It has been said that “all is fair in love and war”. My position? In most cases war is unnecessary and differences can likely be resolved with mature people yet without the devastation. Unfortunately, most political leaders, military leaders, and the general public think differently so they want to create rules for death, treachery, devastation, displacement and destruction. Listen to what I have to say closely, use your ability to reason and see if it makes sense. War is supposed to be “Hell” and costly for all sides, not comfortable, tolerable, repeated nor long-lasting. Real war is about the unthinkable! Real war needs to be indecent, immoral, vicious and as undesirable as either, both or all sides can make it. Clear cut objectives need to be established and lines once drawn need to be erased. Ironically the powers that be believe the nature of war is to win, but unfortunately the “winners” are those who push war, yet never enter any battlefield. More about that later, I promise you.
When any person, nation or group places rules of civility on war, they try to make decent the very nature of something that is indecent, cruel and obviously bad. The intolerable should never be made tolerable because what is tolerable becomes comfortable enough to keep happening. The result? Wars that go on for years or the same wars over the same issues continually arising. Wars that keep occurring in the same places, among the same groups with nothing resolved. Wars without clearly defined agendas and misguided objectives. Wars that should have ended long ago. Wars that seem to drag on and on because the rules are tolerable to all sides and tolerated by the citizens of the countries or factions at war. That is a big mistake.
Decency in both rules of war and rules of engagement only serves to make war tolerable. And what is tolerable is seldomly avoided, which makes war inevitable. You may already disagree with me, but look at the historical evidence. During World War II at the Geneva convention, rules of “decency” in war were developed. What wars did that bring to a screeching halt? Years later the nuclear super powers of the world tried deterrence by using a concept called mutually assured destruction, the idea that the very build-up and potential threat of a nuclear war that nobody could win would stop every nuclear power from using nuclear weapons. That appears to have stalled the use of nuclear weapons. But instead of getting the point, nation after nation used cyber wars, chemical weapons, biological weapons, “freedom fighters (terrorists)” or proxy wars instead. Does it have to be written in crayon for them to understand, do they understand or do they simply refuse to? STOP GOING TO WAR AGAINST EACH OTHER, GROW UP AND RESOLVE YOUR DIFFERENCES PEACEFULLY! That is what man tells his children but then cannot do it himself. What a twisted and ironic contradiction of hypocrisy. Wow, except we be as little children…
Decency and civility in war is an oxymoron all by itself. War is not decent. War is brutal. War is vicious. War is nasty and violent, as it should be. War needs to be full of atrocities and even the very unthinkable so both sides or all sides with think of ways to avoid it, not ways to win it. War must be horrible in order to be avoided. I would therefore contend that the more horrible war is, the more likely people are to avoid it.
THE TRUE NATURE OF WAR IS NEVER DEFENSIVE! The truth nature of war is offensive, to take what the enemy has, subjugate him and/or eradicate him as necessary. Even the side that plays the victim knows this is true. Ironically again, because in many wars, both sides play the victim. Wars are fought over hidden agendas and ideologies, not because one side or the other wants to protect its people. This the truth you will see once you remove the cloaks of propaganda and patriotism. But such a true nature of war must be kept from those who fight it because sharing the truth with them would cause a great awakening. An awakening that these wars were not necessary in the first place. An awakening which would show who is being used and why.
War unfortunately is all too productive – and that is a big part of why wars continue. In war regime changes happen, “undesirables” are eradicated, territory is taken, treasures disappear, key scientists “defect”, technology is stolen, the public becomes distracted, somebody gets richer, somebody gains more power and control and a host of other things happen. And in times past, war stirred the economy. That is a big part of why world bankers played and likely still play both sides, just as they did in World War II. And while I hate to say this, World War II (for example), accomplished quite a bit for quite a few principalities, powers, rulers of the darkness of this world and wickedness in high places (natural, spiritual and then some).
If adversaries can have rules of civility, safe zones and humanitarian behavior towards each other, they should be able also resolve their differences without killing each other. Even person, group, ethnicity and nation has a right to survive. But that does not mean their adversary agrees. And as long as one man is willing to take what another man has, without respecting his right to have it, unfortunately there will be wars, rumors of wars and destruction all the way until the time when the trumpet sounds. The claim by world leaders willing to go to war is that they care about their people. But I submit that going to war on any side or every side proves just the opposite. How can anybody claim to care about their people if they pursue a course of action that will cause their people to die, be displaced, starve and suffer? Answer, they can’t.
In a real war, if people would stop playing games, they would have to acknowledge there are no innocents. There are only casualties of war and collateral damage. Yes even women, children and senior citizens. At least that was evident in the mindset of America when they dropped a atomic bomb on 200,000 civilians in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The truth is people caught in the middle are considered “expendable” by those who drag those families, neighborhoods, ethnic groups, territories and lands into war. People caught in the middle like the Palestinians in Gaza and your average Jewish citizen on the streets of Israel. Like the citizens of Russia and the citizens of Ukraine. Historically like the people of Africa in the Congo, Rwanda, Apartheid, and so on. They don’t start these wars, but somehow they get stuck in the middle, being forced to choose a side.
There are therefore no neutral people in war. That is a reality. You are likely against what your enemy (or those made to appear as your enemy) is doing. That means you have chosen a side. And once you choose a side, the other side views you as the enemy. So, even if you do nothing to oppose the bad guys, those who see themselves as the good guys will see you as a new type of enemy. A supporter of the wrong side, a supporter of their adversary. A supporter of their adversary who is a “threat” and who therefore cannot be trusted. Without ever throwing a rock, firing a weapon or hiding a soldier, you have still become part of the problem for the enemy. Warped thinking? Yes. Actually mindsets and beliefs, even subconsciously? You better believe it. That is part of the twisted psychology of war.