War E-Book

Jochen Krueger

• Herausgeber: BoD - Books on Demand
• Kategorie: Geisteswissenschaft
• Sprache: Englisch

Seitenzahl: 53

Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2025

Beschreibung

This book is a somewhat unscientific attempt by a provincial dude to demonstrate that wars fundamentally cannot have a positive outcome, that human lives and property are senselessly destroyed, especially those of those who have no direct influence on the events and who are helplessly exposed to the fatal and usually completely irrational decisions of leading minds. World peace is possible, but unfortunately very unlikely.

Leseprobe

CONTENTS

PRELIMINARY REMARKS

WHY ONLY?

OR IS THE WHOLE THING JUST A GAME?

A BRAINLESS WASTE

THE INEVITABLE CONSEQUENCES

CONCLUSIONS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

SOURCES

PRELIMINARY REMARKS

The interested reader will find here some thoughts—the thoughts of a hillbilly—on the subject of war. They are about possible causes, methods, and consequences, all without any scientific background. All my considerations led to a single thesis, which also became the title of this book:

War:

The Greatest Stupidity Since the Invention of Man

You can read how I came to this exact assessment on the following pages. I can't promise it will always be fun ...

One thing you should know in advance: I have a state-certified conscience. During my conscription period, if you refused military service, you had to endure an oral hearing with mostly absurd questions. At the end of this compulsory hearing, however, I was granted the right to refuse military service on grounds of conscience. Given this background, one could accuse me of a lack of neutrality in writing this book. However, since this is not a scientific work, but rather a reproduction of my thoughts on the subject of war, one should not expect a completely balanced and opinion-free text.

Last, but not least: Please excuse my poor German tourist English supported by translate.google.de.

WHY ONLY?

What could have been the underlying reasons for the repeated outbreaks of war since the dawn of humanity? This is not about a precise historical account, not about the actions of governments or war machines as institutions. No. What concerns me, rather, was and still is, the nature of someone who makes a decision that leads to the death of many people - because they sacrifice themselves for their country or religion, or are forced to do so, or are simply in the wrong place at the wrong time - that vast sums of money are spent to keep such actions going, and that cities are turned into mountains of rubble and entire regions are devastated, which certainly doesn't help a single person cope with the real problems of their own life—and sometimes even their survival.

One can assume that the first wars were a continuation of animal behaviors that served the mere survival of the clan. In short, it was about satisfying basic needs, especially securing food sources and the continued existence of one's own extended family, one's own pack, so to speak, or whatever one might call the collection of living beings of a particular origin.

As with animal families, hierarchies developed. The one with the greatest power of persuasion—the emphasis here being on power—set a direction. The others had to follow.

Humanity grew. Families branched out more and more, intermingling on one occasion or another, sometimes much to the chagrin of some members. Life became more complicated, especially the social aspect.

Rulers, such as kings, came into play. This is already mentioned in the Bible, when the Old Testament tells the story of the people of Israel, the chosen people. Many wars were fought, bloody wars, commanded by God, according to the texts. These wars were obviously intended to conquer territory to secure existence, a basic need. One could also express it simply—but perhaps somewhat provocatively: A territory was needed. Up to this point, the fighting is still somewhat logically explainable. A territory must be conquered and secured so that "the pack" will be able to survive.

However, what some rulers did and still do with their power was and is a completely different problem. Power almost always leads to abuse of power, because even the most empathetic person seems to lose at least some of their compassion in the role of ruler and drifts toward egotistical arrogance, a climate in which "subordinates" are oppressed and neighbors are patronized or even threatened, ultimately creating tensions that eventually erupt—usually in the form of violence.

While we're briefly touching on the subject of the Bible, we've come to a point that has sparked numerous disputes and continues to be the cause of bloody battles today: religion.

The absolutely insane thing is that Judaism, Christianity, and even Islam are based on the belief in one God who— apart from the name—is essentially the same. Some stories and people reported in the Bible and the Quran, for example, are identical, albeit told slightly differently. How can it then be that people repeatedly beat each other's heads in the name of God, as, for example, during the Crusades?

If, during the study of the Quran by Muslims in appropriate institutions, it is constantly repeated how unbelieving Christians are because they place companions alongside God (Jesus and the Holy Spirit), this is bound to lead to tensions. I don't want to judge at this point to what extent the Prophet's own ideas and ideals, derived from personal life experiences that don't necessarily correspond to God's will, have been manifested in the Quran as the basis of faith. Nor can I. While reading a German translation of the Quran, I certainly got the impression that God isn't trusted to do more than mankind itself is capable of.

Humanity is truly a marvelous creation, so successful that even its own Creator doubted whether bringing them into the world was really such a good idea. Which side should God take when several groups claiming to believe in him, each praying in their own way, ask for his assistance? And how can peace ever come to earth when even groups of essentially the same religions are at war with each other? A very extreme example from recent times would be Northern Ireland from 1966 to 1998, when Catholics and Protestants fought each other. Parades are still a popular means of provocation there.

The strength of the antipathy between Muslim groups is repeatedly demonstrated by Shiites and Sunnis. These two faiths, too, seem to lack the realization that they actually believe in one God. After almost 1,400 years, they still haven't managed to live peacefully with one another.

A fundamental flaw in human nature is that every individual has the ability to exercise their own sovereignty of interpretation and make their own decisions in their own interests, without regard for any consequences for others. The sheer complexity of the brain, with its seemingly infinite number of possible connections, offers countless potential sources of error.