The Original Internet Political Quiz.

[Kasz216]

sapphi_snake said:

Kasz216 said:

Not really.  I'm just pointing out your pure irrationality.

But ok, instead of Medicine... lets say the police.

No need for the police if everyone decided not to comit crimes against each other?  So against the police too then?

Or weapons for that matter.

Being against these things is the same problem as being a pacifist.

All it takes is one person who thinks differently... a single divergent opinion to make you wrong.

There's lots of things wrong with what you wrote.

First of all the police is reactive, not proactive. It's role is to make sure that all goes well within society.

The army's role isn't strictly reactive, and often times the army creates the conflicts (for example attacking another country). Wars don't represent the will of the people (I'm talking about both sides of a conflict), they're power games of political leaders. It's not really in any individual's interest to invade country X, or attack country Y etc. The citizens of country Y did not do anything to the citizens of country X and vice versa. These conflicts are started to political leaders, but are fought by normal people, who have nothing to benefit from them (though political leaders often use manipulation under the guise of patriotism and nationalism to fool people into thinking that their power games really concern them).

That's not actually true.  There are plenty of defensive only armies.  Though with military technology to be defensive you NEED to be offensive.  Otherwise there is no way to stop things like Missles.

Armies very much are the will of the people.  Unpopular wars pretty much don't happen.

Wars only become unpopular once the people who supported them realized they were fools for wanting them in the first place.