It hasn't solved anything recently.

because it havent solved anything

Perhaps it is because violence never solves anything.

>>8317929
It solved WW2.

It doesn't, but it keeps people out of your face.

itt brainwashed people

name something violence solved

inb4 any mention of an american war. lrn2military-industrial complex. America has been continually at war since 1941
War for profit is real

Some people have at least half a brain. Go figure.

fuck off cynical fag. violence is the last resort of the incompetent.

>implying every single violent act ever committed is in the same category as other violent acts without regards for the situation or justification.

>>8317946
Well, to mention a few things.. American independence, Greek independence, and Swiss independence. Violence kept the United States united, and then freed the slaves. Violence prevented Napoleon from becoming dictator of Europe, and prevented Hitler and Hirohito from becoming dictators of Eurasia.

because they overestimate humans and don't know much about history

>>8317929
>>8317930
ending of slavery in the US? every time a corrupt government was forcibly overthrown? just a few off the top of my head.

Some asshole is assholing around and filling your head full of dicks with his assholery.

You kill him.

Problem solved.

Beacause, as Rousseau pointed out very clearly: violence can't create a state of law.

>>8317946
violence solved hitler, bro. name a way to end the nazi reign of terror without violence. talking things over? economic sanctions? yeah okay.

>>8317906
Cost of war in Iraq, to liberate Iraqi people from terrorists, Saddam Hussein, Boogie-Man:
>$716,658,101,100
(according to costofwar.com)

Cost of Gandhi liberating India through hunger strikes, asking for British to leave, sitting on railroads:
>Not a number so high it looks like an IP address

I don't think aggressive violence is quite the same as retaliatory violence.

If violence solved nothing, nature would have no violence in it. But nature is filled with violence and runs itself pretty well. If you disagree, you disagree with a few billion years or evolution, dumbass.

>>8318019
d-d-d-d-dumbass.

>>8318032
>im a dumbass
eating another animal isn't violence, dumbass

>>8318053

Bunch of lions/wolves/monkeys fighting over territory is, fool.

>>8317971
>implying america is free
When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace -- Jimi Hendrix

>>8317911
>>8317929
>>8317930
Those opressed by the Germans in WWII would like to have a word with you.

>>8318032
> implying we are not smarter than animals

>>8318032
>implying nature is about "solving" things

>>8317946
Economy

haveafeelingthiswillbemuteblox

Is it okay to rape somebody in self-defense?

>>8317971
that was the consequence of violence. you're ruling out the possibility that it could not have been done non-violently.

and
>and Hirohito from becoming dictators of Eurasia.
is a plain lie. Japan was trying to surrender all summer.

>>8318072
Quoting a retard who overdosed on drugs and and drowned in his own vomit doesn't really prove anything.

>>8318115
>is a plain lie. Japan was trying to surrender all summer.

Oh just get the fuck out of here.

when i get mad at someone i give them a hug.

it solves the problem pretty fucking quicker than any other violent tactic ive seen.

Wait a fucking minute, did I just get involved in a political thread?

God damn it, it's the same shit every time. I try to just drop one comment that explains my views without being an essay, and here I am trying to defend the power of peace against some kids on 4chan. I fucked up.

Violence tends to start more violence, which in itself starts more violence, and that starts some more violence, and that's where we get the saying from.

>>8318131
seriously. have you studied ww2 at all?
watching The Pacific does not qualify you to discredit things on the internet

>>8317906
Aggression, as a whole, just causes whoever you aggressed against to become aggressive themselves and either: aggress back and making you do the same back to him and him back to you, etc.; or causes them to take it out on someone else or vent it some way that's probably not good.

i.e.: Attacking someone would just make them want to attack you or something else.

Suicide is solving things.

The rest is up to one's interpretation!

And i will do it.

Its extremely naive to believe violence hasn't solved anything when in cases it has, its not absolute though, peaceful options should always be pursued first

>>8318143
>watching The Pacific does not qualify you to discredit things on the internet
Cool it, MENSA, this is just 4chan.

