War, for better or for worse?

[mr.smiley]

The general consensus on war has changed derasticly from the Regan era to present day...back then people had a sort of moral acceptance towards the "neccesity of war" compared to today's idea that war is wrong outright. Moraly are we on the right path or is this just another hubub movement?

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=2pbp0hur9RU&desktop_uri=/watch?v=2pbp0hur9RU

Versus...

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=nJYuViS-XVI

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=sXzmXy226po

 

[ebola?]

It would be better if you could expound on your original post, as not all of us want to digest your argument via youtube links. I'm not sure about what periodization you had in mind (really, the last 30 years?), but I think that the period of peace through balance of powers in Europe preceding WWI led people to think that life without frequent war of nation states was possible (despite the consolidation of the modern nation state having severely increased the incidence and scope of military conflict directly preceding this period of peace). In the decolonizing and post-colonial world, constant war is not accepted because decolonization has a concrete endpoint, and the previous period of peace in W. Europe has altered general expectations.

ebola
(i might kick this to CEP, depending on what the responses here are like)

 

[mr.smiley]

Thats my blunder, sorry. I ment to startadiscussion on wether pulling away from war be it large world powers dukeing it out or one of the worlds many micro conflicts at all costs is a moraly sound decision or are we(as people, everyone) so sick of the meansby which it happens that we are pulling away from(yes 30 year difference. Also try a 50 year difference just couldnt find a video) the "neccesity of war" idealism that people had?

Are people just so fed up with war as to let other countries commit attrocities, just to avoid their country(but not themselves) get involved...