The philosophy of war?

[caddy_caddy]

"I Won't Be Defeated By Anyone"


"No one will defeat me,
and I won't defeat anyone,"
said the masked security guard
who was allocated to a mysterious task.
He fired on air and said:
" The bullet should only know who is my enemy."
The air fired back with a same bullet.
The unemployed passengers didn't care
what the security guard is thinking of;
the security guard who is also unemployed like them,
but he's looking for his private war
since he didn't find the peace to defend!
He looked at the sky
and saw it naked and clear,
and because he didn't like poetry
he didn't see it as a mirror of the sea.
He was hungry
and felt more hungry
when he smells Alfalafel*
so he felt that his rifle humiliates him.
He fired on the sky , so maybe
a vine of heaven's grape will fall on him.
A same bullet fired back on him,
so it fired up his repressed desire to fight
and he went to an imaginary war and said:
" finally, I've got a job. It is the war ,"
and he fired on another masked security guard,
and wounded his imaginary enemy while he was slightly shot in his leg.
And when he came back to his house in the camp
reclining on his riffle,
he found the house full of mourners,
so he smiled
because he thought they thought he was a martyr and said:
" I didn't die" and when they told him
he is the murderer of his brother,
he looked at his riffle with contempt and said :
"I'll sell it to buy by its price a shroud that befits my brother".
( Mahmoud Darwish)--a Palestinian poet

This is a fascinating poem on war which i liked to translate to you to ask some questions about the philosophy of war.
What's the war ? is it a job like any other job , a mission , or what?
the poem speaks ironically of the absurdity of war and how it might be for " unemployee" and who didn't find a peace to defend.
What do u think of it ?

[YesNo]

War and unemployment seem to go together. War does give one a sense of purpose when there is nothing else to do like a period of destruction preparing the ground for peace and something new.

[milagros]

Hello:

The war is synonymous of destruction, hunger and poverty. The war allow flourish the worst of the people; It is truth that in time of war the armies develop abilities that in other time could not and that nations through of it can increase their resources and better the life of their people, but the coast is gigantic. This justifies the war?.

The war only brings pain, is why always should to be the last option of a nation. I remember that Sun Tzu said in his Art of the war: «There is no instance of a country having benefited from prolonged warfare»

[caddy_caddy]

War and unemployment seem to go together. War does give one a sense of purpose when there is nothing else to do like a period of destruction preparing the ground for peace and something new.
yes there are plenty of people that go to war due to poverty and unemployment from poor countries. However, I don't think this is enough only as a motivation.
How could a man kill another man if he appreciates life itself? Maybe this only could happen when life itself becomes very cheap , not sth precious and sacred to protect and preserve. When the human being 's price is one bullet.

bty why does Dawrish mean when he says "the bullet should only know who is my enemy "?

[YesNo]

bty why does Dawrish mean when he says "the bullet should only know who is my enemy "?

It seems as if Dawrish shot the bullet without aiming apparently thinking this left the responsibility to whomever was hit to the bullet. Just a guess.

[caddy_caddy]

Hello:

The war is synonymous of destruction, hunger and poverty. The war allow flourish the worst of the people; It is truth that in time of war the armies develop abilities that in other time could not and that nations through of it can increase their resources and better the life of their people, but the coast is gigantic. This justifies the war?.

The war only brings pain, is why always should to be the last option of a nation. I remember that Sun Tzu said in his Art of the war: «There is no instance of a country having benefited from prolonged warfare»

You're completely right ; yet man have not developed so much . We're still that primitive , fighters and hunters.
or maybe as Darwish mentioned in the poem : war is one of our repressed desires

[caddy_caddy]

It seems as if Dawrish shot the bullet without aiming apparently thinking this left the responsibility to whomever was hit to the bullet. Just a guess.
this line is ironical ; maybe he actually has no enemy at all ( since he speaks of the imaginary war later on in the poem) or he doesn't know who is his enemy .

[caddy_caddy]

remember that Sun Tzu said in his Art of the war: «There is no instance of a country having benefited from prolonged warfare»
someone was talking abt behavior management and spoke abt this book as far as I think.
Is this king the one who beheaded some of the soldiers to spare his army the war considering it an ethical act ?

[milagros]

Is this king the one who beheaded some of the soldiers to spare his army the war considering it an ethical act ?

As far as I know Sun Tzu ordered beheaded some concubines of king He Lu. According to the anecdote, Sun Tzu wanted to show that he could organise any army

Sun Tzu: "If words of command are not clear and distinct, if orders are not thoroughly understood, the general is to blame. But if his orders are clear, and the soldiers nevertheless disobey, then it is the
fault of their officers".

For Sun Tzu, the war should to be the last option, but if the war is inevitable, we should to get victory.

[caddy_caddy]

yeh but my question is how he considered the act of beheading ethical?

[milagros]

I understand that when the man decided live in a society, he accepted let violence, for the purpose of live in armony. This is the ideal society (in my oponion) but sometimes (too much) the man returned your wild stage. If the man was able of forget ambition, respect your neighbor the man was able live in peace and the war would not exist.

The Tsun Zun's act, it is only product of a desire mundano to be recognized. If we leave aside the anecdotal of concubines' story, his action was innecesary and brutal.

[Kaylee19]

I understand that when the man decided live in a society, he accepted let violence, for the purpose of live in armony. This is the ideal society (in my oponion) but sometimes (too much) the man returned your wild stage. If the man was able of forget ambition, respect your neighbor the man was able live in peace and the war would not exist.

The Tsun Zun's act, it is only product of a desire mundano to be recognized. If we leave aside the anecdotal of concubines' story, his action was innecesary and brutal.


If words of command are not clear and distinct, if orders are not thoroughly understood, the general is to blame. But if his orders are clear, and the soldiers nevertheless disobey, then it is the
fault of their officers bit confusing isn't it?