This is a conveniently simple matter: all that there is converges down into all that there appears to be. What does this earth appear to you? What does this life, this tiny little spark of light, the most insignificant yet so necessary a pebble amongst the beach, what all this appear to be? Well, simply put, all that that there is. Is this simple yet?

One does not simply carry a gun because it has suddenly occurred to him that his nation, his home, is beckoning for aid: nor will he charge into a flood of hostile weapons for a silly honour. One may go to war- kill, be killed, wish to be killed- for any reason that he may see fit, any justification will do. Those do not matter. Oh, this is not saying that the man who claims it is for the betterment of his newborn son is lying, not by any means: it simply says that it is whatever the man attaches to that justification. Simple? Perhaps not yet: it is the emotion, the purpose of that solid belief- not the belief itself.

Beliefs can waver, they are merely temporary states of assumption, after all: but the emotion behind those beliefs- the simple belief in believing- can drive a man to war. The strength of this unconscious loyalty to believing can bring a man to bloody his hands with the life of his brother, it can cause a man to tumble mountains in search of beliefs, it has the power to control every little thing a man- no, simply, a creature- can and will do. Why does the soldier cry for the fallen while creating corpses? Why does the lone hero scream inside while smiling? Why does the entire race of humanity not only indulges, but consistently responds to war? Why is it that war is a necessary evil?

Humanity cannot simply escape war. Destroy all the weapons ever made, and war will not simply vanish: take away all differences and mankind will not learn to love everything. War is inevitable, despite all attempts to vanquish it: this is not a novel, there is no battle of good versus evil, and there are no bad guys. Simply, there are people. Some have ideals. Some of these ideals do not suit another creatures, and thus, conflict arises. There are labels given: this man is “evil”, thus we shall do a “good” turn by killing him. These are petty justifications: the world is not made by black and white, but by grey. How can there ever be certainty in grey?

Thus these justifications lead back to the beginning: they will always change, but the emotional backing does not. The belief in wanting to believe something- even if it is blunt uncertainty- is still the underlay.

And what if one were to simply say, there is no war, I refuse to partake in it, there shall never be a war? What would happen then? Let us speak hypothetically to one another, then: say he were right. Say he abolished war. What then? Never-ending peace?

Mankind was never bred for peace. As a complete entity, mankind strives to exceed whatever boundaries it has set up. Simply, if it can do something, then it will. If the power is there, then the will to act will simply build itself: mankind has the temptation for perfection, for constant betterment in its own perspective. In order for this constant evolution to be, there must be constant change. And that, my friend, is where a problem arises.

Peace may mean less death. It may mean more time, more capability, to address achieving change: but there is no emotion there. War is the mother of invention- not peace. There is no hastened need in peace. How could mankind achieve so much with such a lag? Surely, it would eventually deem peace a handicap and move on.

Recall the last century. The amount of invention is astounding, the speed of expansion awe-inspiring. Why is that? Think of the history surrounding these godlike inventions. What is the common thread? Threat- be it war, possibilities, or simply a state of fear, the threat is enough to hasten every attempt for evolution in every field. Think of this chain: war demands weapons, so new modes of killing are invented; these news toys need transportation that is quick and innovative, so new modes of transportation are created; something is needed to work the modes of transportation, so Artificial Intelligence is evolved; Artificial Intelligence is a consistent thread in today’s life, so for a larger income to further the war, it becomes commercialized; commercialization can only reach so far, so new modes of media are made; the means to access the product displayed by the media must equal the efficiency of sending the message, so new modes of purchasing are considered. See the links? And what if one chooses people to do the transportation? Well, there is another chain for that: the people need comfort, so new ways of achieving contentment without great price or time are brainstormed; the people need quick and easy food, so new ways of conserving and transporting nourishment is thought of; the food needs to be made en masse, so production must further itself in order to meet the needs of people. And, of course, this as well reaches into the commercial area. War is very much a friend to human wants and needs.

So what, war is necessary for mankind? Is that all that mankind can conjure? No, and it is not simply that. Let us think, once again, of our hypothetical ever-lasting peace. Think through this seriously, slowly, taste the question for all it’s worth: will mankind become bored with peace? Do not answer right away. Think.

We treasure moments of peace, but not nearly as much as those in areas that see war every year. We are not often in war- can we truly appreciate peace? Mass death teaches a heavy lesson, but all lessons dwindle with time- human minds can only produce sketches, after all. Do we take war as seriously as we did back in the 40’s, when the world was wrought with it? Simply, no. How can we treasure something we take for granted?

Peace is a luxury, but much like electricity, it is one we naturally assume we have a right to. The value of peace would certainly lower if we always had it. Therefore, war is needed, for it is what gives us the love for peace, the yearning for a complete and safer world. Ever-lasting peace? How can one simply say that it is possible? We would grow annoyed at it, lose our love of it, feel a loss of connection to it: war is simply a more efficient way to evolve, a stronger way to breed general love. Peace would mean nothing without war.

So then, is here no hope or mankind? Is there no redemption? Are we lost to being war-mongering, selfish creations that simply follow base feelings? Simple questions cannot lead to simple answers. We are simply creatures that can only learn through error, and nothing more. We thrive on learning, but only accept the knowledge if another idea has been proved wrong through error. Are we thus arrogant, or obsessed with empirical facts? Are we too stubborn to believe anything but our own experiences, or are we simply trying to find truth in the purest form we can?

Simply put, there are no real answers.