It\u2019s simple.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Seen from any of the two parties, the good and the bad are easily discernible. Only exceptional (or deranged, inferior, inadequate?) individuals may point out that, perhaps, the other side is also the \u2018good side\u2019 and that many individuals from that side are OK.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Apart from these exceptions, things look simple: This war needs to be waged.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Except that it simply doesn\u2019t.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n ALL people are better off without war, even those who enrich themselves (money, status) upon it. Eventually, it backfires.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Especially nowadays, with all our technological equipment, we should know better. We MUST know better. Otherwise, history may well be against us<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In this vein, some see \u2018realism\u2019 in the idea that nations (countries, regions) by nature are competitive and cannot but fight each other \u2014 if necessary, by war. So-called realists talk about geopolitical tribes and human tribal nature as if the only option is some primitive law of the strongest.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Of course, that presupposition has not been proven. Therefore, those who call themselves \u2018realists\u2019 do so necessarily on loose grounds.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Tribes are definitely not synonymous with war.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Peoples are not synonymous with own-people-first \u2015 \u2018us against \u2018them.\u2019<\/p>\n\n\n\n