War

Risk in war

Different war, different casualty rate. In some wars more succumbed to disease than enemy fire. There are instances where people can be at a greater risk from some jeopardy at home than in the location of war. There have been many battles where thousands of people took part, but only a few died.

Venom is unleashed when we pull the trigger. Arms are severed, intestines gurgle - exposed to the air, throats are removed, skulls are cracked, genitalia are liquified and the purpose of people’s lives is laid bare. Progress of sorts is made. A move closer to something. The progress feels more akin to a backward step if you made a mistake in your aim. You fired on a friend. You knew them quite well as you slept in the same quarters and hiked together to confront your enemy. A sentimentalist is most perturbed by losses caused by their own militia. Battles are waves of violence where individual acts of bravery help a side prevail. Perfection would be preferred but mistakes will be made, mistakes caused by confusion, miscommunication, or misjudgement. To put out a fire you run to the river and return hauling a bucket of water. Much is spilt. However, so long as you have enough to douse the flames the job is a good one. One is not sentimental about the poor water that never fought the flames. We dwell on efficiency and waste, whilst those with political control tabulate the overall picture. The past is the past and unchangeable, the future is what excites those playing the war game.

Something makes us believe that a battle is justifiable. Others see the stated justification as an excuse. The will to fight is all - belief in a higher purpose. Hope. Public opinion is manipulated to keep the merry dance going. People are coerced to believe that conscription is both necessary and righteous. Men can be pressured to fight whilst women are given a free pass. It is not a meritocracy. If a woman is clearly stronger than some of the men, she will get a free pass. That applies in some areas of the world. In others, both men and women fight. They both fight effectively. Should I go or should I run for the hills? I could be seriously injured. I could die. I could live with myself better if I take part. Some will appreciate me there and appreciate my efforts on my return. Do I believe the war to be the right course of action?

Killing people one way is an act of war. Killing people in another way is thought of as terrorism. Killing people with some weapons is deemed dastardly yet killing the same number with another weapon provokes less outrage. Terrorists take attention seeking to the extreme. Their actions may not align with any government. The aim is to align with public opinion, be heard and be relevant. When the media plays into the hands of the agitators, they increase the weight of the message. If such events are downplayed, then support will drop. Only if the frustration of not being heard rises and rises and therefore action is taken to raise the ante significantly, does this policy become risky. Earthquakes and other natural disasters can wipe out thousands of people in one go. Preventable curable diseases eradicate millions every year. Yet what do we focus the most attention on? Quite often the relatively small numbers killed in a terrorist attack. Use of legal guns and knives destroy lives daily. Add in the preventable fatalities on our roads and the hate wars claim less than 0.01% of the total. If the people in power act in a way that gives the same precedence to all citizens, then the resources would be deployed in a much more even-handed way. No one life is more important than another.

When you have nothing to lose, fear evaporates. Dying could seem more attractive than a suppressed futile life. The most dangerous parties to keep a close eye on are those coerced and sucked into doing something through false promises. They become a patsy in someone else’s game. Those that change their mind, those that aren’t swayed look back years later and are invariably glad they avoided an early death.

A fiend is killing everyone in the immediate locality. Selfish vs cooperative tactics come into force. Rush the fiends or hide? If lots run at them smashing them hard with anything they can lay their hands on, they are usually overpowered. The temptation is to get away and hide though. If the fiend can kill you all one by one, they will kill you all one by one. If not all of you then most of you. The more that challenge the fiend together the merrier the occasion – it is very hard to stave off lots of people coming at you all at the same time. A difficult once in a lifetime gamble.

To sacrifice your life for the benefit of others could be admirable but you won’t be around to appreciate any of the gains of the eventual victory. Is it worse to die in a war that your side ends up losing anyway? From your point of view, it makes no difference. It is only important whether the war is won or lost if you survive.