War is Inevitable?!
Ed Turner
Hypothesis 1:
War will result from the devotion of large resources to the preparation for
war during peace time. "Preparation" is here taken to include physical
(weapons systems), organizational (military establishments, plans, etc.),
and political (alliances, aggressive foreign policies, etc.).
Historical Demonstration:
World War I among others
(There are some frightening parallels between the pre-WWI situation in
Europe and the current world situation).
Lesson:
A sufficiently elaborate and delicately poised war apparatus will eventually
be triggered by miscalculation, accident, madness, etc.
Hypothesis 2:
War will result from refusing to make preparations (as defined above) for
war and from generally conducting oneself in a very pacifistic way.
Historical Demonstration:
World War II among others
(There are some frightening parallels between the pre-WWII policies of some
European nations and those advocated by the major critics of the current
policies of the West.)
Lesson:
Giving ones adversaries the impression that one is extremely reluctant or
entirely unwilling to fight invites a disastrous miscalculation on their
part.
Conclusion:
Murphy wins. When there is the potential for war (i.e., societies with
conflicting interests and goals), there is probably no very effective way of
avoiding the possibility (or even probability) of war, even though it may be
in no ones real interest to fight.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
These gloomy thoughts are intended for both the hawks and doves in net land
who feel *sure* they can see the path of wisdom and the folly of those with
opposing viewpoints.
Ed Turner
astrovax!elt
Cliff Shaffer
> Murphy wins. When there is the potential for war (i.e., societies with
> conflicting interests and goals), there is probably no very effective way of
> avoiding the possibility (or even probability) of war, even though it may be
> in no ones real interest to fight.
I agree. This is exactly what I meant when I said that the nuclear
weapons are an effect of our problems, not a cause. Clearly we are
in competition with the Soviet Union. I think this is because of a
scarcity of resources. Resources are scare (by definition) because
there is not enough to go around. There is not enough to go around
because there are too many people. Hence my conclusion that we should
be trying to solve (and in this group discuss solutions to) the
population problem rather than the nuclear weapons problem.
Cliff Shaffer
{we13,mcnc,seismo}!rlgvax!cvl!cas