Edwin Starr’s song “War” from his album “The Hits of Edwin Starr” expresses the concept of war in a clear, concise manner.  He chants in his song that war is good for “Absolutely nothing.”  War is a controversial topic that has become a commonplace word in the average vocabulary of the people of the world.  For English speakers, this three-letter word seems small, yet holds extreme amounts of significance.  War can neither be simply defined nor simply understood.  In serves as the means which destruction is inevitably caused, and some entity is expunged from existence.  According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, war is “a situation in which people or groups compete with or fight against each other.”  But what is the necessity for this conflict?  Why does the human combat another of its kin?

We can attempt to analyze war in its most primal aspects.  War and conflict may be caused by the desire to acquire new resources or the want to defend resources from a party that covets them.  Biologists observe the territorial relationships between entities throughout nature.  These entities may fight with one another for resources such as food, water, shelter, and mates through a process known as competition.  In a similar case, humans may desire to obtain resources that another human holds, thus sparking conflict.  In a macro, national level, this conflict is observed as the phenomena that we have deemed “war.”  Does this mean that the human is just another animal controlled by the innate instinct to fight for resources for the chance of survival?  Possibly, since the human is an animal.  However, we identify ourselves as cognizant beings capable of controlling thoughts and emotions.  Rather than asserting that all conflict is caused by innate desire and impetus to survive, we may further analyze why war may occur.

Greed, among many negative machinations of the human mind, may serve as a force for war.  As previously stated, wars may be fought over the desire to obtain resources, including land.  It is possible, then, to assert that humans may fight war for the purpose of obtaining wealth.  Throughout human history, one clan has invaded another for the sheer purpose of stealing resources to fulfill their own needs.  However, one cannot state that all war is sparked by greed and lust for another’s property. 

Some warfare is caused by the necessity for revolution.  Under the rule of those who impose a sharp inequity between the upper-class and the lower-class, people rebel.  As a result of the struggle sparked by this incident, a full-blown war is caused, which usually results in the deaths of many.  Revolutions, such as the French Revolution, involved large-scale conflict that resulted in the deposition of the king and the rise of a new government in France, although this new government was later crushed by Napoleon Bonaparte.  Other Revolutions, such as the American Revolution, sparked a full-scale war, the Revolutionary War, between the nations of the United States of America and Britain.  Although much death and destruction was inevitability caused, the United States became a powerful independent state that continues to thrive to this day.

The implications of war have varying effect, similar to how the causes of war vary.  War is the infamous cause of the largest amounts of death, through military interaction and genocide, and destruction.  World War II (WWII), for example, was the largest war fought in the world that involved the largest loss of life in the history of all wars.  Its predecessor war, World War I (WWII), was the war that aimed to end all wars.  The intent of that was evidently failed and imposed the implication of a new World War and economic problems in the event known as the Great Depression.  In some cases, the implications of war are not always completely negative.  The aforementioned cases of France and the United States are two historical examples of nations obtaining independence through combat.  Multiple states have obtained freedom from their mother countries in this format.  Aditionally, war may also help a crippled economy.  Even though the costs of war can be extreme, such as the debt of Germany after WWI, conflict can help stimulate an economy.  The United States is a capitalist economy.  Although World War I may have caused the United States economy to suffer, World War II stimulated the economy.  As a result of the need for new military products, industrial output increased and the economy dragged itself out of the Great Depression.  Furthermore, war can help stimulate an increase in scientific research and technological development.  For example, the development of the radar during WWII served as the base of which television sets may have been constructed.  And, as a result of the ruin some countries experienced after WWII, nations declared their independence, ending the European empires that once thrived.

Although war is such a terrible entity, it seems almost necessary.  Fighting occurs daily, on a micro and macro level, somewhere in the world.  It can cause mass destruction, mass production, a massive death toll, a growth in population, a crash in the economy, a stimulated economy, the antagonizing of nations, the betterment of a nation, the fall of an empire, the creation of newly independent nations, the development of weapons of destruction, the development of new life-saving technology, the loss of resources, and the obtaining of resources.  The list demonstrates contradicting ideas, although they are all products of war.  Can war be classified as a medium of complete destruction, then?  Or can its negative side effects be forgiven for the positive benefits it offers?  Though it is disputed, I argue that war is unnecessarily destructive.  Why do so many have to die for the creation of new technology and the betterment of society?  However, it does not seem that there exists another platform to provide these benefits.  Even in times of a “Golden Age,” conflict still arises.  As a society, we should feel grateful for the advancements our predecessors have made for us.  But is war truly a necessity?