Tags
Artificial Intelligence., Capitalism and Greed, Technology, The Future of Mankind, The quick sand of Capitalism, Visions of the future., Wars
(A long read)
To expatiate upon the miseries which war brings upon mankind appears a trite and a needless blog, to be posting.
To those who begin a war without taking an estimates of its consequences must be regarded as, at most, half—seeing politicians, or totally insane.
Why?
Because the overall concept of war is suicidal. Wars rarely do any good other than to enrich weapons manufacturers and now, the fossil fuel industry.
They are a testament to how little our thinking has evolved, that we still don’t have better ways to settle differences.
We all know that its evils are great and dreadful.
Yet the very circumstance that the knowledge is familiar may make it unoperative upon our sentiments and our conduct, and this is what happing now with wars conducted by artificial intelligence.
It has desensitised us, not just to the killing but to the intensity of misery inflicted on millions.
By the slaughter of a war, there are thousands who weep in unpitied and unnoticed secrecy, whom the world does not see; and thousands who retire, in silence, to hopeless poverty, for whom it does not care.
Beyond the immediate destruction, conflicts disrupt ecosystems, deplete natural resources, pollute the environment, and jeopardize the health of our planet for generations to come.
The frequency with which current war destruction is presented to our minds by social media 24/7 has almost extinguished our perception of its awfulness and horror.
—————
There is no such thing as defensive action. Once military forces are moved out of a country they become to established within striking distance they become part of-the war.
——————
It is not the extent of evil alone, which is necessary to animate us to that exertion which evil and misery should excite: if it were, surely we should be much more averse than we now are to contribute, in words or in actions to the promotion of war.
In referring especially to some of those moral consequences of war which commonly obtain little of our attention, it may be observed, that social and political considerations are necessarily involved in the moral tendency: for the happiness of society is always diminished by the diminution of morality; and enlightened policy knows that the greatest support of a state is the virtue of the people.
To these the meaning of destruction is of little importance.
—————-
The legitimate object of political measures is the good of the people; and a great sum of good a war must produce, if it outbalances even this portion of its mischiefs
—————
When political writers expatiate upon the extent and the evils of taxation, they do not sufficiently bear in mind the reflection that almost all our taxation is the effect of war.
Anger at offence or hope of triumph overpowers the sober calculations of reason, and outbalances the weight of after and long-continued calamities.
The only question appears to be, whether taxes enough for a war can be raised, and whether a people will be willing to pay them.
—————-
But the great question ought to be (setting questions of Religion aside), whether the nation will gain as much by the war as they will lose by taxation and its other calamities.
————
What we are presently witnessing is pure madness, insane.
Not only do wars prevent us from resolving serious, survival-threatening emergencies such as climate change and biodiversity loss — by sucking up money and resources and prioritizing destruction over problem-solving — they also contribute greatly to those problems.
Millions of people in the Middle East, Ukraine and around the world are being killed, maimed, orphaned, displaced and starved as a result of war and climate change.
Imagine what we could accomplish if all the resources used to kill and destroy went into solving the existential threats we’ve created.
Humans spend enormous amounts of money, consume massive resources, develop jaw-dropping technologies, destroy infrastructure and natural areas and kill millions of people, including many non-combatants, often just to stroke the egos of petty power-seeking men.
Our killing technologies may have advanced tremendously, but our mindsets haven’t evolved much from 3,000 years ago when Homer wrote his epic story The Lloyd, about a bloody battle over perceived loss of “honour” when Paris, prince of Troy, absconded with Spartan king Menelaus’s wife Helen.
Wars have since become far costlier, in lives, resources and money, but their justifications seem no less absurd.
We often hear how expensive it is to address the climate change and biodiversity loss crises, but it’s a pittance compared to spending on weapons and destruction — and addressing environmental crises is necessary and offers numerous benefits.
Wars rarely do any good other than to enrich weapons manufacturers and, now, the fossil fuel industry.
From climate change to current wars we are destroying our lives.
——————
In 2023 alone, over 170 armed conflicts were recorded.
By the end of the year, nearly 120 million people worldwide were forcibly displaced due to persecution, conflict, violence, human rights violations.
Environmental damage brings devastating consequences for natural resources, critical ecosystems, and people’s health, livelihoods, and security.
When forests are cleared for military purposes, fertile lands and vital water resources can become contaminated.
Armed conflicts use large quantities of munitions containing heavy metals and depleted uranium, and explosive chemicals, all toxic even in modest quantities, with devastating impacts on human health and the environment.
Let’s see why this started.
The US gets attacked on 9/11 and asks NATO for help.
Fast forward 25 years.
Trump threatens to invade NATO ally, Greenland, which is part of the Kingdom of Denmark.
Then Carney gives a speech critical of the US, and Trump said Canada isn’t grateful to the US.
Then Trump said that in Afghanistan,NATO allies just sat back in the weeds while the US did the heavy fighting.
Can you imagine how that makes the families of those who died protecting the US, feel?
Clearly the US, or at least Trump wasn’t grateful for the help.
Here are some numbers, on deaths in Afghanistan. The total included nearly 2,480 Americans; 457 British; 158 Canadians; 90 French; 60 Germans; and 44 Danes, the most per capita.
The US lost one soldier for every 137,000 civilians.,
Denmark lost one soldier for every 136,000 civilians.
Looking back with respect for all of these young lives lost not to mention the lives lost in other wars had the world got to be a better place. Far from it.
We don’t have a money problem when it comes to war or for that matter any other thing you might think of. We have a profound value problem with the Capitalist I am all right Jack syndrome.
All this needless suffering and death is choice.
We got to stop pretending that the people who are responsible and causing all of this are competent people.
They are not representing the people that elected them because nothing works for ordinary people.
We now in a very dangerous place with these wars spreading into a global nightmare.
All human comments appreciated. All like clicks and abuse chucked in the bin.
Contact: bobdillon33@gmail.com
https://youtube.com/shorts/SMDeKqnc6xo?is=eJGgtQZwrCszt7tc
bobdillon33blog 