In our seriesI was surprised to discover how many prominent people had thought about the question and had a ready answer.
Among those who think war can be abolished is Jimmy Carterwho said: Is it going to be difficult? Absolutely, because it is so extremely profitable for a number of people. The insecurity, fears and anxieties that we have, knowing that our bodies will be extinguished one day, generate deep anxiety.
The question is, what do you target? I view myself as a warrior for kindness, a warrior for tenderness, a warrior for sweetness, a warrior against injustice and unfairness.
One of the most myth-busting ideas Horgan introduced me to was the notion that war comes not because we have evolved for aggression, but rather because we have evolved for empathy and altruism.
The theory is that people fight wars because we so passionately want to protect the members of our group, not because we are bent on taking from others.
But there are almost always alternative ways to defend our families and countries. It set up war as a solution to uncertainty, not just as a last resort.
It took history in the wrong direction.There can always be a way of compromising. Personally, I think that war is not justified. I agree, that sometimes you are forced to do things you might not want to do, however, I .
John Locke (—) John Locke was among the most famous philosophers and political theorists of the 17 th century. He is often regarded as the founder of a school of thought known as British Empiricism, and he made foundational contributions to modern theories of limited, liberal government.
War has continued to exist in this world since ages. Whenever an external force tries to become dominant on some people, war becomes necessary to suppress the opposition. Perhaps the most striking facet about Jew-hatred is its irrationality. The are as many reasons for hating Jews as there are people.
Everything that upsets, hurts, . I have long called myself a social conservative.
I think it is very important to have standards for behaviour (etiquette) and defined roles. The problems with this system is not that it exists, but the lack of flexibility and the value placed on them. Artist Unknown, Spacehive by Jeff Sutton () First off, there are two broad classes of sensors: passive and active.
Passive sensors just detect any emissions from the target, i.e., they passively look for the target. Passive sensors include telescopes and heat sensors.