4 ms·
First, the claim is about loving war, not loving killing, and there's a difference. Second, what little research there is suggests (while being far from defini
by FreakLegion 12y ago
First, the claim is about loving war, not loving killing, and there's a difference.
Second, what little research there is suggests (while being far from definitive) that men in fact resist killing[1].
1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killology#The_problem_of_non-_or_mis-firing_soldiers http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killology#The_problem_of_non-_o...
- rokhayakebe 12y agoReally? "The chief aim of war is to subdue an enemy," by using force. You can't separate war from killing, the proof of that being when we go to war, we do not go with argumentations and documents, we go with guns and fire jets. To love war, is to either love harming others, or subduing others by harming them.
- deleted 12y ago[deleted]
- deleted 12y ago[deleted]
- hueving 12y agoYou are not getting the difference. People like the abstract concept of their enemies being defeated. What they don't like is when they are the ones that have to pull the trigger.
- rokhayakebe 12y agoCool. I see now. Thanks!