CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
You just made the point of the opposing side. There was a problem with Hitler because he started a war. If he hasn't started a war there won't be a problem in the first place so wars create problems not solve them. What was better at the end of the war than before its start.
If the Britain accepted independence of American colonies rather than attacking them, there won't be a problem again. Again problems are started with war not solved by it.
Problems started with war sometimes can only be solved with war though. Thus wars solve problems, wars solve themselves. Nothing else other than war could have ended the war Hitler started.
So at best it solves a portion of problems it created and the net effect is creating more problems. Sometimes it's true but there's other solutions too. There were some instances in the history that after diplomatic talks the attacker abandoned the war (Genghis khan attack on Persia was one of the bloodiest even by their standards but some scientific cities (e.g Shiraz) has talked Genghis khan out of war and his army never entered the city). So there's still possibility for solving war problems without war.
So there's still a possibility for solving war problems without war
That's why I stated Sun Tzu. But you have to accept that there will always be wars. They will never end. You arguments are a lot of if, then statements. If Hitler hadn't done this, or he hadn't done that. He started a war. The US could have stood idly by as he took over Russia and Great Britain. The reason we won the war is because the US was angered by Japan, and in turn Germany declared war on us. If we hadn't done anything, Europe would still be speaking German right now and hundreds of thousands of more people would be killed everyday. That's a problem peace creates when a dictator is in power. Wars solve problems. It may be bloody and violent, but they get the job done. The US brought an end of tyranny in Iraq and brought freedom of choice to the people through war. We killed the SOB Bin Laden through war for killing thousands of Americans and prevented future attacks. WW2 got us out of the depression and created a Golden Age for America. And like I said before, the American Revolution created out nation, which brought peace and good things to the world.
"But you have to accept that there will always be wars. They will never end." That's it, they are never a permanent solution, if at all.
Defence might have a chance arguing but war in general doesn't and I'm not judging US reaction to Germany. Give me an example of country which was in a dictatorship and after being attacked by an external power suddenly become stable, peaceful and democratic. Honestly have you ever asked opinion of an Iraqi or Afghan about that. All Iraqis I've spoken to hate US. As of 2006 there was several hundred thousands civilian deaths in Iraq and 30,000 in Afghanistan not counting those who died because of healthcare problem caused by war destructions. It is estimated by now the number of civilian death in these two countries have reached well above one million. There was 2973 casualties in the Sep. 11th attacks (and I'm truly sorry for each and every lives lost there too) but US actions caused far more casualties and destruction, not to mention many still doubt that how these attacks were possible considering US superior airforce and no WMD were found in Iraq. So these wars hasn't solved any problems. I'm not judging individual US soldiers who participated in these wars (and I'm sorry for what they suffered in these wars) but those politicians who started these wars.
So at best it solves a portion of problems it created and the net effect is creating more problems.
This is true but the debate is "do wars solve problems?", if it solves a portion of their own problems then it solves problems. Sometimes war is necessary, don't get me wrong, I hate war, I'm a pacafist by nature, I respect our military but it doesn't sit well in my stomach. Essentially though war will always exist, and sometimes war can only solve itself.
sometimes it's true but there are other solutions as well.
I agree my general argument that I made stated this as well. Remember, pacafist by nature, I don't want to justify war, I'm only trying to be logical here.
Wars DO solve problems, fighting solves, arguments solves problems. If the question is "Do War Solve Anything?" Technically yes when you say ANYTHING. However it is necessary to fight for peace sometimes, I prefer it and think it is better if we could find less violent ways of settling things. s they say "war does not determine who is right, but who is left." If need be it is important that we all take the personal responsibility that what is left is what is right, through any means necessary. I prefer if war was never necessary, but hey I'm a pacifist by nature so what the hell do I know about war? :P
Well..., my thinking at the time was that it solves the problem of being pissed off. After you go to war, you are no longer pissed off. Problem solved ;)
Wars do solve some problems. If you were a European Jew in 1940 you might be in favor of war, and for good reason. In fact if you are a Jewish person today, you may owe your own existence to WW2. If not for this very necessary war, there may be no Jews today.
Now let's get in the way-back machine and visit ancient Greece. Has anyone seen the movie "300"? The Battle of Thermopylae was part of a war that changed the world forever. Without this war, things would be very different today.
At this time, 500 years before Christ, democracy was a brand new concept. It was only practiced in this little part of the world. Xerxes and the army of the Persian empire, the largest army the world had ever seen, stood at Greece's borders about to invade and stamp out democracy, but a spartan king Leonidas decided Greece was worth fighting for. All 300 of his men died, and so did he, but they stopped the invasion of Greece and saved democracy.
History is full of just wars that solved problems like Hitler and Xerxes. Because the future will have crazy, violent dictators, the future will also hold wars and destruction. No one likes war, but there is no realistic alternative.
they solve the debate of who has either more people willing to die for their country that they blieve is great or who trains the people willing to die for a country they believe is great.
This is sort of my mentality on war, if war never existed we wouldn't need war to solve anything. When someone attacks another, sometimes all you can do is fight back.
It will be complicated for humanity to reach a universal belief. Unless we go through a catastrophe of some sort and we come to terms and realize the answer to some of our questions, like where did we come from, for example; we wont be able to have the same opinion everyone else does. Society will always be dispersed according to ideologies and there will always be a dispute between social groups. An opinion, even though it is strong and important and it should be respected, it is only an opinion. There is no telling with certainty which one is right, because none is. But we however, will still believe that it is our own independent opinion that is right above all others, so we will defend it no matter what. Time comes when a mutual conclusion is wanted, and the only real thing that can be done in order to reach such conclusion, is to confront one another. Politically speaking; war is sometimes the only way to solve some disputes. The winner takes the glory and whatever their belief is, will stand tall while the other one decays. It has been like that for centuries and peace always comes afterward. I believe it keeps a certain equilibrium in life.