>>8318141

Funny how there was no more violence after we nuked Japan huh?

>>8318152
Dead people can't fight back, you dumb cunt.

>>8317934
>>8317998
>>8318082

Sure is Godwin's in here.

Anyway, while it's foolhardy to say violence solves nothing, to say it solves anything beyond the short term can be equally folly. Unless you completely annihilate your enemy and obliterate any and all influence their existence would have had on anyone (impossible since the mere attempt of doing so affects your own future development), the cycle of violence will continue. World War II certainly didn't end human conflict and if anything sowed the seeds for friction that continues into the present day, reflected in the current wars.

I'm sure most everyone will agree with me on this at least.

>>8318180

The cold war would of turned into world war three just as easily as world war two would of been averted if we stopped hitler at munich. Luckily, we learned from our mistakes.

>>8318223

WW2 and hitler would of never happened if the allies had lost WW1. No WW2 no Cold War no possibility of WW3.

>>8317971
funny how you still are at war?

why do people that tries to justify violence seem so fucking retarded?

>>8318180

Yes that is funny because it suggests you were asleep for the last sixty or so years.

>>8318143
The Japanese military leadership would not accept surrender as a viable alternative to destruction. Their Emperor was involved in a coup and the factions were infighting too much to even propose the idea of surrender to the Allies.

Faggot.

/r9k/ the place where retards meet to discuss about things they dont understand

Those who lack intelligence are more likely to resort to violence.

The brain/brawn balance, of course, OP probably can't comprehend it.

>>8318178
MENSA membership recognizes cognitive reasoning and spatial awareness, not history knowledge

and this is 4chan. So shut the fuck up.

>>8318180
>implying there was no more violence after WW2

Everyone laugh at the dumbass.

>>8317934
> implying WW2 was not violence
it is violence
so the war itself is violence, how can more violence then solve itself? Eh.. anyone else getting this logic?

>>8318302

The only smart person in MENSA is the guy collecting the membership fees

Using violence as a first reaction is almost always a result of a lack of creativity, intelligence and empathy for your fellow man.

Never ever using violence even as a last resort is a result of being a spineless coward unwilling to stand up for your beliefs.

>>8318087
Of course humans are smarter than other animals, but you can drawn many similarities between us an other life here.

>>8318096

It solves the problem of surviving, which is pretty much the main thing to do for most people.

As long as one person uses violence, everyone has to. If the USA decided to lose all of its army and missiles, how long do you think it would be beore it got invaded by someone?

>>8318448
>digression response of a digression response
You're so stupid. I feel bad for your mother. Yes, let's talk about MENSA, something that YOU brought up.

>>8318423

That would go way above the heads of your average American. Their definition of "solution" basically amounts to "Lookit our body count!" Which is hilarious considering we really weren't in many wars and didn't even win all of them.

>>8318595

This is funny to me. Who exactly do you think would invade America? One of the third world countries we're directly at war with that don't have any real navies or air forces to speak of? Or how about the major powers that are all intrinsically tied to us economically and stand to lose more by cutting those off for the sake of a mere territorial conflict.

You are a FUCKING IDIOT.

It's a stupid saying. Violence isn't right for all situations, but it's certainly right for some of them.

all you guys saying that violence ended some war or saved us from hitler must have been lobotomized.

WAR IS VIOLENCE, YOU DONT SOLVE IT WITH MORE VIOLENCE. THE VIOLENCE _IS_ THE WAR GODDAMIT. What you must try to comprehend is the following: WHY DID THE VIOLENCE START IN THE FIRST PLACE?

I don't know but I solved a lot of my problems in high school with violence.

Violence does work. Dead men can't fight back.

A quote from TF2 explains it pretty well.

>"...How am I going to stop some big mean mother hubbard from tearing me a structurally superfluous new behind?"
>"The answer..."
>"...use a gun. And if that don't work ...use more gun."

