What is war and armed conflict. The meaning of the word "war"



home

War

War, noun, and.

used Often Morphology: (no) what? wars , what? war , (see) what? war , how? war , about what?; about war pl. What? wars , (no) what? wars wars war What? war to wars war wars

1. home about wars

- this is a struggle, a conflict between states, peoples, different social classes, etc., which are waged with the use of weapons. | To declare a war. | Many years of war. | Bloody war. | Wage war. | Go to war. | Die in war.

2. Win, lose the war. Civil War

- is an armed struggle for state power between classes and social groups within the country. | During the civil war he fought on the side of the whites, in Denikin’s army.

3. She endured hunger, devastation, and civil war on her shoulders. World War

is a war waged by many countries around the world. | The Second World War. In 1914, Russia entered into.

4. world war Patriotic War

is a war waged by the people of a country against the army of another country, defending their independence. | Patriotic War of 1812.

5. My grandfather went missing in the Great Patriotic War. Cold War

call a period of tense and hostile relations between two or more countries, when the struggle is waged at the ideological and political level, and not with the use of weapons.

6. The times of the Cold War between the USSR and the USA are long gone. War

7. The times of the Cold War between the USSR and the USA are long gone. call a conflict between countries or organizations that concerns economic, political, etc. issues.

are called hostile relationships, quarrels between people.

They have a constant war at home. 8. When you declare war

something bad, harmful, you want to actively fight it.

Declare war on corruption. War, military

m.

Martial law. Dictionary Russian language Dmitriev

.:

D. V. Dmitriev.:

2003.

Synonyms Antonyms

Organized military struggle between states (groups of states), classes or nations (peoples). The genesis of V. goes deep into the pre-class history of mankind (see K. Marx and F. Engels, Works, vol. 46, part 1, p. 480). However, only... Philosophical Encyclopedia

- “War and We” (“Military Affairs through the Eyes of a Citizen”) is a series of books on the history of World War II, founded by Yuri Mukhin in 2000. Contents 1 Abstract 2 List of books ... Wikipedia

home- WAR. I. War, the most powerful coercive means, is the means by which the state achieves its political goals (ultima ratio regis). In its essence, V. is an application in human life. generally all over the world. the law of struggle for... ... Military encyclopedia

WAR- WAR. Contents: Sanitary and social. biological consequences V. . . 523 Military pathology...................531 Military psychoses................5 37 Sanitary and socio-biological consequences of war. Being a large national social. political,... ... Great Medical Encyclopedia

Women (war, to fight, to beat, massacre, to fight, as probably a boyar, and a governor or war leader), discord and military combat between states, international warfare. Offensive war, when an army is led against a foreign state; defensive when... Dahl's Explanatory Dictionary

Y; pl. wars, wars; and. 1. Armed struggle between states, peoples, tribes, etc. or social classes within the state. V. against foreign invaders. V. for freedom and independence of the state. To declare a war. Wage war... ... encyclopedic Dictionary

- (war) an armed conflict between two or more parties, usually pursuing political goals. The meaning of the term is that when there is a clash of interests (usually territorial) of large political entities - states or empires ... ... Political science. Dictionary.

Everyone against everyone. Book Joking. About an unfriendly team, a society torn apart by squabbles and infighting. ShZF 2001, 41. /i> Tracing paper from Lat. bellum omnium contra omnes. BMS 1998, 93. War and Peace. Jarg. school Joking. iron. 1. School life. Bytic, 1991 2000;… … Big dictionary Russian sayings

WAR, wars, many. war, women Armed struggle between states or social classes; ant. world. Wage war. War broke out. To declare a war. Franco Prussian war. Civil War. Trench warfare. Being at war with... Ushakov's Explanatory Dictionary

There is no unity in the literature in defining the concept war. According to Quincy Wright, one of the earliest definitions of war was given by Cicero, who defined war as "competition with the use of force"(contention by force).

This suggests that war involves competition (struggle) over something and that this competition occurs in a special form, namely the use of force. In politics, competition involves disputes over objects of a certain value.

Greece made an addition to Cicero’s definition, noting that war is both certain legal status.

Wright believes that war - This a certain period of time when certain rules come into force regulating violence on the part of states that seek to resolve the dispute between them in this way.

