Community > Forum > The Spaceflight Cafe > Do we need a war?

Do we need a war?

Posted by: Klaus Schmidt - Tue Apr 10, 2007 7:45 pm
Post new topic Reply to topic
 [ 19 posts ] 
Do we need a war? 
Author Message
Space Station Commander
Space Station Commander
User avatar
Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2004 12:55 pm
Posts: 506
Location: Germany
Post Do we need a war?   Posted on: Tue Apr 10, 2007 7:45 pm
In history wars were always times of great technological progress. The last big conflict lead to the journey from the Earth to the Moon. I would say it only was fought without armed forces because of the nuclear weapons. So I ask you: Do we need a big war or conflict to take the next steps?

Buzz Aldrin and John Barnes drawed a "Hot Peace" between China and the rest of the world in their book "Encounter with Tiber". So do we need a similar conflict? There are several possible conflicts imaginable. A re-rising Russia, a Chinese behemoth, a imperialistic Japan, a terror-shakened US and many more.

Are wars perhaps the only evolutionary ways for humankind to evolve? Humans tend to get dull when they have everything they need. Even further: Stagnancy is the death of civilizations.

Or do you think the current progress (is there really any?) is enough? Private-induced developments like Scaled Composites, Space Exploration Technologies, Kistler Rocketplane. Slow-growing efforts like the Chinese space program, the Japanese space dreams, Russia's tries to recover old times.

How much time do we have left? Many things endanger humankind. Not only that decadence can slowly kill humankind. What about space objects' impacts, gamma bursts, a collapsing biosphere and many more?

What do you think is under the current circumstances the best and perhaps only way to get real progress?

_________________
"The hardest hurdle to space isn't the technicalities and money. But rather, the courage and the will to do it." - Burt Rutan.


Back to top
Profile WWW
Spaceflight Trainee
Spaceflight Trainee
avatar
Joined: Sat Oct 28, 2006 4:53 pm
Posts: 36
Post    Posted on: Wed Apr 11, 2007 3:12 am
War needed? Nah, I don't think so. :) It just needs to be turned over to private industry.

Private industry doesn't need wars to improve it's products, just market competition.

IMO war is not the way humanity advances, all wars actually do is remove the controls put in place by the controlling enties. (governments, big business,ect) a good example is the internet. It has grown really fast, no war needed... but neither has it been regulated... as soon as it gets enough regulation, it's growth will begin to be affected. Probably people have already noticed it slowing.


Back to top
Profile
Moderator
Moderator
avatar
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2004 11:23 am
Posts: 3745
Location: Hamburg, Germany
Post    Posted on: Wed Apr 11, 2007 10:19 am
The effect of wars on technology indeed is as Klaus says. But does this mean already that the wars themselves and as such drive the technological progress? What might it be that causes wars to have effects that seem to be found NOT if there are no wars?

This seems one essential and crucial question that needs to be asked and answered to get insights into this topic.

To me it seems that a war means requirements and emergencies not present in peace - the dangers to life and objects are extreme in comparison to peace and so technologies are reuired that are not needed in peace. This drives the technological progress.

In so far it is not the war itself that are causing the progress but the requirements and emergencies that apparently don't exist in peace.

In truth the same progresses will be achieved in peace but not at that pace, not that quickly but slow and evolutionary.

The requirements and emergencies can occur by other ways alternatively - by the goal to reach Moon and Mars for scientific, adventureous or colonization goals for example. They simply aren't that forcing then - it is possible to not go there.

There are requirements and emergencies in peace also - hunger, Tsunamies, volcanic eruptions, rising sea level. hurricanes and blizzards and much more. But they aren't as forcing as wars are that can last for decades or even centuries (the hundred year long war between the UK and France call "Der Hundertjährige Krieg" in German).

Not all wras drive the technological progress - the "Dreißigjährige Krieg" in Europe from 1618 to 1648 only was killing very lots of people but I don't remember a single technological progress it caused.

In so far wars do nothing else than establish a forcing challenge to meet requirements and emergencies. There are challenges in peace that aren't met - some of them result in wars because they aren't met.

...



Dipl.-Volkswirt (bdvb) Augustin (Political Economist)


Back to top
Profile
Space Station Member
Space Station Member
User avatar
Joined: Mon Aug 16, 2004 7:09 pm
Posts: 485
Location: Maastricht, The Netherlands
Post    Posted on: Sat Apr 14, 2007 8:41 am
How about this stupid war on 'terrorism', what did that bring us? Right, camera's all over the place.

The developements in world war 1,2 and the cold 'war' were because of urgency and simple need. If mankind would need to get to mars or out of this solar system for whatever reason, that would be the biggest drive you can get towards developement.

Btw, whats the point in killing your own workforce?


Back to top
Profile
Space Walker
Space Walker
avatar
Joined: Sat Jun 26, 2004 2:00 pm
Posts: 213
Post    Posted on: Sun Apr 15, 2007 2:52 am
War is the father of all and the king of all

and

Every animal is driven to pasture with a blow

- Herakleitos

The question is actually about competitive pressures. In the absence of competition, does progress occur?

Talking about war or business is just the surface issue driven by competition.


Back to top
Profile
Spaceflight Trainee
Spaceflight Trainee
avatar
Joined: Sat Oct 28, 2006 4:53 pm
Posts: 36
Post    Posted on: Sun Apr 15, 2007 7:15 am
koxinga wrote:
War is the father of all and the king of all

and

Every animal is driven to pasture with a blow

- Herakleitos

The question is actually about competitive pressures. In the absence of competition, does progress occur?