>>8318686
The worst part about a war is its beginning. If one country initiates force against another, then shouldn't people fight back to stop the aggressor?

>>8318529
This anon is one of the few in this thread with half a brain, IMHO.

>>8318595
The "Big Red Button" is one hell of a deterrent to rogue nations, bu thte fact of the matter is, we don't have any real enemies that couldn't be stopped by virtue of our own Second Amendment rights. Whether or not we have a standing army, we have provisions within our constitution that allow us as Americans to posess firearms for the purpose of forming a militia in defense of country, civil liberties, etc... Unless China or Russia decide to get uppity with us, we're set. I mean, shit, we're the biggest military Cock and Balls on the planet, and we're getting thrown through hell trying to weed out poorly-trained insurgents in Iraq with only partial success. Good ol' American brass and rednecks with gun cabinets that look like National Guard armories would sure as shit bring the fight to any invading power.

How do you arrest a serial killer, smooth talker?

>Therefore, the best warfare strategy is to attack the enemy's plans, next is to attack alliances, next is to attack the army, and the worst is to attack a walled city.
-Sun Tzu

>>8318274

Why yes, being a coward is regarded as "intelligent" by other cowards.

>>8318802

Sun Bin advocated siege warfare.

>>8318752
yes, but it is still violence, and it did not solve anything? The violence is still the war and the problem just persist.

The point us peacefags are trying to make, is why the "aggressor" starts in the first place. Not how we try to end it. You make the same retarded logic as everyone else.

>>8318850

Why did Hitler invade Poland? Why do insane maniacs like Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot exist?

For the same reason that you peacefags exist - this world allows insane people to exist.

>>8318838
Back in his time that was pretty normal. But still, he wrote one of the most influential books on strategy. But he was right in saying that violence only needs to be applied if you cannot find a way to attack your opponents strategy.

And something I've been seeing in this thread is that SOME anons seem to think that not agreeing with the "violence never solved anything" means you're an idiot who thinks violence can solve anything. No it doesn't, it means you understand that there are multiple violent conflicts throughout history that have solved problems, and that therefore, the statement is false.

>>8318763

>we're getting thrown through hell trying to weed out poorly-trained insurgents in Iraq

Does Vietnam ring a bell? Who do you think lost America the war - loyal soldiers on the ground or corrupt politics at home?

>>8317906
war is an instrument of policy. If your policy isn't working and you have an advantage, time for war.

Because people today are cowards that think they can hide their cowardice behind anti-war sentiments.

Anyone that honestly believes violence has never solved anything is so indoctrinated by their pro-cowardice bullshit that they're completely beyond hope.

"War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself."-John Stuart Mills

When people think of violence they jump to the conclusion of killing someone. Thats just stupid, but if a person just wouldn't stop even if you told them then you beat them. You don't go as far as to killing someone. Thats just stupid

>>8318850
>why the "aggressor" starts in the first place

Because there really are bad people out there. This is hard for some people to believe, but it's true. And for a lot of those people, the only language they really understand is force. Some people can be talked down, and that's why diplomacy exists, but some people are determined to end up either imprisoned for life or dead. And I have no problem accomodating them.

>>8317986
That's an idiotic statement, stupid enough that I have to believe you're completely misrepresenting what the guy said to suit your own means.

Violence doesn't NEED to create a state of law, it's already so commonly the best possible solution to REMOVING intolerable sets of laws to make way for the creation of better laws which would bring about a better state of law than before.

>>8318936

Violence is way your justice is imposed on somebody else. If somebody does something you think is unjust, and he refuses to change his behaviour, even by threat of violence, then the only way to bring about justice is to use violence against him. If you succeed, then there is justice, and if you fail, then injustice is imposed upon you.

It's as simple as that.

>>8318939

I'm sorry, we lost Vietnam?

Last I heard we killed a million communists and left.

Sometimes people need to be punched in the face, most times though they don't.

>>8318980
What? No, that's not what violence is. Look up the definition and try again.