Webster's Dictionary states that war is a state of usually open and declared armed conflict between states or nations.

Another definition of war is given by Hidley Ball (Bull) - war is organized violence that is carried out against each other by political units 2.

It's more general definition than in Webster's Dictionary. But the concept violence also remains uncertain. The advantages of this definition are threefold:

1)" it does not reduce wars only to interstate wars;

2) uses terms that are not controversial;

3) includes the concept “organized”.

So, war is organized violence. This means, firstly, that military activities someone carried out in accordance with rules and traditions. Secondly, war is not random violence. She has a certain direction and source. Thirdly, war is collective, and not an individual phenomenon. However we're talking about not just about a collective phenomenon, but about a political phenomenon.

War as an extreme form of rivalry fulfills essential function. War is a way to solve a certain kind of problem(Margaret Mead). Hence, war is a learned (acquired) behavior, and we are talking about the behavior of society, and not of individual individuals.

The significance of Mead's approach is that she shows war as product of human activity. Humanity is accustomed to solving certain issues through war. Hence, in order to prevent the outbreak of wars, it is necessary to create other mechanisms for resolving situations that push states onto a military path.

Mead does not answer the question in his works: Why humanity solved certain problems in exactly this way, which is why a certain model of behavior was consolidated.

Biologists partially answer this question by considering the phenomenon of aggressive behavior of animals.

Animals defend their territory from strangers. They also fight for food and the right to procreate. Both of these circumstances come with territory (Wilson). So, aggression may be associated with the struggle for living space. Clans and groups survived through the struggle for existence, the struggle for territory. Genetic memory thus, can be considered as a factor predetermining aggressive behavior in case of competition for territory.

Clausewitz gave two classical definitions wars:

1 Diplomatic Bulletin. 1992. No. 7. P. 3-4.

2 Vasquez. R. 23.

Chapter 2. War, peace and states

“War is nothing more than the continuation of politics by other means...it can never be separated from politics...Once war has become a reality, it is nothing more than the expression of politics...its instrument. Therefore, the subordination of the military point of view to the political is the only possible one.”

“War is an act of violence with the aim of forcing the enemy to carry out his will” 1.

According to Clausewitz, war is a political act of violence. The political aspect is the most important for him. There is war tool, which is necessary for politicians in certain situations. Clausewitz notes that war occurs when conventional politics and diplomacy fail. In cases where existing diplomatic practices (negotiations or developed conflict resolution mechanisms, as well as international law) are unable to lead to a result acceptable to the conflicting parties, war becomes a means by which one side tries to force the other to carry out its will.

War occurs when one of the parties is ready to make certain sacrifices to achieve a goal. Hence, wars start only because of certain problems, which, however, may vary in different historical periods, in different cultures etc. If there is a way to resolve the conflict that satisfies both sides, war does not happen.

From understanding the causes of the war, two questions follow that need to be answered:

1) what makes problems cannot be resolved peacefully?

2) why is violence so attractive as a political tool?

Historically, the establishment political control both successful and absolute complex issues were resolved as a result of wars.

This process began in early agricultural civilizations, when people became more attached to the land than to gathering and hunting. In addition, these societies became more organized, which was important for mobilization and warfare (Wright, Mansfield).

However, war, once it arises, has its own logic. Violence and the desire for dominance can make war irrational. Clausewitz's rational explanation of war may conflict with psychological explanation - desire to kill. 3. Freud, for example, believed that the rational explanation of war is incorrect, since its main causes are instincts, namely an explosive reaction \& against increasing pressure modern civilization. The more aggressive and repressive a civilization is towards a person, the stronger the response.

Freud believed war is a manifestation of the death instinct to destroy what was created by eros (the instinct of life). Thus, psychoanalysts raised the question that war, along with political and cultural components, also includes mental ones. This approach also makes us think about the non-political goals of war (“satisfying aggressive urges” of a psychological nature).

