这个月小男生看了描写二战太平洋战争的 ”The Last Fighter Pilot“，按惯例，让他写一份有关对战争的认识。解答三个问题，1，人类是否可以完全避免战争？2，战争有什么坏处或好处？3，日本为什么要偷袭珍珠港？以下是他的答案。
Can war be avoided altogether?
No, people cannot avoid war altogether. Mankind was born with war, just like animals in nature (albeit on a smaller scale). There is competition in human societies. Surviving. Greed, Hate, Bias, Disagreement come with human beings from day one.
And now, even though what we want to get from war has changed, it still has the same premise. There is only so much land or so much food, and there are much more people. Naturally, people will want it, and if interests conflict, war happens. This goes for animals, too, but as said before, on a much smaller scale. Darwin also may contribute to this explanation. For one thing, the process of natural selection, or “only the strong will survive” is true. Although the definition of “strong” may vary, in order to assert your dominance, you must be able to not starve. Eventually, food will run out, and in that case if you were too weak then you would be the one targeted, but if you were stronger you would simply get invade for more food and land. If we apply the theory of competition and Darwin’s theory in WWII for Japan, it’s not much of a surprise they invaded China and bombed Pearl Harbor. Japan was running both out of land and resources, and so chose to invade the weak for them, as they were stronger. As such, it was a choice that they couldn’t really avoid. It was inevitable, just like the creation of the nuke. The Japanese also knew this. As far as Pearl Harbor goes, the Japanese adopted a pragmatic mindset. In order to take some land, the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor pre-emptively to, as far as they knew, prevent the Americans from striking back. If there was a short answer, it was because of Mother Nature and ourselves. Our own brains are the root cause; our ambition and greed all lead us to try and fight for whatever we want. As such, no matter how I can word this, there is no possible way to avoid war altogether. It is like trying to divide by zero.
Positive and negative aspects of war
Some advancements are to be made for the human race, should there be a war. When there is a war, the people developed new technologies like nuclear bomb. This furthers technology as a whole forward, even though the purpose might be different. There are other cases where it would be more positive, if soldiers were getting sick from mosquitos, then a medicine would likely be invented. That furthers humanity along and has much more use.
Unfortunately, the list goes on for the opposite side of things. People die, resources are used, land ravaged, and often progress forfeited, if not destroyed. Who will make the next generation of automatic vacuum robots if the factory is repurposed and possible workers sent to war? The phrase is not limited towards simply research. A large city that was tirelessly built could easily be destroyed, and then people go back to living into caves. Remember, we are looking at the entire human race, not just a country. It is a zero-sum equation, as one country may lose land and the other gains the same amount. There is no benefit there. Even the advancements are of limited value when not strictly in use for war. What use does the nuclear bomb have outside of war? It may prevent war, but it causes arms races that weaken countries and their economies; and therefore, the world. It also isn’t the most cordial of matters. However, the overall change is negative when war happens. All this research could’ve gone to make new technologies, and the resources could’ve been spent elsewhere. Even if something great was found because of war, more could probably still be done in peace. War can do magic at the same time, though. Perhaps a surgeon might find the cure to some diseases, because he would otherwise not operate in such a fast and important environment, that otherwise without the urgency of the situation, they would’ve not had found. The trend, however, is still always at a negative.
Why Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor in WWII?
Why did Japan declare war in the first place? It is very simple. They were running out of land and natural resources. Often, conquest is simply because of these reasons. Someone may lack resources, and as land or other nature resources are a zero-sum equation (there's only so much coal and oil), they must go elsewhere for it. Japan lacked coal, oil and land. Areas like Sumatra had all of those. In order to get them uncontested, they chose to deter the U.S by pre-emptively attacking their fleet in Pearl Harbor. That fleet may have looked like the most capable of stopping their conquest.
选择“Disable on www.wenxuecity.com”
选择“don't run on pages on this domain”
