Why was constant warfare the apparently inevitable consequence of the rise of the absolutist state?
97318
Because one the state becomes basially the toy of the sovereign, it becomes a reflection of his honor, and so to enlarge one is to enlarge the other. It's the same reason that people with sports cars drive fast even when they shouldn't.\n\nThe wars were fought also because the people who start the wars (the sovereigns) aren't connected with the people fighting the wars (the commoners). Modern democracies, for instance, try to prevent this effect by having the leaders elected by the folks who would fight any war.
218356
Yes it was a justified war.  There were two incompatible ways of life fighting for control of the Nation.  The non-slave states were resentful of southerners disproportionate control of government and constant push to enforce slave-holding rights in the North. Although the concept of freeing southern slaves was not considered  until the war was begun, the northern peoples vehemence in the belief that there should be no expansion of slavery was very much a cause of the war.\n\n The South believed it had a superior economy and culture and feared that the Northern states would damage or destroy that life.\nThe Nation became Industrialized and Free of Slavery.\n\nIt also cemented the concept that the UNITED STATES was a single entity, and not a collection of States.
336019
it would depend on the circumstances of the war
703932
Time flies and nothing changes.\n\nThis is a quotation by nazi Hermann Goering:\n\n"Naturally the common people don't want war; neither in Russia, nor in England, nor in America, nor in Germany. That is understood. But after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. ...Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country."\n\nDoesn't seem the same?
324923
I would only fight the government if it had become so oppressive that the consitution became a mere piece of paper with no real value. It would basically require us to be living under martial law, being subjugated by authorities, having no upward mobility, no freedom of speech or liberty. It would require alot, but i would do it if the alternative was so bleak I had nothing to lose.
84219
If Germany would have known when to stop with it's expansionism, Nazism would probably still be in place.\n    Sucking up a few smaller countries just wasn't enough for the madman Hitler, he had to push his agenda of extermination of the Jews and total world conquest.
193820
I imagine most books about pacifism have been written during a time of war, as this will be when people are driven to think about pacifism. There's no point telling people not to kill when there are no people killing. Possibly a lot were written in the periods after a war too. But then there are so many wars all the time that this would be a bit of a continuous process.
464692
Our country adopted the military thinking process of force and absolute destruction of our enemies - it worked for production and countering the threat from the enemy but the men who assembled it - couldnt have imagend how it would become self perpetuating and increasingly trading effieciency for freedoms - and ultimately would shape our thinking proces to the point where human life is considered as less thasn important than our "country's needs"  unthrottled government in union with unmathced force is creating is creating a system Hitler would envy as it has men actually thinking its the right thing to do both morally and loyally.  Hitler had to force compliance - with obvious terror - our spreading control is much more subtle. The answer is for all of us to do what is right morally and stand up vehemently when eeven one right is taken for granted.  As now we turn our backs and watch it become so engrained in everday life that it becomes accepted as normal behavior
722548
It widened due to the expanisionist policy of the Nazis.  Simply: they wanted to go and invade everyone else.  This caused some people to get a bit peeved, and they started to fight back.  The more the Nazis threatened or invaded other nations, the more countries joined the allies.
188954
I once had a 6th grade teacher that said that nobody could rule the world because it would spread them to thin. I subscribe to that theory because it sounds reasonable to me. Just because Germany or Japan took over France there was still a resistance that contributed to the victory by the allies. If it was here there would also have been an underground that would have made it tough to keep us in line. So the answer to this is no I think that English will always be the language of the land regardless if we pass on a war or not.
334457
intresting choice of words.. peace 'take over the world', sounds military. Its also the only way I see peace coming, if someone imposes a 'Pax Romanum' and ends war by conquering everybody. Is peace neccesay? Surely your question should be is war neccesary? as peace is surely the better aim. Peace is neccesary for there to even be people. Sadly war is neccesary for some people to impose theor will over other people.
125757
The Treaty of Veraille was veiwed by some as harsh, I think that this type of punishment, in this curcumstance wasn't practical because 1.) Germany didn't have sole responsibility for the war even if they agreed to take responsibility. 2.) there were those (in germany) who didnt intend to keep the agreement and 3.) no one was going to force them to comply. as far as harsh punishment, it would be in order if a country deliberatly stirs up trouble with other nations. but it depends on the circumstance whether its practical.(this is of course, my opinion)
511293
Even before World War I, citizens of the Russian Empire were beginning to grow uneasy with the direction the Empire was going. This is particularly true for the peasants and the most notably, the intellectuals, who felt they were being oppressed.\nDuring World War I,  the Russian Empire suffered many serious military defeats. These misfortunes along with the downward moving economy help spur riots through the country, especially in major cities. \nIn 1917 the Bolsheviks (under the command of Lenin) led a revolution against Czar Nikolai II and seized power in St. Petersburg and Moscow. Later Czar Nikolai II and most of his family were executed. Afterwards they changed their name to the Communist Party. However they weren’t in power yet. Shortly thereafter a civil war ensued between the Bolsheviks and supporters of the monarchy. The Bolsheviks won and this lead to the forming of the Soviet Union in 1922. \n\n\n(So, I believe that is exactly 150 words.)\n\nOh F-U-C-K YOU  CHINA?????? I just spent 30 minutes writing this! (Partly my fault that I needed so long, I thought it was supposed to be 250 words, so I went into WW II as well. LOL)\n\nI'd better get best answer anyway.
172463
The country was together at that time.Vast ammounts of people were willing to sacrafice  for the war effort. That was a real war that brought every one to a common goal-Victory. Unlike todays war of choice which has devided our country,we joined together and did the job that saved civilization as we know it.
241774
As Eisenhower was leaving office, he warned of allowing the military industrial complex to become too big and too powerful.  The growth in this industry has come to dictate foreign and domestic policy, endagering democracies around the world, not just our own.  Powerful groups like Halliburton, the Carlyle Group, Raytheon, Northrop Grumman and others only profit from endless war at the expense of freedom.  This is exactly what Eisenhower warned of decades ago.
1027721
We are always facing the possibility of WWIII. They have been ready for that reality since the last world war. The problem is that the world has been at war with itself for centuries. Its only when it happens to you that you take notice. Power and greed are the players and the sides are whoever has the most or the illusion of the most power. But you know what is said about the big guys...The harder they will fall. Boom baby.
396308
If Germany had won the war the government of the criminal actions would have permeated throughout the world and have begun to plot against each other and eventually that government would have broken apart fighting itself.  Then somewhere a movement would have begun to grow supportive of individual rights and it would have consume the older government.  \n\nAlthough centralized government will come to the fore periodically, over time, that which is supportive of the individual will rise and win.