Wars solve a purpose. A purpose which is in dire need to get solved. Use arsenal for wars all you want, peaceful negotiations take a lot of time. And time is what we do not have. Time kills everything eventually. Why wait?
I am retard ehhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
I will include in debating whatever I want. I only take seriously that which requires it, and debating does not always demand it. Also, depends on my mood, and other similar factors.
Well, it depends on what is meant by anything. If by anything you mean to say anything of value, I'd have to take a very defeatist and existential approach and say there is no value of anything short of what makes you forget about our impending death and the following infinite 'un-being'; of which war certainly does not apply.
I can see why some would say yes. But I must disagree, and say no; wars do not solve anything, in the end anyways. Its a cycle in a way. We go to war, but the 'peace' is only temporary, soon enough a new war will be born. It will continue to go through this cycle. No true peace will ever be generated from war. The only thing war truly accomplishes is that of raising the amount of deaths. Yet, there is no other way for us all to get along, which is what must be done in order to create peace. Therefore, war is mainly our only option. I wish it was easier, that we could all see eye to eye. But that's not how life, and humanity works. But in the end, no wars do not really solve anything, not fully anyways.
People then use war in an attempt to solve the problems they themselves created.
War is like treating the symptom instead of the cause in medicine. You may think you've solved the problem, but at best, you've only managed to cover it up, temporarily.
If what your saying is true then is America's fight for independence just a "cover up" for a problem? No. Death and destruction is all people see. Values are transparent. When America fought we didn't gain anything? I do not recall waking up under british rule or waking up in a foreign place i can't even name. Destruction can result in creation. Death can bring life and insight. Now im not a war fanatic but war is sometimes inevitable and requires great sacrifice.
War is the problem itself. There were problems after Britain started a war against America. After the war some of them resolved (like the recognition of independence) and some them not (like the casualties). If Britain accepted American independence instead of starting a war there won't be any problems. So the net effect is war creating problems.
Who gets the right to say war is wrong? Fighting is in our instincts just like anger or sadness. Animals fight. Humans fight. You know good and well Britain wouldn't allow it. We aren't going to focus on what could've happened. Causualties will occur in war. If someone dies in war is it wrong? Even if that soldier wanted to win the war for his country? Is that soldier wrong for doing what he thinks is right? If I start a forest fire that land will be destroyed. Eventually the land will regain its luster and create new fertile ground regardless of its previous destruction. Earth was impacted by a meteor long ago and here we are today. War is not the problem its what the person believes in. War is an action. War happens. As I said before i do not advocate war. But it has created many things. War has created independence. War can create nations. War can create empires. You probrably wouldn't be were you were today without it.
"Who gets the right to say war is wrong?" Everyone gets the right to express his/her opinion.
"You know good and well Britain wouldn't allow it." I'm saying Britain should. Similarly Britain thought war would solve the problem and was wrong.
"Causualties will occur in war. If someone dies in war is it wrong? Even if that soldier wanted to win the war for his country? Is that soldier wrong for doing what he thinks is right?" I'm not discussing the individual soldiers, I'm discussing policies and leaders that results in war and whether it solves anything.
"If I start a forest fire that land will be destroyed. Eventually the land will regain its luster and create new fertile ground regardless of its previous destruction." So you think it's useful or resolves anything? You want to set forest on fire? The new fertile land was nothing compared to the ecosystem that once was there. Also you know that it isn't the fire that resulted in creation. After wars countries get rebuild but it's the nations who rebuild them not the war.
"War has created independence." It's knowledge and awareness that creates independence. A nation becomes independent because they realised they wanted to be independent and it's good for them.
Regardlessly. War isn't new. The question asks "Do wars solve ANYTHING". Clearly it has. It's been shown it history already. Everyone can voice there opinion. But who declares war bad? What makes your opinion better than the other? Nothing. Some people hate war some just accept it. Naturally war has solved many things. Not even mass war just small wars likw the ones Britain had with Spain and France. They fought often. Did they just stop and say this is wrong? No. America did and what did they think? They thought that America needs to wake up because this is how they resolve things. France and Britain know what they lost and what they gained.
It's reason which distinguishes opinions. War can never be a permanent solution. In many of the areas you might think it was war that solved the problems, it was actually other factors like diplomacy that solved the problem. Those who are diplomatically weak go to war. In my opinion the only thing that might got a chance arguing is defence not war in general.
Still. If war can solve one thing then this question is answered. War brings out the final step. War happens. War can't really be prevented unless two countries come to an agreement. But thats for a different topic. War has solved some things so this side's argument in validated.
Wars are caused by weakness, selfishness and greed. Wars are started because someone wants something but can't get it with reason or wants something unreasonable. Wars are started because someone wants more and say let's stole it from another. Wars are started because someone has taken away others property or rights.
War solves nothing. I mean look in world war 2 Germany attacked everybody because they wanted to take the land back. Just for a single land millions of people died!
NO IT DOESN'T, IT DOES MORE HARM THAN GOOD.MOST WARS ARE START BECAUSE OF SOME DISAGREEMENT BETWEEN PEOPLE WHO REFUSE TO LISTEN,COMPROMISE OR BE OPEN TO ANY OTHER ALTERNATIVE. ONE WAY OR ANOTHER PEOPLES LIVES ARE CHANGE FOR EVER AS A RESULT IN THE NAME OF VICTORY..INNOCENT PEOPLE ARE KILLED,'' WARS ARE AS DUM AS THE PEOPLE WHO START THEM..''