Bobboau, my view isn't that simple. Yes, conflict what creates progress. But that doesn't mean you should be eager to jump into it. If war is to be used at all, it should be used as a last resort, and there is overwhelming evidence that this war is not a last resort.
Which essentially boils down to "war is bad," because if it creates progress, then people should indeed (and will) be eager to jump into it for their purposes. War is an option, just like any other, and may be a last resort, a first resort, or anything in between based on other conditions. So it is indeed that simple.
Wow. This is the first time I've heard you denounced ideas that work. Ghandi is an idiot, because he won independence without needing a fight. Interesting reasoning.
Won independence?
Quite the contrary; you obviously have not looked at what happened there in detail at all. The reason India got its independence was that the UK had been somewhat weakened by WW2 and the INA was slowly gaining support, so the British decided to pull out before any armed uprising could occur. Gandhi was actually a major deterrent to independence, since his power and influence in the Indian parliament was so great that he could essentially kick out any congress member he pleased, which is what happened to anyone who made any mention of armed rebellion. And of course, the rapid spread of his ideas, the effects of which are seen to this day, delayed attempts at independence for many decades.
He has actually been recorded in public speeches a number of times saying that he did not even
want full independence and was happy to be a part of the British empire, but was just begging for a little more freedom. They therefore let Gandhi stay in power because they knew that as long as he and his ideas were dominant, they could continue to rule without any trouble; Churchill once called him a "half-naked man of straw" which, although a massive understatement, gives an idea of what they thought of him.
Gandhi was either a paid agent of the British or just a phenomenally stupid person, which is actually not all that unlikely considering India's political history.
On a side note, one funny thing about him is that he actually sent an official letter to Churchill during the height of WW2 asking him to show no resistance to the German onslaught and to let them kill and take, because they will eventually relent.
(I kid you not; this one has made it into some history books)
I meant with conflict and struggle fighting and war. Not the peacefull competition 
If we were only defined by those things we would be Klingon 
Same thing; competition can take many forms, but no one form is any more absolutely peaceful or warlike than another. what are these klingon like?
i may be wrong here, but hasn't the entire history of the earth been shaped by constant conflict and conquest?
Exactly.
Actually, here is an interesting quote I read a few days ago:
"The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas, values or religion but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do." -Samuel P. Huntington
Poll