It is important to consider the following theoretical assumptions regarding war:

1) war is a state to which humanity is accustomed (historicism);

2) war is a process; it has causes that do not immediately lead to a conflict in extreme form;

3) war, as a rule, is the result of a long confrontation;

4) war is a kind of way to solve problems;

5) a war can have several causes;

6) exist Various types wars;

7) war as a means of enrichment.

war) is a socio-political phenomenon that directly affects the fate of power in all its forms and has its own teachings and theories. In the West one of these scientific directions now called polemology - 1) armed struggle between states, sometimes in a given state (civil war); 2) in a figurative sense, the extreme degree of fierce struggle, hostile relations between someone (war of authorities, war of laws). There are V.: global, local; colonial, unjust, liberation, conquest, customs, newspaper.

Great definition

Incomplete definition ↓

WAR

armed conflict between opposing large masses of people pursuing their own interests; it is a policy carried out through the use of armed force. Under certain conditions, a warrior is the most radical means of achieving political goals.

Within the framework of savagery and barbarism - before the emergence of the state and politics - inter-tribal and intra-tribal armed clashes took place. As human communities develop, populations multiply, and with the emergence of a state, sporadic armed skirmishes and clashes develop into wars. There are wars within states, between social and national groups (civil war, interethnic and national liberation wars); wars between individual states (for example, the wars between Rome and Carthage, the wars of conquest of Alexander the Great, the wars of Napoleon Bonaparte, etc.); wars between groups (coalitions) of states (including the world wars of 1914-1919 and 1939-1945). With the advent of nuclear missile weapons capable of destroying humanity, a war using such weapons, while remaining a continuation of politics, ceased to be a radical means of achieving political goals: it would lead to catastrophic results. In this situation, the confrontation between “capitalism and socialism” was transformed into the “Cold War” (1946-1991) with its own principles, means and forms of development.

Contrary to Stalinism, which argued that the root cause of all wars is private property and the exploitation of man by man, in reality wars (for example, intertribal) happened long before the emergence of private property and exploitation: their causes were the struggle for “living space”, for the possession of fire, women and etc. But wherever wars arise, they are always based on a clash, a confrontation of interests, the desire of some people to achieve their goals through the use of armed violence and bloodshed, contrary to the interests and aspirations of other people. Of course, with the emergence of private property, exploitation and the state, wars acquired a qualitatively the new kind and not only because they were most often based on feuds over private property, the struggle of interests for vital, material benefits, but also because the state became a powerful organization for preparing and waging war. Politics, which arose along with the emergence of the state, became the most important means of preparing and carrying out military actions, and war itself became only a continuation of politics, but by other - military - means. Any war has its own causes and its own character, fair or unjust, fleeting or protracted, local or quite widespread, and modern times- global, world character. For realpolitik, it is especially important to determine the nature of the war in order to develop an adequate attitude towards it: taking the side of a just war and preventing the development and success of unjust wars. To understand the nature and character of war, you need to find out from what historical conditions this war grew, what social forces it is being waged and in the name of what, i.e. what goals they are pursuing, what results they want to achieve and what can become the real result of the war. It is one thing to directly subjugate the people against whom the war is waged, another thing is when the war is waged over the redistribution of colonies, and a third thing is when the purpose of the war is the extermination of a certain national or social group, destruction of a people or nationality (genocide).

At earlier stages human history(within such secondary formations as slavery, the Asian mode of production and feudalism) the war, arising on the foundation of private property and exploitative relations, pursued the goal of redistributing territories and wealth, seizing cheap labor, etc. At higher levels, with the growth of productive forces, more significant goals were set: the enslavement of the peoples of entire countries or states. It must be taken into account that the main losses during a war are borne by the people, ordinary citizens - peasants, workers, farmers, office workers, etc. They were the ones who paid for the wars a sharp drop your standard of living. In contrast, a certain part of the propertied, exploiters and oppressors used wars for selfish purposes: the extermination during the war of the most productive part of the population, the decline in the living standards of the broad masses was often accompanied by the rapid enrichment of that part of the population that was engaged in the supply of weapons, ammunition, food for the army, siphoning into their pockets a huge portion of the funds mobilized by the government through taxes.

For example, the Boer War in late XIX V. brought the English merchants of death 1,125 pounds sterling for each killed. Subsequently, incomes quickly increased: already during the First World War they amounted to $8,000 for each killed. During the Second World War, which claimed more than 50 million human lives, the profits of the American monopolies alone amounted to over 55 billion dollars. Destroying enormous material and spiritual values, destroying the productive forces and their flower - people, wars, especially world wars, caused deep bleeding to humanity lasting wounds that take decades to heal.

