The Relation Between Warfare And Mankind

Instinctivist theories on human aggressiveness often promote the notion that warfare is in the nature of humankind and therefore cannot be prevented. However Margaret Mead eloquently refuted this idea in her renowned essay Warfare: an Invention – Not a Biological Necessity. Mead states, “War is inevitable unless we change our social system and outlaw classes, the struggle for power, and possessions; and in the event of our success warfare would disappear, as a symptom vanishes when the disease is cured.” Through this statement Mead makes it clear that because aggression and subsequently warfare is a learned invention, it can be avoided. For the purposes of this essay, aggression will be defined as “a response that delivers noxious stimuli to another organism.” This essay will outline how and why aggression, and thus warfare, is not biological and is rather a behaviour that is learned as a reaction to social stimuli. Furthermore, it will be explained that violence is used by societies as a political weapon to achieve ostensible objectives.

All war is a symptom of man's failure as a thinking animal" The quote, “all war is a symptom of man’s failure as a thinking animal” is evident in our very lives and is definitely true. World War I highlights the fact that war was a result of the failure man faced. Furthermore, World War II also demonstrates another example of an instance where a war was created due to the failings of man. Finally, the Sri Lankan Civil War again explains how man’s failure triggered an irrational and unneeded war.

“Canada, France, Germany, Japan, Soviet Union and the United Kingdom were among many countries that investigated how to wage biological war.” (pg. 38) Some of these countries have biological weapons programs and even some biological weapons have been used in the past. A Russian program “known to the Soviets as “the Concern Bioreparat”, supposedly a series of laboratories and plants that manufactured vaccines and other medicinal products, was in fact a vast network of secret cities, production plants of Moscow’s germ effort. Bioreparat studied and perfected germs as weapons. President Richard Nixon’s administration became the “world’s leading advocate for a treaty banning germ warfare. Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention- prohibited the possession of deadly biological agents except for research…for vaccines, detection and protective gear. It was the world’s first treaty to ban an entire class of weapons.” (pg. 63) April 1979, an explosion at a secret military base near Soviet city of Sverdlovsk, sent a cloud of Bacillus anthracis fanning over a nearby village, leaving thousands dead. Although the Soviets, had signed the treaty, they denied allegations that this was “nothing more nefarious than tainted meat.” (pg. 77) During the Gulf War, for example, biological weapons developed by Iraq posed a threat and they might, if fact still pose a threat. While US went in search of nuclear

War is a human endeavor. Humanity continually pursues solutions to counter evolving threats with the end of preserving power while also enabling peace. Civilizations resort to war to maintain their perception of this equilibrium. Defined threats and adversaries have changed throughout history, however, the essence of human nature and the base concept of conflict itself have not. Carl von Clausewitz’s theories on warfare capture the relationship between humanity and its application of war, remaining relevant in today’s era through their pensive explanations of timeless philosophical principles regarding the concept of war. These theories regarding war in politics, the key factors affecting war, and the extent that war is applied are inherently interconnected, providing insight on the relationships between humanity and its application of war.

As the wind moves the smoke in the sky and the ground trembles from the causations of man, mankind is surely but slowly bound to crumble. In many of the essays, speeches, letters, and novels that were made by influential people such as Margaret Mead(“War Is Not A Biological Necessity”), Tim O’brien (The Things They Carried), Rick Loomis(“Imagine Dying”), Elie Wiesel (“Hope, Memory, and Despair”), Mike Royko (“A Faceless Man’s Plea”), and John F. Kennedy (“Address to The UN General Assembly, September 1961”); they all summarize the true nature of war, what it does to people, and the immoral acts that are initiated by it. War itself takes away all what is there to mankind. It dehumanizes and conflicts against the moral philosophy towards society.

People will do almost anything to win or achieve their goals and that is sometimes a good thing. However, there have been instances where people have taken the idea to the extreme. So extreme that it was even banned at the end of World War 1 at the Geneva Convention. The topic is Biological Warfare. This type of warfare uses toxins or contagious agents instead of using guns and explosives. Toxins and agents such as bacteria, fungi, and viruses. All of them are different things and have different effects but all have the same goal, and that is to disable or kill humans, animals, and plants to win the war. This warfare is cruel and inhumane and should never be used by anyone. If anyone did they should be punished severely. Why shouldn’t we use this? Well one example is World War 1.

