Listening to the professional commentariat, one can be led to believe that war is a dead end and never solves anything. The discussion about a "never ending cycle of violence" is a prime example of this mindset.

So my question is, does war ever solve anything? Does violence ever solve anything?

Historically, the answer is obviously yes. Yes, war and violence can solve or resolve things.

Did the American Civil War resolve anything? Yes. It resolved the issue of slavery and federal power.

Did WWII resolve anything? Yes. It resolved the question of Nazi ideals and expansion and Bushido dominated Japan expansion.

Did the American Revolution, the Vietnam War, or the Russian Revolution resolve issues? Yes. America fully separated from Great Britain and became independent. Vietnam was united under communist rule. Russia ended centuries of Tsarist rule and became a United communist nation with a totally new financial and governmental system.

So clearly, war and violence can resolve long festering issues.

Did Korea solve anything? Not really. A partitioned Korea could go up in smoke in a week due to unresolved issues.

Did WWI solve anything? Not really. It was basically a breather until WWII settled things.

Did the first Punic War solve anything? Not really. But the third Punic war certainly solved things. Carthago delenda est.

So, war and violence can resolve issues. It ain't pretty, but sometimes it may be necessary. War is hell. War is suffering and brings out the worst in man. But it can resolve issues. And sometimes, it may be the only way to resolve a long standing issue between peoples.

With that being said, what war aim in the current Israeli conflict could possibly resolve issues? And is Israel and the world prepared for a resolution? Or is this just another cycle in the decades long cycle of violence?

And before anyone says that genocide is the only way to resolve issues (or even the Israeli conflict issue), the American Revolution, the Civil War, even WWII wasn't a genocide perpetrated by the victors (Great Britain, southern states, Japan, and Germany were not ethnically cleansed).

Discuss.

When done to where the enemy is so defeated that they can't come back from it, yes it's extremely effective.

When it's done just to keep someone at bay, then it's only effective to keeping the military industrial complex raking in money hand over fist.

Solves the job problem for the manufacturing sector that's needed to make the ammo or weapons of mass destruction.

No Spin Ag said:

---

When done to where the enemy is so defeated that they can't come back from it, yes it's extremely effective.

When it's done just to keep someone at bay, then it's only effective to keeping the military industrial complex raking in money hand over fist.

---

This. The west has lost its ability to stomach war. War is always fought to win. Truces and territorial giveaways coupled with destruction of the enemy is the only way to truly win a war.

I'm not advocating for it but if you go to war you better be willing to do what has to be done. Otherwise you're just enriching the MIC and ruling classes who profit from these wars at the real cost of the citizens lives.

From the song:

"War. Uhn. What is is good for? Stopping Nazis."

(Or that's how it should have been)

Yes it does. As long as one side decisively wins.

No Spin Ag said:

---

When done to where the enemy is so defeated that they can't come back from it, yes it's extremely effective.

When it's done just to keep someone at bay, then it's only effective to keeping the military industrial complex raking in money hand over fist.

---

Carthage taught Rome a very valuable lesson in war. War means breaking the back of your enemy where they can't come back. They used it effectively after that but only when circumstances dictated it.

People talk about the military/industrial complex loving wars, but nobody ever talks about the other giant industry that loves war.

The media.

They use it to promote their ideals in right or wrong, almost completely a liberal slant. They use their videos and columns to influence the sides they want to win. And they make tons of money off of ANY war.

The right kind of violence solves everything.

Ask the Comanches

AggieDruggist89 said:

---

Yes it does. As long as one side decisively wins.

---

To add to that, how can either side decisively win by using proxies only?

aggiehawg said:

---

AggieDruggist89 said:

---

Yes it does. As long as one side decisively wins.

---

To add to that, how can either side decisively win by using proxies only?

---

Destroy the proxy.

Iraq II was a proxy war between the US and Euro currency European countries. Saddam sold his oil to Germany in euros. We took out Saddam. We won the war. Petro-dollar won.

SAN JACINTO

Cartographer said:

---

No Spin Ag said:

---

When done to where the enemy is so defeated that they can't come back from it, yes it's extremely effective.

When it's done just to keep someone at bay, then it's only effective to keeping the military industrial complex raking in money hand over fist.

---

This. The west has lost its ability to stomach war. War is always fought to win. Truces and territorial giveaways coupled with destruction of the enemy is the only way to truly win a war.

I'm not advocating for it but if you go to war you better be willing to do what has to be done. Otherwise you're just enriching the MIC and ruling classes who profit from these wars at the real cost of the citizens lives.

---

Both of these are spot on. War should be done with the goal of destroying the opposition. What we've been doing the past 6-7 decades has been quite the opposite

There was this war once upon a time fought by colonists trying to get out from under the tyranny of an overseas Kingdom. It lead to some
Very interesting developments.

Peasants dying for the elites based on some notion of the flag, religion, ideology or patriotism. Been the story since the dawn of man.

Hogties said:

---

Listening to the professional commentariat, one can be led to believe that war is a dead end and never solves anything. The discussion about a "never ending cycle of violence" is a prime example of this mindset.

So my question is, does war ever solve anything? Does violence ever solve anything?

Historically, the answer is obviously yes. Yes, war and violence can solve or resolve things.

Did the American Civil War resolve anything? Yes. It resolved the issue of slavery and federal power.

Did WWII resolve anything? Yes. It resolved the question of Nazi ideals and expansion and Bushido dominated Japan expansion.

Did the American Revolution, the Vietnam War, or the Russian Revolution resolve issues? Yes. America fully separated from Great Britain and became independent. Vietnam was united under communist rule. Russia ended centuries of Tsarist rule and became a United communist nation with a totally new financial and governmental system.

So clearly, war and violence can resolve long festering issues.

Did Korea solve anything? Not really. A partitioned Korea could go up in smoke in a week due to unresolved issues.

Did WWI solve anything? Not really. It was basically a breather until WWII settled things.

Did the first Punic War solve anything? Not really. But the third Punic war certainly solved things. Carthago delenda est.

So, war and violence can resolve issues. It ain't pretty, but sometimes it may be necessary. War is hell. War is suffering and brings out the worst in man. But it can resolve issues. And sometimes, it may be the only way to resolve a long standing issue between peoples.

With that being said, what war aim in the current Israeli conflict could possibly resolve issues? And is Israel and the world prepared for a resolution? Or is this just another cycle in the decades long cycle of violence?

And before anyone says that genocide is the only way to resolve issues (or even the Israeli conflict issue), the American Revolution, the Civil War, even WWII wasn't a genocide perpetrated by the victors (Great Britain, southern states, Japan, and Germany were not ethnically cleansed).

Discuss.

---

War is always and only a stop gap measure that leads to short term partial solutions. The love of Christ is the only everlasting solution that is soon to come with His return.

AggieDruggist89 said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

AggieDruggist89 said:

---

Yes it does. As long as one side decisively wins.

---

To add to that, how can either side decisively win by using proxies only?

---

Destroy the proxy.

Iraq II was a proxy war between the US and Euro currency European countries. Saddam sold his oil to Germany in euros. We took out Saddam. We won the war. Petro-dollar won.

---

Except Iraqi oil mostly flows east....to our greatest bond holders (China, Japan, India.)

"Naked force has resolved more issues throughout history than any other factor. The contrary opinion that 'violence never solves anything' is wishful thinking at its worst. People who forget that always pay."

Hogties said:

---

Listening to the professional commentariat, one can be led to believe that war is a dead end and never solves anything. The discussion about a "never ending cycle of violence" is a prime example of this mindset.

So my question is, does war ever solve anything? Does violence ever solve anything?

Historically, the answer is obviously yes. Yes, war and violence can solve or resolve things.

Did the American Civil War resolve anything? Yes. It resolved the issue of slavery and federal power.

Did WWII resolve anything? Yes. It resolved the question of Nazi ideals and expansion and Bushido dominated Japan expansion.

Did the American Revolution, the Vietnam War, or the Russian Revolution resolve issues? Yes. America fully separated from Great Britain and became independent. Vietnam was united under communist rule. Russia ended centuries of Tsarist rule and became a United communist nation with a totally new financial and governmental system.

So clearly, war and violence can resolve long festering issues.

Did Korea solve anything? Not really. A partitioned Korea could go up in smoke in a week due to unresolved issues.

Did WWI solve anything? Not really. It was basically a breather until WWII settled things.

Did the first Punic War solve anything? Not really. But the third Punic war certainly solved things. Carthago delenda est.

So, war and violence can resolve issues. It ain't pretty, but sometimes it may be necessary. War is hell. War is suffering and brings out the worst in man. But it can resolve issues. And sometimes, it may be the only way to resolve a long standing issue between peoples.

With that being said, what war aim in the current Israeli conflict could possibly resolve issues? And is Israel and the world prepared for a resolution? Or is this just another cycle in the decades long cycle of violence?

And before anyone says that genocide is the only way to resolve issues (or even the Israeli conflict issue), the American Revolution, the Civil War, even WWII wasn't a genocide perpetrated by the victors (Great Britain, southern states, Japan, and Germany were not ethnically cleansed).

Discuss.

---

Since you brought up the Civil War, Israel's stated strategy against Hamas was conceived by Gen William T Sherman. Total War. Or, make war so painful that it will not reoccur for generations. Now, instead of making war with the US, Georgia is harvesting ballots and cheating on elections. But I digress….

Damn right it does... individually, people do better when a clear pecking order is established. Same holds true for nations. It should be a last resort, but when violence is used, it should be just that... violent. Instead, we hold good people accountable and let vermin use violence as intimidation.... should be completely reversed IMHO.

You pop a couple of folks / nations on the beak, and that's usually enough to hold other losers in check.

If the enemy believes his purpose is to die attempting to kill you, then violence is the only end.

Ben Matlock said:

---

The right kind of violence solves everything.

---

Bingo.
As General MacArthur stated "In war there can be no substitute for victory. War's very purpose is victory, not prolonged indecision".

Hogties said:

---

And before anyone says that genocide is the only way to resolve issues (or even the Israeli conflict issue), the American Revolution, the Civil War, even WWII wasn't a genocide perpetrated by the victors (Great Britain, southern states, Japan, and Germany were not ethnically cleansed).

Discuss.

---

The combatants, on both sides, in the American Revolution, the Civil War, and WWII were not muslim. With the cult of islam, it might take genocide, or the purging of the muslims, to make a lasting resolution of issues.

Israel has given Gaza enough chances in the past to be a good neighbor. This latest action was beyond brutal. They are not good neighbors, have not been for a while and Israel is going to eliminate them.

If Israel needs to go to West Bank, they will. I think Hezbollah and Iran have backed down to where Lebanon is safe...for now...

Hogties said:

---

...until WWII settled things.

---

Didn't you answer your own question?

aggiehawg said:

---

AggieDruggist89 said:

---

Yes it does. As long as one side decisively wins.

---

To add to that, how can either side decisively win by using proxies only?

---

Ukraine is a good example for immediate, intermediate and long wins for the US. I am purposely leaving out politics from my statement. We win in each of those defined stages because we gain critical intelligence information about our enemy. That information can be processed by our analyst who figure out ways to beat improved or new technologies, determined if military doctrine and tactics have changed, how robust their logical systems are and we get to watch their military men and machines get destroyed.

It is all good.

chickencoupe16 said:

---

Hogties said:

---

...until WWII settled things.

---

Didn't you answer your own question?

---

Well, I did answer the question of can war or violence solve things. History clearly says yes. Defeat solves issues. Ceasefires and armistices historically do not.

So to repeat the real question,

"With that being said, what war aim in the current Israeli conflict could possibly resolve issues? And is Israel and the world prepared for a resolution? Or is this just another cycle in the decades long cycle of violence?"

Ask the American Indians.