This I Believe

Keith - Indianapolis, Indiana
Entered on May 17, 2006
Age Group: 18 - 30
Themes: war

I hate war, but not for the same reasons as most. I hate it, because it displays the limits of our mind. Most people hate war, because it ends numerous lives; or because it is brings destruction to societies. More and more now battles are fought using computers and unmanned machines. People believe with less people involved in the battles, there will be less bloodshed. They are wrong. I hate war, but I strongly oppose these reasons for despising war.

Lately the Discovery Channel shows more and more technologically based television shows. And correspondingly I see more and more programs having to do with some machine that can fire so many rounds per second. Or some new hardware that requires less human interference. To this, all I can do is shake my head, because the world is moving closer and closer to the age of science fiction; where humans sit behind screens and watch as robots do the fighting. This sounds nice, but truly it would be detrimental to civilian lives. If the world’s powers stopped using human lives to combat one another then the emphasis on the battles would shrink until it became insignificant. The American government, for example, is a government ran by “the people.” So America’s leaders cannot do whatever they feel is right; they must take American’s feelings into consideration. Because American citizens are relatives to the soldiers that America uses to fight its wars, their enthusiasm for war is going to be restrained; thus restraining America’s enthusiasm for war. However if America’s citizens have no ties to the soldiers of the army, then their desire for war has no reason to be curved. Therefore America’s desire for war has no reason to be curved. This would be fine if the fighting consisted of only the fighting that exists on the battlefield. But countries would realize that without fatalities their victories on the battlefield would be hollow, because countries have little investment in their losses. However, they still have much invested in their civilians. This realization would be followed by an increased amount of attacking citizens of a country rather than just the soldier. This was proved in World War II when America realized the Japanese’s philosophy of the death of a warrior. Because the Japanese did not see the deaths of their soldiers as lamentable they continued fighting. But when America decided to unleash its full fury upon the civilians of Japan the government quickly acquiesced. Although Japan was not a democracy like America; the same principle still applied, because all governments want to protect their civilians, even if its only a specific social class.

Some might say that a country’s capital could be used instead of its lives to decide disputes between powers, because capital would decide its ability to produce war machines. But a country with fewer capital resources is probably more likely to attack its enemies civilians, because they have less of a chance of winning a war on the battlefield.