We Need Peace More Than War And Rumours Of War

in QC Community17 days ago
War - Do you think governments should seek the people’s approval through a referendum before invading, attacking, or declaring war on another country? Do you think citizens would support a war, or do you think the number of conflicts currently taking place would decrease? Why?

Hello #qccommunity, I trust you are doing great. I welcome you to my blog.


Vilkasss

War and rumours of war seem to be on the increase these days. States seek control and show the strength of their war equipment.
Recently, the wars between two prominent countries caused serious ripple effects around the world due to political ties and economic waste that resulted from the battles. No wonder the popular saying that “when two Elephants fight, the grass suffers”.

The meaning of war depicts “a planned violent response to provocation with ammunition." Hence, seeking people’s approval will be dangerous. This is because it is a battle fought with tact, wit, precision, and with some classified information. Making war a public thing will weaken that government and hand over victory to its enemies.

Furthermore, wars are not supposed to be discussed openly; however, the parties involved may send threats and venom to frighten their enemies. Sometimes, these threats, when push comes to shove, are carried out on a small or large scale to test the strength of their enemies before launching a full-scale war.

Additionally, referendums are mostly used during peace accords. Using it to get war approval will pose a danger to that government. The whole secret, formation, and tactics will be revealed to the enemy's camp, and they will use it to their advantage to cause damage.


Tama66

Again, the delay witnessed during the referendum and its processes will open the government to attacks because, sometimes in war, it may be blatantly dangerous. Delay tactics can be used in football to hold the opponent, but in war, a surprise attack is always the answer.

On the other hand, it is good that governments plan wars internally by getting the buy-in of major stakeholders and allies before launching an attack or going to war. This way, there will be strong backup and cover in case of surprise attacks or strong retaliation from the enemy's camp.

In conclusion, I do not think it is necessary to get referendum approval before a government launches war, but rather a buy-in from the major stakeholders. And so long as there is life and existence in this world, there will always be conflicts and rumours of war.

Nevertheless, governments can do better by employing dialogue peace treaties because we need peace in this world more than war and rumours of war.

Feel free to join here

Sort:  

I absolutely think it's necessary to consult the people. I'm outraged that our government sends military aid to US/Israel in hte form of f45 bombers. I do not want my taxes going to death and destruction and it is always we, the people, who suffer. Fuck war.

I understand the dynamics and pains, but you know, the reality is that in times of war, it is difficult to make a wide consultation.
The executive and the legislative arms will always be the ones to decide.

It might not even go down to the constituencies. Now tell me, do you think such arrangement can give such allowance for referendum in times of war.

You are lucky to some extent, our taxes are robbed before our own very eyes and still would not amount to any reasonable basic life saving amenities.

!WEIRD

En realidad, el problema esta en el tipo de líderes que escogemos. Suiza lleva sin verse involucrada en ninguna guerra desde 1847 y garantizó la seguridad de sus ciudadanos. Por lo que ellos demuestran que sí es posible vivir sin guerras durante periodos prolongados. Ahora, si creara un sistema que evalue la competencias y capacidades de los liíderes de antes llegar al poder, como hacemos con los médicos, pilotos y abogados, allí si se podrían filtrar el acceso al poder de los lideres tóxicos que generan conflictos. El referedum no debería ser sobre la guerra si no el tipo de líderazgo que nos lleve a una paz duradera. Pero, en cambio, elegimos psicopatas y sociopatas y ese es el resultado.

Woah, this is amazing. Since 1847?
Interesting. I agree with you, and we are the ones that chose these leaders or rather elect them.
Maybe other leaders need to study what and their approach to resolving issues to enable them design an approach to settlement of conflicts instead of allowing it to degenerate to wars.

We need peace more than ever.
!PIZZA

PIZZA!

$PIZZA slices delivered:
@cagolistic(1/5) tipped @jlat1412

Learn more at https://hive.pizza.

the delay witnessed during the referendum and its processes will open the government to attacks because, sometimes in war, it may be blatantly dangerous

Totally get the point. And it's true, countries should never lose the advantage they have. But I do think that countries shouldn't attack others just to get resources, or more power.

Exactly 💯, dialogue and peaceful resolution will make the world a better place 🙏

Yes, countries should not strike another just to gain power or resources. But find a better way to resolve conflicts amicably