www.businessinsider.com/nuclear-weapons-deadly-evolution-power-military-video-animation-2017-311/20/17 The US and North Korea have been engaging in continued conflict ever since the 50's. We are now in the era of Kim Jon Un and Donald Trump. The following video is a timely discussion of the consequences of nuclear weapons.
www.businessinsider.com/nuclear-weapons-deadly-evolution-power-military-video-animation-2017-3
www.businessinsider.com/nuclear-weapons-deadly-evolution-power-military-video-animation-2017-3
War and Human Conflict
1. Social Motivators
Why do people choose to do, what they do?- individually, as societies, and as a species, what are our motivators for selfishness, violence, compassion, altruism; what drives us?
I have, for most of my life, tried to understand why people fight wars. Of all the turns this web site has taken, this is one of the strangest. It is a long way from wanting to share farm skills to war.And yet, what more important subject to study in the context of emergency preparedness?
Looking at the section on 'The End of Cheap Oil', and the matrix of possible outcomes set forth by Sarah Odland, (Shifting the Peak Oil “Debate” to Strategic Management) you see on page 8, an illustration entitled 'THE OIL ENDGAME: A MATRIX OF PLAUSIBLE OUTCOMES'. Prominently on that matrix are possibilities such as 'NUCLEAR ARMAGEDDON', 'MILITARY STATE', and 'RESOURCE
WARS'. This is her description of the matrix;
'...Figure 4. Oil Endgame Matrix of Outcomes. The outcomes are scored on a subjective scale of
relative desirability from 0 (low) to 100 (high).
Outcomes are sorted on the x-axis based on the degree of transition planning, which could range from
zero (chaos/collapse) to a highly managed transition into a reduced petroleum economy. The Y-axis
portrays the transition time allotted to prepare for life on the downward side of Peak Oil, which ranges
from abrupt (little to no warning) to gradual (20-30 years preparation time, whether wisely used or not).
The stakes are high. Extreme negative outcomes are possible, including nuclear obliteration, or collapse
of civilization and a return to a pre-industrialized standard of living. Less severe, even positive, outcomes are also possible. At the positive extreme, the transition from fossil fuels is consciously managed to
achieve a sustainably high standard of living for a majority of the world’s people.'
Considering this matrix of possibilities, how does one understand the individual motivations, the motivations of society, the motivations of humans as a species, that would drive us to such an end?
1. War
http://www.slate.com/articles/life/history/2012/03/edmund_wilson_s_patriotic_gore_one_of_the_most_
important_and_confounding_books_ever_written_about_the_civil_war_.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriotic_Gore
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War
'...The seeming contradiction between warfare and morality has led to serious moral questions, which have been the subject of debate for thousands of years.[122] The debate, generally speaking, has two main viewpoints: Pacifists, who believe that war is inherently immoral and therefore is never justified regardless of circumstances, and those who believe that war is sometimes necessary and can be moral.'
'World War II
'...One of the starkest illustrations of the effect of war upon economies is the Second World War. The Great Depression of the 1930s ended as nations increased their production of war materials to serve the war effort.[46] The financial cost of World War II is estimated at about a trillion U.S. dollars worldwide,[47][48] making it the most costly war in capital as well as lives.
'...By the end of the war, the European economy had collapsed with 70% of the industrial infrastructure destroyed.[49] Property damage in the Soviet Union inflicted by the Axis invasion was estimated to a value of 679 billion rubles. The combined damage consisted of complete or partial destruction of 1,710 cities and towns, 70,000 villages/hamlets, 2,508 church buildings, 31,850 industrial establishments, 40,000 miles of railroad, 4100 railroad stations, 40,000 hospitals, 84,000 schools, and 43,000 public libraries.[50]'
It is clear from this brief snapshot that war destroys- tears down the infrastructure of human's 'civilized' life. As General Sherman said, 'War is Hell'. Those who wage war bring hell down on themselves and those they choose to war against. Why? Why do we as humans do that?
Those who believe that war is a necessary evil evidently believe that the events and situations preceding the actual waging of declared war are of such gravity and atrocity that war is the only solution.