Talking about war or business is just the surface issue driven by competition.


Well progress does actually happen wihout a great public need for it, even if it is slower. For example what great calamity drove Galileo to make his many advances? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_Galilei


Back to top
Profile
Space Walker
Space Walker
avatar
Joined: Sat Jun 26, 2004 2:00 pm
Posts: 213
Post    Posted on: Sun Apr 15, 2007 9:05 am
You are not wrong of course, but the days that a single individual, scientist or otherwise, working alone without financial aid making a major breakthrough and benefiting the rest of humanity is getting less likely.

Research, military or commercial or government is sadly driven by big money.

And in that context, i argue that the military drives progress, because governments tend to spend extraordinary amounts of money to find the next better way to kill people, even if it does not make much commercial sense.


Back to top
Profile
Space Station Member
Space Station Member
User avatar
Joined: Mon Aug 16, 2004 7:09 pm
Posts: 485
Location: Maastricht, The Netherlands
Post    Posted on: Sun Apr 15, 2007 9:07 am
Akkman wrote:

Well progress does actually happen wihout a great public need for it, even if it is slower. For example what great calamity drove Galileo to make his many advances? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_Galilei


How about worldwide stupidity? :lol:


Back to top
Profile
Moon Mission Member
Moon Mission Member
User avatar
Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 5:38 pm
Posts: 1361
Location: Austin, Texas
Post    Posted on: Sun Apr 15, 2007 8:06 pm
Akkman wrote:
what great calamity drove Galileo to make his many advances?
There was no specific event directly causing his exact innovations, but I think it is overly simplistic to say that, for example, world war two caused the start of space flight. Some things during Galileo's life include the Dutch Revolt, or Eighty Years' War (1568[1]–1648), http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eighty_Years%27_War
the Long War or Fifteen Years' War (July 29, 1593 - 1604/November 11, 1606) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_War_% ... an_wars%29
the Polish-Swedish War (1600–1611) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish-Swe ... _1600-1611
and many other minor conflicts. Galileo lived in an EXTREMELY violent time. We have almost no war today in comparison.


Back to top
Profile WWW
Space Station Member
Space Station Member
User avatar
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2004 6:12 am
Posts: 321
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Post    Posted on: Mon Apr 16, 2007 3:34 am
Don't forget money. Galileo did a lot of things to make money.

Also there was a lot of political wrangling amongst the Italian city states, noble families and churchmen, short of outright war. A sort of mini, renaissance, cold war.


Back to top
Profile
Moderator
Moderator
avatar
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2004 11:23 am
Posts: 3745
Location: Hamburg, Germany
Post    Posted on: Mon Apr 16, 2007 6:51 am
Hello, koxinga,

Herakleitos didn't say that war is the father of all and the king of all - that's a misunderstanding. What he said really is translated into German as "Der Kampf ist der Vater aller Dinge" which translates into English as "The fight is the father of all things" or "The struggle is the father of all things" - these issues really had nothing to do with war or the like but was the european version of the thinking of Yin and Yang for example.



Dipl.-Volkswirt (bdvb) Augustin (Political Economist)


Back to top
Profile
Space Walker
Space Walker
avatar
Joined: Sat Jun 26, 2004 2:00 pm
Posts: 213
Post    Posted on: Mon Apr 16, 2007 1:06 pm
Ekkehard Augustin wrote:
Hello, koxinga,

Herakleitos didn't say that war is the father of all and the king of all - that's a misunderstanding. What he said really is translated into German as "Der Kampf ist der Vater aller Dinge" which translates into English as "The fight is the father of all things" or "The struggle is the father of all things" - these issues really had nothing to do with war or the like but was the european version of the thinking of Yin and Yang for example.



Dipl.-Volkswirt (bdvb) Augustin (Political Economist)


What he really meant was strife. All things are change and flux, pantei rhei and all that stuff. :wink:

I was using his words to put the point across that change is a result of or act of opposing forces. And by that nature, it is hardly cooperative.


Back to top
Profile
Launch Director
Launch Director
avatar
Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2008 1:39 pm
Posts: 15
Post Do we need war   Posted on: Sat Mar 29, 2008 1:00 pm
Well I don't think so , but our poiliticians do so they can have something to discuss during their cocktail hour. You know for them talking golf all day gets boreing, besides who would want to sit around all day and discuss , the next big raise they are giving themselves.

_________________
Don't glorify yourself over someones elses work


Back to top
Profile
Space Station Member
Space Station Member
User avatar
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2004 1:04 pm
Posts: 254
Location: Norway
Post    Posted on: Sat Mar 29, 2008 5:32 pm
Why so bitter cj422?


Back to top
Profile ICQ
Moderator
Moderator
avatar
Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2004 4:01 am
Posts: 747
Location: New Zealand
Post    Posted on: Sun Mar 30, 2008 12:41 am
War is just the extreme end of market competition. One sided wars don't produce technological advance.

_________________
What goes up better doggone well stay up! - Morgan Gravitronics, Company Slogan.


Back to top
Profile ICQ YIM
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 19 posts ] 
 

Who is online 

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 24 guests


cron
© 2014 The International Space Fellowship, developed by Gabitasoft Interactive. All Rights Reserved.  Privacy Policy | Terms of Use