About Does belief in religion cause wars? Page 4
|February 28th, 2009||#31|
| || |
I think that all religions are like governments / street gangs, they have a hierarchy, a leader, a defined objective and competition. Unfortunately too many people want to be led and find it easy to do what they're told rather than what is morally right - which then leads to an interesting debate about Western v Eastern morality.
I suppose the point I'm trying to make is that religion is a useful support to many people, but there are also many people who want to manipulate religion for their own ends, until people in general can get past religious dogma and slavish devotion, they will just be another pawn in the Great Game.
|March 2nd, 2009||#33|
| || |
Erm - all of them. GB has had its foreign policy defined by trade - the opening of new markets, the protection of existing markets and the protection of their links.
Kick off with the Napoleonic wars. Napoleon wanted to extend the French Empire and influence, he saw England as his main threat (as did Tsar Alexander - Treaty of Tilsit). They then divided Europe between themselves. French stranglehold on Europe threatened not only GB trade with Europe, but also its sea lanes to the colonies - hence the Peninsular War.
The bulk of the other European wars in the 19th Century, as I recall, did not involve GB, or a threat to GB markets, as they were between city states and 1 country v another, as neither side was actually trying to build a complete domination of Europe and thus threaten our trade. The 2 closest threats on mainland Europe, were the year of Revolutions, 1848, but the GB govt stepped hard on any potential insurrection and relaxed some laws to keep the public sweet & the Franco Prussian War, 1870, which was based around who owned Alsace - Lorraine (I will have to review this to confirm my hazy schoolboy history lessons!). This did not pose an immediate threat, in fact it benefited GB, because it meant that we could continue our overseas annexations, whislt our competitors squabbled over old ground. (BTW Germany did not truly become a nation until 1871) So they were in the throes of trying to het their act together and really came late to the Imperial race.
In the 20th Century we know about WWI & WWII. Both were really fought against German expansionism and domination of Europe. Now I'm not saying that these were trade related, but they were a direct threat to Britain and its trading partners and allies.
I'd like to add that I'm an atheist and do believe that religion is the root of all evil, but I also believe that we should try to review our actions as honestly as possible. In short was GB wrong in building an Empire - No. It needed new markets and resources, like all other countries going through growth & industrial reformation. Has GB used religion as a pretext for war - yes, is this right, I don't think so, but it's a bit late to argue the toss. Is Religion a useful thing - No, but it is so entrenched in society that we might as well break it down and start again, but then what would replace it? People do seem to need to believe in somebody else guiding their destiny.
|March 4th, 2009||#35|
| || |
I always thought that religion was the organized way men used God to control people. And in that control, war was a possibility. In that if a war was the only way to ease a population problem, get resources, additional land for food and such, a religiously controlled population (like the quasi-nation controlled by the Catholic Church from the 1200s through the 1600s) could be influenced to war by the controllers of a religion.
Take the crusades. kings declaring they needed to free the holy land from the evil invaders. The Catholic church didnt exactly say "go and get those barbarians out of the Holy lands" but they lent a official nod to the act, as if it was ok. Maybee in this case, the excuse of religious ferver (and not having anything better to do) gave it a cause to fight for. I understand that the church defitnetly didnt try to stop it. I mean, as a Christian based faith, killing was kinda supposed to be not a thing to do.
Those that use religion as an excuse to war...are using religion as an excuse. Nothing more. Oh, the Jewish people understood that war had its place in things, defitnetly. A time to kill...they knew everything under the heaven was posible.
If we should have to fight, we should be prepared to do so from the neck up instead of from the neck down. General James H. Doolittle, USAAF
|March 5th, 2009||#36|
| || |
|March 5th, 2009||#37|
| || |
Please note that 98% of what I say is my opinion and/or my "version" of the facts. Most of what I say is rumor with little to no evidence to back it up, just something I picked up somewhere.
|March 6th, 2009||#38|
| || |
The Germans were an immediate threat, we had the choice of learning to goose step or commit ourselves to their defeat, happily we went for the latter. As for rationing, it finished in the late 50's (so my mum told me), although our financial debt to the USA was finally repaid last year.
BTW who are you calling a 2nd class power?
Back to the original point, name a country which has gone to war not saying that "god is on their side"?
|March 6th, 2009||#40|
| || |
Partisan.........The building of Empires had gone on from time immoral, so was GB wrong to do what all the other countries were doing. Lets face it even America has done it one way or another. Alaska was purchased and so was the Virgin Island or a section of them any way. Hawaii was a straight forward invasion after a coup by the American residents had failed and they had been sentenced death. What about the Indian Nations did America give a moment thought to the Indians when they almost wiped them out while taking their land of them. Then what happened in the far south with the Wars against Mexico and a huge chunk of territory was sized and Incorporated into America