Those, on the other hand, who promote and sustain such conflict as a means to make a profit or to indulge their blood lust are not deserving of any of the positive connotations of the term 'human'. Nor should they be called 'animal' or 'beast'; as to do so would insult those to whom they are being compared. Those who choose to carry out such acts for profit or pleasure are predators on their own kind, predators of the worst sort. Such things should not be.
I have, for most of my life, tried to understand why people fight wars. Of all the turns this web site has taken, this is one of the strangest. It is a long way from wanting to share farm skills to war.And yet, what more important subject to study in the context of emergency preparedness?
Looking at the section on 'The End of Cheap Oil', and the matrix of possible outcomes set forth by Sarah Odland, (Shifting the Peak Oil “Debate” to Strategic Management) you see on page 8, an illustration entitled 'THE OIL ENDGAME: A MATRIX OF PLAUSIBLE OUTCOMES'. Prominently on that matrix are possibilities such as 'NUCLEAR ARMAGEDDON', 'MILITARY STATE', and 'RESOURCE
WARS'. This is her description of the matrix;
'...Figure 4. Oil Endgame Matrix of Outcomes. The outcomes are scored on a subjective scale of
relative desirability from 0 (low) to 100 (high).
Outcomes are sorted on the x-axis based on the degree of transition planning, which could range from
zero (chaos/collapse) to a highly managed transition into a reduced petroleum economy. The Y-axis
portrays the transition time allotted to prepare for life on the downward side of Peak Oil, which ranges
from abrupt (little to no warning) to gradual (20-30 years preparation time, whether wisely used or not).
The stakes are high. Extreme negative outcomes are possible, including nuclear obliteration, or collapse
of civilization and a return to a pre-industrialized standard of living. Less severe, even positive, outcomes are also possible. At the positive extreme, the transition from fossil fuels is consciously managed to
achieve a sustainably high standard of living for a majority of the world’s people.'
Considering this matrix of possibilities, how does one understand the individual motivations, the motivations of society, the motivations of humans as a species, that would drive us to such an end?
1. War
http://www.slate.com/articles/life/history/2012/03/edmund_wilson_s_patriotic_gore_one_of_the_most_
important_and_confounding_books_ever_written_about_the_civil_war_.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriotic_Gore
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War
'...The seeming contradiction between warfare and morality has led to serious moral questions, which have been the subject of debate for thousands of years.[122] The debate, generally speaking, has two main viewpoints: Pacifists, who believe that war is inherently immoral and therefore is never justified regardless of circumstances, and those who believe that war is sometimes necessary and can be moral.'
'World War II
'...One of the starkest illustrations of the effect of war upon economies is the Second World War. The Great Depression of the 1930s ended as nations increased their production of war materials to serve the war effort.[46] The financial cost of World War II is estimated at about a trillion U.S. dollars worldwide,[47][48] making it the most costly war in capital as well as lives.
'...By the end of the war, the European economy had collapsed with 70% of the industrial infrastructure destroyed.[49] Property damage in the Soviet Union inflicted by the Axis invasion was estimated to a value of 679 billion rubles. The combined damage consisted of complete or partial destruction of 1,710 cities and towns, 70,000 villages/hamlets, 2,508 church buildings, 31,850 industrial establishments, 40,000 miles of railroad, 4100 railroad stations, 40,000 hospitals, 84,000 schools, and 43,000 public libraries.[50]'
It is clear from this brief snapshot that war destroys- tears down the infrastructure of human's 'civilized' life. As General Sherman said, 'War is Hell'. Those who wage war bring hell down on themselves and those they choose to war against. Why? Why do we as humans do that?
Those who believe that war is a necessary evil evidently believe that the events and situations preceding the actual waging of declared war are of such gravity and atrocity that war is the only solution.
Those, on the other hand, who promote and sustain such conflict as a means to make a profit or to indulge their blood lust are not deserving of any of the positive connotations of the term 'human'. Nor should they be called 'animal' or 'beast'; as to do so would insult those to whom they are being compared. Those who choose to carry out such acts for profit or pleasure are predators on their own kind, predators of the worst sort. Such things should not be.