Comments on Man's biological need for War

Go to Kill Every Sacred CowAdd a commentGo to Man's biological need for War

Re:
Hm, another rash jump to an unsupportable conclusion.  I'm constantly amazed at how you say you can draw valid conclusions just from your own observations (even about unrecorded events that happened thousands of years ago), ignoring the entire body of accumulated human knowledge and experience.

And by the way, 'liberal estrogen' is a sexist slur, but doesn't bother me.  I teach physiology.  I know all about the steroid hormones, and their levels in each gender.  Want to know how much estrogen you have?

posted by mousehop on January 7, 2009 at 7:27 PM | link to this | reply

Competetition sooner or later leads to war fruit-bat. Enjoy your liberal estrogen.

posted by mordent on January 5, 2009 at 11:34 PM | link to this | reply

Re: Re:
It appears you can't see a difference between competition and war.  I think you should just shut up until you learn the difference.  (But I don't insist upon it.  If you really want to keep spouting childish nonsense, knock yourself out.)

posted by mousehop on January 4, 2009 at 5:27 PM | link to this | reply

Re: My Dad

Alright, those were some heavy stories about your dad. I can't believe the checker didn't know we fought Japan!!!  You're right, the libs will just keep re-writting history and it's a damn shame. That is why I told Mouse that i could care less what books he's read.

And the sickest irony of it all is that fighting men will continue to die so that liberals can live in a country they consider to be far from their vision of perfect. Can't they find a better one.

 

posted by mordent on January 4, 2009 at 9:51 AM | link to this | reply

Re:
Glad to hear you son is safe. God will take care of him.

posted by RedStatesMan on January 3, 2009 at 7:35 PM | link to this | reply

My Dad
My Dad has always told me that as a Marine, in bootcamp, they would tear you down inside then build you up into a fighting machine. He said as a Marine he felt like he could conquer the world. This is obviously the right way to defend a great nation. This is far from the panty waste liberal approach to life. So all fo the liberal minded people out there, you can thank my Dad for defending the rights you have today so you can sit back in a comfortable home and spew out hatred towards all that is true and right and how this nation became great!

posted by RedStatesMan on January 3, 2009 at 7:06 PM | link to this | reply

If I would have read this yesterday I would have not truly understood it! I have a son who is a police soldier in the Army! He called today to let me know he was headed to the Dominican Republic for a security mission! His ending comment was that it was okay but it wasn't combat! I think his comment is a good summation of what you just presented! Needless to say I was uneasy with his desire to be in combat! We must learn to understand it as you say! I have had to learn to understand a lot with my soldier son! Happy New Year! sam

posted by sam444 on January 3, 2009 at 7:00 PM | link to this | reply

The Bell Just Sounded...

and the fight has begun! Oopps, I just eluded to these comments being related to a fight, sorry. I see this as yet another example of my outcry to see the "whole picture"! I feel that Mordent did paint the whole picture, however the liberal mindset has chimed in on the comments. I happen to agree with this post.

My Dad, 84 year old WWII Veteran Marine (once a Marine always one), received a visit from the local auxiliary of the American Legion bearing Christmas gifts. They asked him about his service to ouir nation back then and they asked if he had any buddies that he still kept in contact with from that time. Dad began to cry and I knew what he was crying about because I have known for the better part of my life. My Dad was crying because he remembered running around in the jungles in the south Pacific with his buddy's guts strewn all over him. He remembered seeing his fellow Marines being killed while trying to fight for this nation and stay alive while doing so. He remembered what it took to fight every day, to place a flamethrower in a hole in the ground then listen as Japs cried out as they died. He also cried because of all of the military personnel who died at Pearl Harbor when it was attacked by Japs on December 7, 1941(this is the correct date and the correct history of that day, Reverend Wright). He also cried because back about 16 years ago he did see one of his Marine pals, who made it, in a grocery store. They had not seen each other in awhile so they started talking about the war as they neared the register to pay for their food. The check-out girl behind the counter was listening to them talk and she said to them, "I did not know we fought Japan."  This is one of many reasons why we have people in this nation today who do not understand. Then again, the way they are changing the history books so that no one is offended who knows how history will read in the future.