The historical unevenness of economic and socio-political development of individual countries constantly changes the balance of forces on the world stage, which, as political scientists in both the West and the East rightly note, leads to attempts to use their increased power to redistribute territories and wealth. There are no other means of restoring the balance that is disturbed from time to time, except for crises in the economy and wars in politics. Interstate wars, including world wars, are the product of conscious politics. But this does not mean that at any historical stage there are equal opportunities to prevent war. Back at the beginning of the 20th century. Lenin and his supporters proceeded from the inevitability of wars between states, and therefore he considered an armed uprising of the people and a civil war, although not the best, but the most probable form of development of the people's revolution. Later the situation changed. Why? Previously, only the interests and policies of finance capital and the imperialist bourgeoisie collided on the world stage. But the strength of working people, the strength of peace-loving democracy, was not sufficient to prevent the war. It was in connection with this that V. Lenin wrote about “the dominant force now throughout the world. international politics financial capital which inevitably gives rise to new imperialist wars (Works, vol. 33, p. 33). When the situation and the balance of power changed, such wars were no longer inevitable.

Along with interstate wars, there are also wars within states waged for social liberation (armed uprisings, civil war or guerrilla warfare in the name of national liberation). These are all just wars. It would be wrong to assume that any use of armed violence is unacceptable. Even Jean-Jacques Rousseau substantiated the justice of the armed struggle against tyrants: “An uprising,” he wrote, “which leads to the murder or overthrow of a sultan from the throne, is an act as natural as those acts through which he just disposed of property and with the life of his subjects. He held on by strength alone, and strength alone overthrows him.” Many thinkers developed the idea of ​​justice and justified the struggle against tyrants, justifying popular uprisings.

As the irreparable losses associated with armed uprisings and civil wars, and even more so with a global armed conflict, a concept is being affirmed aimed at peaceful resolution national, social and international disputes. But before this concept began to prevail, the nearly fifty years of post-World War II peace had been dominated by an extremely dangerous arms race and mutual threats. The struggle of incompatible interests in these years continued on the world stage in the form of the “Cold War”, which spurred the arms race, which bled “real socialism”, ensuring victory for the West. “The Cold War” is not only a Soviet-American clash, but a global confrontation that excluded the third world war with a head-on collision of two systems and their nuclear missile forces. “Both Americans and Russians,” wrote Arthur Schlesinger (Jr.), “are accustomed to viewing the Cold War as a kind of duel between only two states, as an exclusively Soviet-American monopoly. However, it would be a mistake to reduce the Cold War to two-way game, which was led by the USSR and the USA. The states of Europe were not just spectators attending someone's match. They also took part in " cold war". And, according to the author, the West won this war.

War. One of the most delicate aspects in the matter of nation-building is the increasing role of the use of military force as the state grows. It should be noted that the vast majority of European nations were formed and united by their conquest. Therefore, heresy, rebellion and liberation movements were very cruelly suppressed. And in many third world countries this continues to this day.

For any ruler, maintaining the state is a matter of paramount importance. Both the monarch and the president will do everything possible to prevent foreign invasion of the country or to avoid internal division. And they are ruthless when such threats arise. In the interests of preserving the state, they are increasing military power of their state in order to be able to withstand any threats, and this, in turn, means that they need to constantly improve political system states...

Failure to improve the army and government system could lead to the loss of power. Territorial structure Europe became noticeably simpler as smaller states were subjugated and merged with larger ones. Therefore, war was a powerful engine of unification and various types of improvements.

Why does war happen?

Much has been written about why war occurs. Many thinkers agree that the war had many causes, not just one. Although, in a very broad sense, theories on the issue of wars are divided into two general categories: micro and macro theories - small, close-up a picture centered on individuals as opposed to a larger, panoramic picture centered on entire countries and their interactions.

