This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »
Are religious wars (past and present) just an excuse to fuel territorial disputes?
Religious wars throughout history, to me, just seem to be an excuse for a leader or group of leaders to gain more land or territory, and therefore power.
Am I wrong? Why or why not?
Madhavi Gavini
At present and in the most recent past, I believe that the wars/conflicts are to gain control (not necessarily the territory);religion/ethnic differences may be a trigger.
In territorial disputes such as between Israel and Palestine, India and Pakistan over Kashmir,religion is an added 'difference of opinion', not an excuse,I presume. The disputed territory is used as an excuse instead.
Don Wesley 50+
As an old timer, I have learned over time to adopt a much different philosophy.
I do admire your question and the topics highlighted.
Wars require money and the super-rich loan their money.
No money, leaves us with fist fights.
My intention to be present in your question, is to say lets us go back to the idea of war and find a better question.
So I honestly offer the following, which is long on thought and short on words:
George Carlin on war and choice. His philosophy.
God Bless his courage to think and talk.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JINczGG_UjQ&feature=related
Aware of and caring about us All.
Don Wesley [From The Silent Generation - 1930's]
griffin tucker 10+
My best guess would be a 'weapon' that isn't actually a weapon but instead an instigator of peace, and made by the real weapons companies (perhaps patented by them) and sold to governments so that everyone wins.
What is so obvious with recent wars is that no government really wins, but instead the private sector.
Don Wesley 50+
My first reply is a real one; let the two original souls in the conflict have a fist fight to get over their mis-managed anger. They hurt themselves and become heroic friends. In the Irish Mafia, [Boston, Mass] they let the guys fight. If not someone gets “whacked.” See YouTube for history.
In general situational principle, discover the conflict early and collaborate to find a solution. Never buy a manager.
In Business I used Flippo's – "Principles of Personnel Management." Solve the conflict quick before it grows. If not the owners of the company lose money in a strike. The owners make money to spend and no to lose.
Another view [national] comes from the Dalai Lama who said at Stanford recently " He has the best system; best for them, but not for us." Collaborate!
These are more philosophical ideas of culture and have no questions of right or wrong. Live in peace or no profits.
Arkady Grudzinsky 50+
Colleen Steen 500+
I agree...wars are about money, politics, religion...all of which are used to have power over, and control people...control and power, I believe are at the core.
Barry Palmer 50+
People who are willing to kill are willing to lie, and they alone know their true motives.
Rather than guessing their motives, we should face the fact that we will always be ignorant of their motives, and base our actions on this fact that we know for sure.
This applies to all leaders who advocate war.
griffin tucker 10+
You may be interested in a TED video of such ex-service men and women of whom have held onto their comradeship and therefore hold onto their sanity.
http://www.ted.com/talks/jake_wood_a_new_mission_for_veterans_disaster_relief.html
Elizabeth Gu 30+
So true.
We've seen so many nations and religious groups at war rather distort and degrade what they're standing for.
Lawren Jones 10+
John Smith 30+
Maybe that's true for some of the leadership, but they're not the ones doing the fighting, the troops on the ground do it for religious reasons, the leadership made sure of that, probably because they couldn't get the troops to fight otherwise.
Kate Blake 50+
Religion, territory, etc has very little to do with it, these factors are merely manipulated as an excuse to sell more arms!
$$$$$$$$$$
griffin tucker 10+
If you were a leader of a government, you make the money, and therefore money is almost meaningless compared to, say, creating a law to control.
Large corporations such that of aforementioned Google are interested in money, but there is a point where an individual or group of individuals have so much money that money itself becomes almost meaningless.
There's an old folk tale of Bill Gates that might elude to the situation.
"If Bill Gates dropped a $100 note, he would end up losing $200 if he spent the time picking it back up."
Kate Blake 50+
If they really thought it through and took the advise of ex-soldiers there would never be another war. Propaganda functions at many many subtle levels, and the cost in human lives, mental and emotional complications can never justify war at any level. So many civilians raped and killed, women and children, war is not just between those in uniform, it adversely effects everyone in those areas.
griffin tucker 10+
http://www.ted.com/talks/thomas_barnett_draws_a_new_map_for_peace.html
Kate Blake 50+
griffin tucker 10+
It has been said that America is very good at "winning" wars but not very good with the aftermath.
Preparing for peace in my opinion should be made before a war starts (for whatever reason the war is about, including money) and it is the weapons companies who are the true winners in the end with any war.
It's odd that sometimes it seems the same 'brand' of weapons are used in both sides of certain recent wars, so I would tend to agree with your stance on money being the driving force of these modern wars.
That being said, money is only power when you can spend it, which is why trade sanctions on war-torn countries is a method to attempt to stop a war, or at least a cease-fire.
Is there any such thing as a weapon that creates peace?
Kate Blake 50+
The only weapon to create peace is LOVE, genuine kind care for one another, then how could we kill our brothers and sisters?
griffin tucker 10+
I remain unsure of your inability to access video, so I provided this link for you that should be accessible from most devices where it glamourises the effect of extreme capitalism in a future scenario in approximately 10-15 years time where governments have lost control and corporations literally and overtly rule the world.
The difference between today's scenario of your view that corporations rule is that while industrial espionage exists in today's society, it is not nearly as overt as displayed in the above link.
Keep in mind this is a fictional scenario, but with real-world implications that we can learn to avoid or adapt to.
Metaphorically speaking, if you were to compare to today's realm of reality, I would say that the video represents the trillion-dollar pharmaceutical industries such that of Glaxo-Smith-Kline and the like.
I hope you find the video barable to watch as I must warn you and others who click the link that although it is the censored version, it may still contain disturbing material. Possibly NSFW.
Arkady Grudzinsky 50+
Religion should be about personal self-control. But it has been successfully used to control others throughout the ages - no doubt about it.
Zman Kietilipooskie