What is "war?"

There seems to be some considerable dispute here at DU over just what exactly constitutes "war."

The classical definition is that of Clausewitz: "War is the continuation of politics by other means."

Or you might consider a more direct definition: "War is the application of force to achieve political aims."

Or you might prefer my own definition: "War is killing people until they do what you want them to do."

Some here on DU seem to think that a military action is not a "war" if no US troops are dying, which seems an odd definition to me. I've also seen the argument that unless congress declares something a war (which has not happened since 1941), then a military action is not a war. This ignores the possibility that a state of war might exist which is not legal.

Both of these definitions beg the simple question: if it ain't war, what do you call it?

-- Mal

Odd for me being a pacifist, but, what the hey.

It seems to my admittedly novice mind, that war is stepping outside those mechanisms people engineer to prevent the use of force. Governments and ambassadors are not natural occurrances. They have to be created by people deciding to do so. Usually those governments are created for domestic order but ambassadors are for when 2 or more governments come in contact.

These ambassadors seem to discuss things because neither side is eager to leap into war at first sight. They talk, they play golf or whatever it is they do.

When disputes arise the governments have their ambassador play a few more rounds of golf with the other ambassadors hoping they can resolve the dispute to their favor.

They might even seek arbitration by asking a tribunal of judges to join them on the greens.

If one side feels slighted or feels the other side is sufficiently weak the ambassadors report no progress can be made and, oh, the the way, the other guy is so uncivilized he is using a 9-iron as a chipping wedge.

Once one side commits military troops or commits some act of violence that circumvents the arbitrator and/or ambassador you have a war. The military becomes de facto proof that the non-violent appeals to ambassadors and tribunals will no longer suffice and the violence will proceed apace until one side becomes physically or morally exhausted.

... with your "novice mind."

I have one warning to make to you: don't read about WWI unless you are prepared to become really, really depressed.

-- Mal

My husband was a soldier (it's his old magazines he had on deployment I'm reading). He hated it but he loves what he did and who he served with.

What I'm reading tells me when warriors revel in war it is depressing because so many people are hurt and so much is ruined over the ambitions of so few. And when soldiers are stoic professionals they are good people and what they endure out of love for their families and countries makes it all the more depressing.

I can't even pretend to understand it on a personal level, I just hug my husband a bit tighter every time I read about what soldiers go through.