Microtheories. The roots of microtheory lie largely in biology and psychology. They try to explain war as a result of human genetic aggressiveness. The result of millions of years of evolution is that humans have become fighters in order to obtain food, protect their families and protect their territory. In this, people are no different from many animals. Many anthropologists angrily refute such biological Darwinism, arguing that behavior primitive people varies widely - some of them are aggressive, others are not, which can only be explained by their culture. Psychology-oriented writers explore the personalities of leaders, what makes them who they are, and how they achieve such power over the masses that they can be driven into war.

Biological and psychological theories have some insight into the problem, but they fall far short of explaining the wars themselves. If man is by nature aggressive, then why aren't countries at war all the time? How is it that countries can fight a long series of wars - the Russian-Turkish war around the Black Sea or the Arab-Israeli war - under the leadership of different leaders, who must surely be different in psychologically? Biological and psychological approaches can provide insight into the underlying causes, but not the immediate causes. There is a certain amount of human aggressiveness, but under what conditions does it manifest itself? In order to understand this, let us turn to macrotheories.

Macrotheories. Macrotheory has its roots in history and political science. They focus primarily on the power and ambitions of states. States, not individuals, are the main actors involved. States expand their holdings where they can - as with Germany's eastward advance in the Middle Ages, the "apparent inevitability" of the Americans, the rise of the British Empire and the Soviet takeover of Eastern Europe and Afghanistan. Only a balancing force can stop the movement in order to expand its possessions. One side, fearing growth neighboring country, will strengthen its defenses or enter into alliances in order to counter the power of its neighbor.

Much in international relations can be explained by the proverb “Si vis racem para bellum” (“If you want peace, prepare for war”) and “The enemy of my enemy is my friend.” Political leaders almost automatically sense national interest and power and strive to strengthen them. Does the pursuit of power lead to war or peace? Here again there are two main theories: Balance of power. The oldest and most widespread theory states that peace occurs when states, strengthening their national power and forming alliances, balance one another. Those who dream of expansionism are blocked. According to the theory of the balance of power, large periods of relative peace - between the Peace of Westphalia in 1648 and the wars that broke out as a result French Revolution/1798-1814/, and then from 1815 until the outbreak of World War I in 1914, were a time when European powers balanced each other. When the balance was upset, war began.

Hierarchy of power. Sophisticated analysts call the balance of power a problem squared. Firstly, because calculating the scale of force is so problematic that it is impossible to know how and when the balancing of forces occurs. Some authors note that there were periods of peace when forces were balanced, when states, as far as power was concerned, were arranged in a hierarchical series. It was in times of transition, when this hierarchy was violated, that countries were tempted to start a war. After great war with the final outcome peace reigns, because in this case the balance of forces is well known. If this theory is correct, then attempting to achieve a precise balance of power is completely misguided: it will lead to war because the participating states will think they have a good chance of winning.

Wrong perception. Combining micro- and macro-approaches, some scholars have focused on "perception" or "perception" as key factor war. Both the psychological and strength approaches make a certain contribution, because they are not perfect. It is not the actual situation (which is difficult to understand), but the situation that leaders perceive as such that forces them to make decisions regarding war or peace. They often develop misconceptions when faced with hostility and the development of more perfect weapon in another country, which believes that its actions are for defensive purposes and aimed at overcoming the gap in the field of weapons. John F. Kennedy showed that the Soviets had a missile advantage over us; he achieved a sharp increase in missiles in the United States. This resulted in the Soviets being effectively behind us, and they perceived the American efforts as a threat that they must counter. President Reagan believed that Soviet power was superior to ours and extremely dangerous; he accelerated the development of new rockets to achieve equilibrium. The Soviets perceived this as an aggressive move and countered it with their own new weapons. Both sides were hostage to their own vulnerabilities. As Henry Kissinger brilliantly said: “Absolute security for one power means absolute vulnerability for all others.”

In the misperception theory, the psychological and real worlds collide with each other in the affairs of political leaders. They believe that they are acting defensively, but the picture they create of the situation may be distorted. It is interesting to note that in our time not a single country calls its actions anything other than defensive. Americans in Vietnam viewed their actions as defending the free world; The Soviets in Afghanistan believed they were defending socialism. In their own eyes, a nation is never aggressive. A country under the leadership of its leaders, under the influence of ideology and means mass media can bring herself to such a state of fear that even her most aggressive steps can be explained as pursuing defensive goals. Even Hitler and the Germans during World War II believed that they were defending Germany against hostile states.