Great post!

posted by RedStatesMan on January 3, 2009 at 7:00 PM | link to this | reply

Re:

You proved my whole point by vehemently arguing. That's a war. Now just pretend you're running a country....soon you will send men off to war to further prove my point.

I honestly don't care what you've read. You are no different than getting 10 Biblical scholars who end up arguing the Bible, Koran etc,

You fit the liberal stereotype of not being able to reason and deduce your own conclusions so you seek it out in other books which are just written by other human beings.

So you and another human being will end up arguing whether Nazareth existed or not?

"Look this book says this. Wait a minute that book says that" 

Testosterone wills a man to be aggressive, adventure and seek new lands. Sooner or later he will run into other males who are not happy with his adventure and fighting will ensue. 

I don't understand how you never figured that out. 

As for the cave-man days I find it impossible to believe a cave-man never swung a club at another cave-man over a woman or food. 

I find it impossible to believe that different tribes of people never fought each other just because there were no walls.

I'm sure you're waiting for your favorite liberal author to tell you whether that's true or not.

As far as I'm concerned there is no difference between a war/fistfight/arguing. It's all the same. A person wants their way and is willing to risk their flesh to get it.

As for women having babies you better believe a healthy woman wants nothing more than having children. Unless she's a brain-washed liberal who now thinks she's beyond all that.

Sorry, I don't believe I'll get a gun and go start a war as I find that a bit unrealistic. Choking a Sacred Cow might be a bit unrealistic as well.

That;s okay because I choke humans on a daily basis as well as striking them, all in the honorable and super masculine, macho world of sport-fighting (ooh baby are you drooling at the thought?).

And who knows, I may end up in a combat situation someday... as life is unpredictable.

Now get some cleen-ex and dry your eyes from all that knee-jerking and go start an arguement with someone else in the name of peace, love and understanding.

  

 

posted by mordent on January 3, 2009 at 1:55 PM | link to this | reply

That is an impressive collection of bullshit in such a small place.  I mean, if you wish to be in a war, go start one.  It's not like it's hard to get a gun in this country.  Or do you avoid that because, oh, I don't know, you know you'd get killed pretty damn fast, and that would hardly make you feel manly?

I doubt you have any basis except your own arrogant conclusion to boast that no other human bond is as meaningful and strong as that between fellow soldiers, but if that were true, it would refute your basic assumption; if war is the greatest drive of men, then men would automatically kill each other, and cooperation would be a denial of basic biology.  The comradeship you worship would be impossible.

Fortunately, human biology is not so superficial and simplistic as your presentation.  The vast majority of humans never participate in war, and those who do generally do so out of necessity, not biology.  The leaders who create and drive warfare don't actively participate; they manipulate the weak into doing the fighting.  Real men are smart enough to determine their own interests, which generally mean avoiding pointless destruction of themselves and others.  War is neither a fundamental nor even an actual drive in humans.  The sympathetic response, yes, but war, hardly.  Neither is having babies the most important biological drive in women.  The sex drive is a powerful motivator, but not the only one, and sexual selection is not predominantly determined by one's ability to kill members of his own species.  After all, as far as we can tell, war wasn't even invented until after civilization.  Pre-civilization villages weren't even walled.  So for the first 95% or so of human existence, there was no such thing as war.  When, then, did this sudden defining trait appear?  And how do you know?  And why would you want to explicitly encourage a pointless and destructive activity that results from a recent historical anomaly, not a biological imperative?

You want to prove your manhood, go kill an actual sacred cow with your bare hands.  At least you could eat the result.

posted by mousehop on January 3, 2009 at 10:15 AM | link to this | reply