Staredit Network

He died in the 60s. The two Japan bombings happened within a few days of eachother.

Tell you the truth I think war and stuff is what human’s do. Also what animals do they just cant see other people being better then themselves, and have to take what others have and try to overpower them. As in the Iraq war we only went in for the oil more then anything. Well I mean is the oil made the final call in going into war. So War + Technology is pointless however, in the end were all just animal and we cant be perfect so that’s what we do. Tell you the truth I don’t think peace will ever work out. There always is some form of hostility.

Well if you think about it, war/killing is what we do best. Corrent me if Im wrong in saying we have more ways on earth to kill you then to make peace with you? (As in developments and tech)

This goes for all of man.

We actually have very few oil deposits in our hands in Iraq. They go to the Iraqi people.

It is pointless though, because as technology advances, so the weapons we use in war. It's an ever-changing system that just heightens what damage we can do to eachother in the end.

You know... I think I may have found a solution to the "gun-armor" tension.
Quit making armor!

This concept is so rediculously simple even you Starcraft people know it. When your marine can one-hit computer zerglings already, why waste more weapon upgrades to kill zerglings? People only get more weapons when faced with better armor! Maybe i'm wrong, and the enemy still evolve from 1-hit bows to 1-hit guns, but that's just making the enemy having to pay more to do the same damage we do to them.

On opposite side, if you stop making weapons, people will still make stronger armor that is lighter, more flexible, and such. For example, "sure, maybe you can use wood to block a few punches, but man... Iron makes em hurt their fist a lot!" If you continue to make armor, we'd have invincible people walking around impossible to kill, FORCING the creation of better weapons to be made! Vicious circle.

Now, I know it's highly improbable, heck impossible, to get people to quit making better armor. But hey, if you can somehow accomplish this, better weapons become worthless... am I right?

But then they're still killing you. And more casualties reduces the effectiveness of your army. It's a vicious cycle, but to stop advancing armor technology just means that you'll be slaughtered on the field. You always want to save as many of your soldiers as possible, and better armor is just another way to do that.

Bla bla better armor.

You could use that money to advance weapons only instead. Soon they'll realize it's pointless to advance armor and weapons when they can 1hit you already with weapons but are being out-teched in weaponry. Then both sides will engage in full-weapony upgrading. Thus, soon both sides will realize upgrading weapons is worthless and will spend money on other important things.

Edit: ...or the enemy could go to full-armor upgrading -_-
But, that won't matter because your weaponry will so overpower their weaponry that you'll be able to destroy their weaponry with yours.. thus causing a forever stalemate between the power sword and the power shield. Hey, it's not as good of ending as they forget war, but it's better than the ending of the vicious cycle if it continued.

I know war wont stop, but we can't keep advancing it or we're all screwed.

Or we could all explode.

Why would we all explode?

well there are elements in the human body such as sodium, potassium ect. as well as various mixtures that could make us explode. but fortunately those elements/mixtures are in compound form.... but that would be pretty cool if you were an alchemist and your make the elements revert back to the 1 atom form hehehehehe

Bombs, town destroying bombs, state destroying bombs, country destroying bombs, continent destroying bombs, we all explode bombs.

Could you put that into the context of the scenario i've laid out? I mean if you have a country-bomb, then the enemy would have a country-shield. How is my logic about stop making defenses flawed? Make a scenario please.

It's not like that, we don't have the money to build any sort of shield even over a small city, but one nuke can destroy a state.

Well we could launch a homing missile at the nuke or the bomber couldn't we? I mean can stealth fighters even carry nukes?

I'll go look into that Demaris.

Well that would create a radioactive mess, fighting fire with fire burns your house down.

In a war with equal weaponry, it all comes down to the tactitians and the skill of the troops.

and the armor.... example:

both soldiers are equipted with sticks... with thorns on them. one army has full plate mail while the other army has rags.... no matter how much strategy and such you put into it the one with the armor will win.

Do you really think peace is possible?

While the concept of war is of the most simple, it's advancments become the most complicated. I agree with the equation War + Technology = Pointless on the smaller parts, which actually is the majority of war. None the less, im sure the military and politicians have stummbled apon this theory, but man is more than often ruthless on war and will stop at nothing. Besides, if we were to stop the process, either the weapons would be pernimantly useless or the armor.

If we don't stop the process, the weapons will surely outdo the armor and the Earth will end up as a charred meteorite.

Well i belive war is pointless in the first place. It is over once gain for power or dissagreement. It's unfair because many people die just to defend there country. I'm glad this isn't the 1700's.. hehe..



funny..

So are you saying that we shouldn't have defended ourselves against Hitler?

Technology matters, which was why many Native Americans died during the exploration days, and it's why India was annihilated during the British Raj. Honestly, it's a pretty straightforward concept.