When looking at all four sources, the proposition that warfare caused hardship for civilians is definitely true as it destroyed housing structures along with daily items and other services.

Throughout the progression of mankind, there has always been a need to become superior in tactics and technology over an opponent. It did not take long for man to discover the effective and deadly tactic of Bioterrorism, which is the deliberate release of viruses, bacteria or other germs used to cause illness or death in people, animals, or plants. As time passes, everything about bioterrorism becomes more and more sophisticated, making it very difficult to combat with. By examining the history of bioterrorism, one can learn how military forces utilize this deadly weapon.

War used to be two antagonistic nations opposing each other (Lauer). Now war has escalated to new levels including multiple civil wars at one time, and terrorism (Lauer.)

From European settlers gifting indigenous peoples blankets infected with smallpox, dead bodies being catapulted into cities during the Middle Ages (Hall), to extensive BOW research during the Cold War by both the Soviet Union and the U.S. Just as man has never not lived without pathogens, modern man has never lived without biological weapons. The ease of how something so small and undetectable -that is, undetectable until it is too late- can devastate thousands of people is to some degree attractive to humans. With this thrall comes humanity’s natural tendency towards a need for superiority, but also an intense curiosity. This is how BOW research became so extensive, and reached a climax in the mid 20th century. Even after World War II, the Cold War arms race extended past traditional weaponry to biological weaponry. The Soviet Union was particularly interested in the possibilities of Anthrax, and the U.S. in pathogens dispersed in aerosols. In an attempt to ease tensions and control the development of these weapons during detente, Britain began pushing for a global ban on BOWs (this was largely in part due the the fact that London’s location and population density would make them extremely vulnerable to a BOW attack). With SALT (a treaty between the Soviet Union and the US agreeing to limit nuclear weapons) negotiations nearing closure, Britain knew that suggesting the

The anthrax attacks in America in 2001 remain in the memories of people today, but as far back as pre-biblical times the use of biological agents to conduct warfare occurred. One example from 700 BC cited the Assyrians poisoning water wells using rye ergot, while another example from 400 BC references Scythian archers using the blood from decomposing bodies as a coating for arrowheads in order to create infection in the enemy (Kostadinov, & Galabova, 2010, p 296-297). Less commonly known, is that as recently as 2009, evidence shows that Al-Qaeda was experimenting with biological weapons and a number have been killed by the plague at a training camp (Kostadinov, & Galabova, 2010, p 301). If there is a lesson that can be inferred from Al-Qaeda’s past practices, it is that once they identify a course of action or a target, they commit to it until ultimately

The evolution of the United States military and the notion of warfare can be traced back to the 1600s in Early America. The military has developed from a small militia to the world’s greatest within a few hundred years. In order to understand the changes in warfare, history, and the American way of war, the beginning must be understood. The Colonial period is one of the best examples because it was the period in which organized militias were constructed as a primary means of defense. The resulting colonial militia laws required every able-bodied male citizen, usually between the ages of 16 and 45, to participate and were responsible for equipping themselves with weapons. These units were utilized for small military operations which included seizing land, defending themselves, and being prepared for emergency service. Militia units became the backbone of the American

War is strongly ingrained into our world today whether we like it or not and while it may seem more prevalent and worse lately considering the advances in technology and the increase in hysteria over security, war is not a recent adjunct to society. That poses the question, where does war come from? As human beings, are we hard-wired biologically to fight each other or is it a behaviour influenced by peers and morals?

In the time period of last ten years, many changes have been observed in the nature of Warfare from being aggressive towards more argumentative. There are various views and debates among the nature and character of the wars and the debate continues to grow with time. The several reasons of changes can be attributed to the technological advances and other situational changes. This essay is going to shed light upon whether the nature and character of war has been changed in the course of recent years or it continues to be the same as it was years ago.

Pathogens are pervasive in nature and can be found everywhere. The possibility of synthesizing pathogens particularly viruses, using technologies are inexpensive and globally available. The skills and equipment for making a biological weapon are largely the same as those required for progress in medicine, agriculture, and other fields and are required for future economic prosperity for the nation, so they cannot be locked away. Public health, medical, military, and law enforcement experts have met in a number of settings in efforts to identify the most threatening of the biological weapons, specifically those weapons that merit priority concern in the development of public health and medical preparedness