Violence is a tool to impose your idea of justice and righteousness onto someone. Though you might as well impose your idea of justice through civilized debate. You should always, always, try to convince someone through reasoning before you should even think about applying violence.

>>8318950
What's wrong with having a lack of pride (in one's country)?? Imagine if the whole world lost a sense of pride in their individual countries, how much more tolerant and peaceful would we be??

>>8319028

Yeah you did. Vietnam fell under communist control, as did Laos and Cambodia.

>>8319042
>he refuses to change his behaviour, even by threat of violence

Read my post and try again.

>>8319028
We didn't officially lose but we lost a lot in terms of lives, money, etc. We didn't gain anything either.

>>8319059

You'd be a bunch of cowards trying to milk each other for all you're worth - precisely nothing - which is taking place as we speak.

>>8318950

implying violence == pride & honor

retard

>>8319107

>Implying violence is never used by those with honor

>>8318977

If you count anarchy as "law of the jungle", then I agree.

because it doesn't. the problem is in people's heads. but people don't want to think that they are the problem.

violence is barbaric, pure animal passion that every human being should strive against. It solves no problems; it actually causes more problems. Causes more problems because it leaves people disgruntled and outsiders take sides. Peace on earth, joy in the hearts of man.

>>8319084

I have. You might want to fix the first sentence.

If your enemy, even under the threat of violence does not succumb to your will, you have to attack the opponents strategy, trying to make sure that they cannot execute their plans. If that doesn't work, you'll actually have to apply violence. And even then you have to think because there are seven factors that will determine whether you will certainly win or lose. Violence should always be the last resort.

Okay, too many stupid idiots in this thread. Let me make this abundantly clear by making 3 clear points:
SITUATION ONE: YOU ARE A COWARD
--------------------------------------------------------------

1. There is a bully who doesn't care about anything except his own welfare.
2. He asks you for your lunch.
3. You give him your lunch.
4. He asks for more.
5. You have given him everything you can give him.
6. He beats you up for his own amusement.

SITUATION TWO: YOU ARE NOT A COWARD
----------------------------------------------------------------------

1. There is a bully who doesn't care about anything except his own welfare.
2. He asks you for your lunch.
3. You punch him in the nose.
4. He calls his friends to beat you up.
5. You call your friends and beat him up.
6. Problem solved.

Armed guy robs bank. Police use violence to stop him.

You now realize that some of the most "violent" people of all, enacted their violence through nothing more than words.

Steel may pierce flesh, but words can murder thousands.

So what is violence?

Americans like to posture as war-hungry faggots to seem tough, only because no American has ever experienced total war on their own soil.

inb4 civil war, I mean REAL wars faggot.

>>8319293
so you cant even talk your way out from a bully? God, you must really be struggling.

KILLING PEOPLE IS THE ONLY WAY TO TRULY CHANGE PUBLIC OPINION. BECAUSE THERE ISNT ANY, MUWAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHA

KILLING PEOPLE IS THE ONLY WAY TO TRULY CHANGE PUBLIC OPINION. BECAUSE THERE ISNT ANY, MUWAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHA

KILLING PEOPLE IS THE ONLY WAY TO TRULY CHANGE PUBLIC OPINION. BECAUSE THERE ISNT ANY, MUWAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHA

KILLING PEOPLE IS THE ONLY WAY TO TRULY CHANGE PUBLIC OPINION. BECAUSE THERE ISNT ANY, MUWAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHA

>>8317906 violence never solves anything'?

Certainly solved colonialism.

>>8318671

Just because wars are ultimately not in their self-interest doesn't mean they're not going to happen. If that were the case, wars would never happen.

If a mugger was pointing a gun at you, would you just think "I don't have to give him my wallet, it would be too stupid of him to actually shoot me!"?

>>8322806
explain to me how violence didn't factor into the rise of colonialism

>>8323329

We are not cosmic beings who operate from a God-level perspective. The people who suffered under colonialism used violence to end it; it doesn't matter if the rise of colonialism was violent. The people who used violence to end it were not the people who started it.