Is it man’s “nature” to make war?

Is it man’s “nature” to make war? I may be in the minority but I don’t really believe it is. Human nature (if it is reflective of what we see in the animal world--and there is no way REALLY of saying if this is a valid comparison) would probably suggest that the bigger fish will attack the smaller one and the smaller one is best advised to fight back or swim fast.

BUT we don't know if this is “true” or not since the possibility exists that man's cognitive or spiritual base is so fundamentally different than a "lower animal” that observed behavior patterns in other animals are, as a result, just not applicable to humans. Of course, I don't KNOW the answer to this--nor does anyone else, it is all speculation.

However, if there is no aggressor then no counter-punch is needed so if we can stop ourselves from beginning a war then we won't have to fight. It is that simple. That is the peaceful, and I think superior, position. Really? Why kill each other IF you can somehow work it out?

Maybe it can't be done but shouldn't we try a little harder than we do to avoid it. And--By seeing wars as noble or justified, it only makes their likelihood increase.

I think most large-scale wars ultimately are undertaken due to a profit motive and munitions suppliers and defense contractors--like the Krupps or Basil Zaharoff or others--often times pull the strings behind the scenes to maneuver countries in to full-scale conflicts so that they can make a profit. I don't think this position can be totally discounted nor do I think this is late breaking news, either. Wouldn't it be a better place if we could find diplomatic means of settling things--a compromise--as opposed to might makes right the biggest baddest dude wins.

I don't think war is inevitable nor do I think it justified. So? Why do we typically go to war?

Because somebody has something we want and they won't let us have it.

Most wars are based on a simple problem (at its core) no matter how much complexity lies atop the core issue and the core issue is this:

"You won't do what I want so I am going to kick your ass". That is war.

For example, in World War II, yes I believe the US was justified in responding as they did to Germany but this WAR was NOT JUSTIFIED at all because GERMANY was not justified and THEY are the ones, along with Japan in the Far East and Italy in North Africa, who were the primary agents starting WWII.

War was not justified then nor is it now. I need oil, Iraq won't give me a deal--fuck 'em I want it anyway. The Poles won't willingly give me 80% of their farmland and live in high rise ghettos in Cracow--fuck 'em I want it.

I am not getting enough return on my investment--this president is anti-business, get rid of him. We need water, you have a well I want it fuck you I will take it . . .

On and on and on--somebody has something I want they won't give it to me for the price I am willing to pay I get angry fuck you I declare war.

That is war . . .

I believe as my good friend Sven says as well: creative solutions and love. That is the way. Build, do not destroy. Peace first. Aggression should be seen as a last, a very last resort. Make love, not . . .