Great definition

Incomplete definition ↓

Cool! 15

War is the worst thing that can happen in the life of every person. Sudden attack by Nazi Germany on ordinary people Soviet people. But nothing can break a strong-willed people, they only have Victory ahead of them!

War - there is so much in this word. Just one word carries a lot of fear, pain, screams and cries of mothers, children, wives, losses of loved ones and thousands of glorious soldiers who stood for the lives of all generations... How many children did she leave as orphans, and wives as widows with black scarves on their heads. How many terrible memories she left behind in human memory. War is the pain of human destinies, caused by those who rule at the top and crave power in any way, even bloody.

And if you think carefully, then in our time there is not a single family from whom the war has not taken away or simply maimed someone close to us with bullets, shrapnel, or simply its echoes. After all, we all remember and honor the heroes of the Great Patriotic War. We remember their feat, unity, faith in great victory and a loud Russian “URA!”

The Great Patriotic War can rightfully be called sacred. After all, all people stood up to defend their Motherland, not being afraid of a stray bullet, torture, captivity and much more. Our ancestors rallied so much and went forward to recapture their land from the enemy, on which they were born and raised.

The Soviet people were not broken even by the suddenness of the attack on June 22, 1941; the German fascists attacked in the early morning. Hitler counted on a quick victory, as in many European countries that surrendered and submitted to him with virtually no resistance.

Our people did not have any weapons, but this did not frighten anyone and they walked confidently forward, without giving up their positions, defending their loved ones and their Motherland. The road to victory ran through many obstacles. Militant battles developed both on the ground and in the sky. There was not a single person who did not contribute to this Victory. The young girls who served as medics and carried wounded soldiers from the battlefield, how much strength and courage they had. How much faith they carried with them, giving it to the wounded! The men went boldly into battle, covering with their backs those who were in the rear, their homes and families! Children and women worked in factories at the machines, producing ammunition that brought cherished successes in capable hands!

And no matter what, that moment came, the moment of the long-awaited victory. Army Soviet soldiers after many years of battles she was able to drive the Nazis away from native land. Our hero soldiers reached the borders of Germany and stormed Berlin, the capital of the fascist country. All this happened in 1945. In May, on the 8th, Germany signed a complete surrender. It was at that very time that our ancestors gave us one of the great holidays celebrated on May 9 - Victory Day! A day truly filled with tears in your eyes, great joy in your soul and a sincere smile on your face!

Remembering the stories of grandfathers, grandmothers and people who participated in these hostilities, we can conclude that only a strong-willed, courageous and ready-to-death people could achieve victory!

For younger generation The Great Patriotic War is just a story from the distant past. But this story excites everything inside and makes you think about what is happening in modern world. Think about the wars we see now. Think about the fact that we must not allow another war and prove to the heroic soldiers that it was not in vain that they fell into the ground, that it was not in vain that the soil was saturated with their blood! I want everyone to remember at what price this difficult Victory and the peace over our heads that we now have were achieved!

And in conclusion, I really want to say: “Thank you, Great Warriors! I remember! I'm proud!"

Even more essays on the topic: “War”

How I would like all children on Earth to know about what war is only from the pages of history textbooks. I sincerely hope that someday my wish will come true. But for now, unfortunately, wars on our planet continue.

I will probably never understand how those who start these wars feel. Don’t they really think that the price of any war is human lives. And it doesn’t matter which side won: they are both, in fact, losers, because you can’t bring back those who died in the war.

War means losses. In war, people lose loved ones, war takes away their home, deprives them of everything. Those who were not affected by the war, I think, will never be able to fully understand how terrible it is. It’s hard for me to even imagine how terrible it is to go to bed, realizing that in the morning you can find out that one of your loved ones is no longer there. It seems to me that the fear of losing loved one much stronger than fear for your own life.

How many people do war take away their health forever? How many are disabled? And no one and nothing will return their youth, health, and crippled destinies to them. It’s so scary to lose your health irrevocably, to lose all your hopes at one moment, to realize that your dreams and plans are not destined to come true.

