Question 529

Photo by: Cromacom

28 Responses to “Question 529”

  1. that one hippy chic:

    War: to carry on active hostility or contention.
    Hostility = Distrust = High, breakable tensions = Possible future wars.
    War does not make ‘Peace’— it forces it out of the destruction it builds first. The ‘peace’ made between countries is fragile because of the distrust and the desolation they inflicted on one another.
    The winnings of war can only create ‘temporary peace’ but everyone wants ‘permanent peace’—and when people think of ‘peace’ they think everything is right in the world and how it should be. Little do people realize that they think they’re right, and others are automatically wrong.
    So, to correct this ‘wrong’ people fight one another, trying to make their ‘perfect peaceful world’. Thus creating war.
    ‘Peace’ cannot be reached. At least, not any time soon, in my eyes.
    And if you point to me and shout “You’re wrong” you’ll only prove my point.
    If you shrug and say “I’ve never thought of it that way,” and carry on with your own thoughts without accusing others of being ‘wrong’… then you my friend, is what the world needs.

  2. Morgan:

    Using violence to bring peace makes no sense. Disagreement can no longer be solved with words, only brute force. By fighting fire with fire everyone will end up burned. The only way I see war being of use is if it is used to protect others from something that is widely accepted as morally wrong, such as genocides. Fighting for resources, or because of ethnical differences is wrong. Hatred only breeds more hatred. There can never be peace as kong as there bare disagreements in the world. It is impossible to have peace. But it is possible to get alone.

    An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.
    By fighting others we all end up hurt.

  3. dev:

    A simple no. War is hate. And hate is for shallow fools.

  4. Mike:

    Saying the answer is categorically no is short-sighted and naive. Saying the answer is categorically yes is foolish and immature. As with everything in The Real World, there is no simple answer. Sometimes, wars are bad – the Crusades for instance, but sometimes war is a valid solution, like WWII. War is always bad for the civilian populace and I guarantee it is bad for the military since we’re the intended target for all the killing efforts. That being said, when words fail sometimes all that will work is violence. As long as it is the LAST resort.

  5. thereallytruebelievereverhereandthere:


  6. theofficialassistanttothelorax:


  7. to field:

    wbat? that’s not even a real question.

  8. Aussiecraig:

    In as much as a dictator can bring ‘peace’ (which to my mind is the absence of violence) then yes war can bring ‘peace’…is it the brand of peace we want? There lies the real question…its all shades of gray while this is a pretty B&W question…

  9. court:

    i believe there would be no peace without war. just like there would be no feeling of happiness without sadness. They are two things that pair together, and we will always go through times of peace and times of violence. Its within the human nature to fight for what you want, and there are always going to be different opinions.

  10. Emmy:

    An ancient middle-eastern king once wrote, “There is a time for war and a time for peace.” There are occasions when war is simply wrong and can bring nothing but more destruction. However, there are also times when war is necessary. What would have happened to Europe if no one had been willing to stand up and fight against Hitler? There are so many people today who think peace at all cost should be our ultimate goal. But I believe there are some prices too high to pay. When evil men begin to have their way with innocent people, it is the duty and responsibility of those who have the power to stand up and stop them, to speak up for those who cannot speak up for themselves. Of course war should be a last resort, but regardless of how awful war is, it is sometimes worth the price.

  11. Rachel:

    No because it makes the people affected seek revenge.

  12. Aaron:

    It all depends who’s being killed. If it’s a fascist dictator like Hitler, then yes. If it’s the lives of innocents, no.

  13. Mandy:

    The price for FREEDOM has always been BLOOD

  14. Lynn:

    Freedom brings peace. And sometimes freedom must be fought for.

  15. pnog:

    I believe the only way for true, permanent peace to exist is for everyone to be the same. As long as people have different ideas, hopes and desires the potential for war will always exist. Politics like democracy subdue war by making compromises so no one is fully happy, while war more often than not seeks to make one side’s desires a reality while ignoring the opposition. In the end the question should not be if war can create/sustain peace, rather does it create a larger overall level of happiness or satisfaction.

  16. lizzie:

    Never ever, violence just generates more violence

  17. mac1:

    only temporarily. things need to be worked out diplomatically to sustain it

  18. Hallow:


    Sometimes, you have to fight for what you believe in, and sometimes violence is the only way. Anyone who thinks we should have peace no matter what is very, very luck that their freedom and safety has never been compromised.

  19. No, not at all.
    I’m not sure either if it is possible to live all in harmony with nature and in balance with our selves. But I like the thought of being so, much more than the thought of war and violence.

    It takes ages and a whole lot of energy to build up a life and in one snap of our fingers you can take this away. For me this means life is precious, so why would we take it away? Or a better question is, who are you to take this away?

    War leads to more violence and money does too, but peace leads to happiness and the freedom of you!

    It’s like Michael Franti says:
    “We can bomb the world to pieces but we can’t bomb it into peace!”

  20. TP:

    War does not directly bring peace; it can only bring temporary silence and uneasiness, which leads to more war.

    I know this is not exactly what the question is asking, but if war were to bring peace, it’d be close to “War is peace”, which is out of 1984, totalitarianism and all.

  21. Jessica:

    Technically, yes. When war ends there is peace. However, war can’t bring peace forever.

  22. Julia:

    I think war just brings more war. The only way to find peace is to make peace, and to make peace is really quite simple. War is so complicated, it comes out of dispute after dispute and we can’t really find the orgin. Peace is just forgetting about the past and moving on. Learning to live with eachother and accept our differences.

  23. Javier:

    yes, but at the highest price, and only momentarily.

  24. chris:

    Yes – but with a caveat. The only way war can bring peace is with the complete destruction of mankind – total annihilation.

  25. no because if we always fight we never grow great friendships and we never get over ourselves being on a high hourse. we have not followed our hearts and tryed to be good sivilians and show how we care for eachother.

  26. Andreia:

    No war does not create peace and peace creates war, human nature is only for power and greed and until human nature changes each thing will follow on as before.

  27. Alex:

    No because war brings hate and destruction and pain.

  28. Rob:

    No Jesus, no peace. Know Jesus, know peace.

    “Fighting for peace is like screwing for virginity.”

Answer the question or add your comment: