That's like saying "why do people need to fight". Because humans will never ever live in utopia. That's a pipe dream, where the agenda to obtain it just makes us less prepared to defend ourselves.
If we don't destroy one another, and last long enough to evolve psychologically, we will evolve out of the irrational, out of war. The question is will we last long enough to evolve psychologically.
Do you have a proposal for creating a "WE"? The word "we" implies unity. Then do you a lawful strategy "WE" can use to all provoked reasons or those that pretend to have the authority to do so? I do. It starts with making a "WE" of sincere Americans that unconditionally support the 1787 constitution and it's principles. You can show you are such an American by agreeing with and accepting the most prime of those principles. Do you agree and accept that the framers of the founding documents intended for us to alter or abolish government destructive to our unalienable rights? Do you agree and accept that the ultimate purpose of free speech is to enable the unity adequate to effectively alter or abolish?
Are we gradually becoming crazy!?!?!? This seems to betray a light reading of history. We live and have lived in one of the most peaceful times in planet's history - the trend is clearly the opposite of what the OP seems to suggest. Also, sidenote: the 5th commandment is "thou shall not murder".
Avoiding all wars is easy, because war requires two parties using force against eachother. All that one needs to do to avoid a war is to submit to the will of the enemy. That is what people usually do; it is why there is not civil war and revolution in the U.S. and every other country in the world. People 'need' war insofar as people 'need' to be free from being unwillingly subjected to the will of other people, and especially the perverse disruptive will of other people. Notice how Ostap Bender and One Mind are exhibiting the disruptive behavior of false portrayal of motives. Such behavior is motivated by the fact that war is necessary and efficient for fixing problems, and people with disruptive intent desire to disrupt efficiency; thus both their means and their ends are motivated by the same general psychological desire to disrupt. It is particularly ironic that One Mind's behavior of libellously attributing war to people being 'psychologically unevolved and irrational' is itself caused by his/her own innate irrational perverse psychological desire, which has yet to be eugenicly eliminated from the human species. It's the sixth commandment. And yes, it does say 'murder'. There are two hebrew words for 'murder'- 'ratsach' and 'nakah'. The commandment uses the word 'ratsach'. The hebrew word for 'kill' is 'harag'.
One could also say, wars are necessary. America needs to be liberated from the oligarch globalists and turned back over to the People. But in so far as America and her oligarchy perpetual war for perpetual peace, we should stop meddling and let other nations settle their own problems. Mind our own business, and fix our own nation. But then what would the cowardly chicken hawks here do for entertainment. For the highlight of their day is to kick back in the recliner and watch whatever war we are waging in our meddling, and get entertained by the bombs going off, as we watch it on the big screen tv set, sipping a suds. It has surpassed baseball as the great American pastime. I say each time an American says we should go and kick the hell out of some muslim, that we snatch their arse up and put them on the next flight there. And then make a reality tv show out of it, so we can see them cry like sissies and crap in their britches.
It's been 5 on all tablets I've seen. I'd recommend looking at the traditions for numbering - 5 is the most common but it's been others. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ten_Commandments
there will always be wars as long as the devil (bankers and big european corporations) thinks he rules the earth
MOD EDIT The FACT is, human beings are the only animals that wage war for ideological beliefs. And we will evolve out of that, unless we destroy humanity first. Wars fought for exclusive self defense are necessary. Any other war comes about from irrationality. MOD EDIT And so yes, we will evolve from the irrationality that creates most wars. Whether you like it or not. Of course, you will be long gone, for it will not happen in our lifetime, but one day it will. For psychologically we have not evolved at all in 50,000 years. And it is long past due for the human brain to work, not based upon pure emotions and irrationality, but clear perception and rationality. MOD EDIT
Doubt it. Humans are human. They will always have disagreements. There will always be people that desire power and control, and that will always lead to fighting. Its a pipe dream.
I see that you are exhibiting the innate sociopathic disruptive behaviors of libellous false portrayal of motives (yet again), libellously stating the opposite of the truth about a person, and projecting your own bad traits onto said person, by falsely portraying me- the quintessentially rational person with clear perception, as 'really liking war and irrationality', 'celebrating irrationality', and 'lagging behind' in rationality and clear perception. That is yet more evidence of the strength of your innate sociopathic desire to disrupt truth. That desire of yours is even stronger than I had thought. Rationality, by the way, is more of a means than an end. It is a process, rather than the goal of the process. All fundamental human goals, including survival itself, are ultimately driven by psychological desires, aka emotions. A person who has no emotions does absolutely nothing, and just sits still until they die of dehydration and starvation. A person desires to survive in the first place largely because a person desires pleasure, and life allows oneself to reap pleasure. But there are also other fundamental desires: In particular, there is the desire for fundamental truth and justice (which are closely related to eachother), which is what I desire, and there is also the desire to disrupt truth and justice with inverted truth and inverted justice, which is what you desire. Your perception of inverted fundamental truth is even revealed by the quote in your signature ("Multiplicity is only apparent, in truth, there is only one mind"), which contrasts to the fundamental truth that separate conscious individuals are separate conscious individuals. Clear perception of truth facilitates rationality, whereas perception of inverted truth distorts rationality. If a person could choose one's own fundamental desires and perceptions (which is not the case, because such traits are innate), then it would be rational to choose to desire and perceive truth, like I do, and it would be irrational to choose to desire and perceive inverted truth, like you do, because truthful perception is a strength, whereas the perception of inverted truth is a weakness. There are no others of my kind. No other individual has such a strong desire for, and clear perception of, the general fundamental truths and the more specific truths that derive from them, nor for true justice, which is closely related to fundamental truth. But apparently you are using the word 'kind' in a much broader way, to refer to any and all people who lack your perverse psychological desire to disrupt truth and efficient problem-fixing. That is not what you stated in your post to which I replied. In the post to which I replied, you referred to wars in general. Thus you are changing your position. I for one strongly support wars of self-defense against disruptive tyranny (which comes in many different forms). I also support making 'mass gun drops' in various countries with disruptive tyrannical governments, so that the people therein can pick up those guns, kill their disruptive oppressors, and liberate themselves. Do you consider such indirect military intervention to be a form of self-defense, or do you consider it 'irrational'? I also support pre-emptive military action to eliminate the WMDs of foreign states that are inclined to attack with them, such as North Korea. That is to say that I support destroying North Korea's missiles and nuclear facilities. That is a perfectly rational military action, but it consists of long-term far-sighted self-defense and defense of others (i.e. South Korea and Japan), as opposed to immanent self-defense. Do you think that that military action is 'irrational'? All of the military actions that I support involve the elimination of disruptive tyrannical aggressors and the military capabilities thereof. I do not support wars for the purpose of forcing an ideology onto other people. That said, I do not see anything inherently irrational about wars to propagate ideological tyranny. A large group of people who desires to expand their ideological tyranny (such as communists or islamists), and therefore wages war in order to do so, is effective in achieving that end, and is therefore rational. Something that would be irrational is if such ideologues thought that they could change everyone else's ideology by talking to them and converting them. Funny how you say something as sadistic as that, yet you claim to be rational and unemotional.
Then war does a really pisspoor job of it. WWII killed 50 million people. Seems like a lot until you realize the world made that up in less time than we could really notice. We had 6 billion people about a decade ago, now we have 7. War is also not eugenic, even your boy noticed that, bemoaning that the "brave" Aryan was always running off and getting himself killed in wars. The only way to control population is to prevent births. People are reluctant to let you kill them once they're able to do something about it.
Abortion is a murder, just for your information.Do you recommend to replace one murder by other one?Nice.
Ulyanov didn't mention abortion. Fundamentalist paternalist Judeo-Christi-Islamic sects claim that the Bible views contraception as murder, and usually have large families. In places like northern Europe and New Zealand, where religions have largely died out and women are treated as equals, reproduction is around replacement level instead of rapidly expanding. Arguing for feminism and against primitive religions is one way to try to control population expansion.
This is what happens when populations do not have enough information about their unconscious existence to control themselves. God disapproves.