But the worst thing is that war leaves no one a choice: to fight or not - the state decides for its citizens. And it no longer matters whether residents support such a decision or not. War affects everyone. Many are trying to escape the war. But is escape painless? People have to leave their homes, leave their homes, not knowing whether they will ever be able to return to their former lives.

I am convinced that any conflicts should be resolved peacefully, without sacrificing human destinies to war.

Source: sdam-na5.ru

For a person it has great importance whether there is meaning in his life. Every person strives to express himself as much as possible. But personality manifests itself most clearly in crisis situations, such as natural disasters or war.

War - scary time. It constantly tests a person’s strength and requires full dedication. If you are a coward, if you are not capable of patient and selfless work, if you are not ready to sacrifice your comfort or even your life for the sake of a common cause, you are worthless.

Our country was often forced to fight. The most terrible wars, which fell to the lot of the ancestors, are civilians. They demanded the most difficult choice, sometimes completely broke a person’s existing value system, since it was often unclear with whom to fight and for what.

The so-called patriotic wars are the defense of the country from external attack. Everything is clear here - there is an enemy who threatens everyone, ready to become the master in the land of your ancestors, dictate his own rules on it, and make you a slave. At such moments, our people have always demonstrated rare unanimity and ordinary, everyday heroism, manifested in every little thing, be it a fierce battle or duty in the medical battalion, exhausting foot crossings or digging trenches.

Every time the enemy wanted to defeat Russia, he harbored the illusion that the people were dissatisfied with their government, that the enemy troops would be greeted with joy (both Napoleon and Hitler were most likely convinced of this and counted on an easy victory). The stubborn resistance that the people showed them must have surprised them at first, and then terribly enraged them. They didn't count on him. But our people have never been entirely slaves. They felt part of their native land and could not give it up to strangers for desecration. Everyone became heroes - men, fighters, women, and children. Everyone contributed to the common cause, everyone took part in the war, everyone defended their homeland together.

Source: nsportal.ru

72 years have passed since the day when the whole world heard the long-awaited word “Victory!”

May 9th. Good ninth day of May. At this time, when all nature comes to life, we feel how beautiful life is. How dear she is to us! And along with this feeling comes the understanding that we owe our lives to all those who fought, died and survived in those hellish conditions. To those who, without sparing themselves, worked in the rear, to those who died during the bombing of cities and villages, to those whose lives were painfully cut short in fascist concentration camps.

On Victory Day we will gather at the eternal flame, lay flowers, and remember thanks to whom we live. Let’s keep quiet and once again tell them “Thank you!” Thank you for our peaceful life! And in the eyes of those whose wrinkles preserve the horrors of war, remember fragments and wounds, the question is read: “Will you preserve what we shed blood for in those terrible years, will you remember the real price of Victory?”

Our generation has less opportunity to see living combatants and hear their stories about that difficult time. That’s why meetings with veterans are so dear to me. When you, war heroes, remember how you defended your Motherland, your every word is imprinted on my heart. In order to convey to the future generation what they heard, to preserve the grateful memory of the great feat of the victorious people, so that no matter how many years have passed since the end of the war, they will remember and honor those who conquered the world for us.

We have no right to forget the horrors of this war so that they do not happen again. We have no right to forget those soldiers who died so that we could live now. We must remember everything... Our duty to the eternally living soldiers of the Great Patriotic War, before you, veterans, before the blessed memory of the fallen, I see it as living your life honestly and with dignity, so that through your deeds you can strengthen the power of the Motherland.

In this article we will touch on a very painful and, in my opinion, important topic for any person called "What does war and peace mean for a person." Let's look alphabetically deeper into the meaning of the word home and the word World perspective . It will look higher , "top down", and planetary, human, "down up".

Our view is formed when we tune in to some topic, some action, or when we find ourselves in some difficult situation. life situation. Changes external environment, the conditions around us are usually for the worse and what we do: namely, we begin to collect all our internal capabilities, positions, views, structures, attitudes - because our individual view is formed from all of this.
How do we see this situation? We see not just with our (physical) eyes, but as if we perceive this situation with our capabilities. As a rule, we often with our folded gaze WE DON'T SEE deeper meaning inherent in the worst and negative situation that is happening around us or somewhere with someone. We assess the situation according to our positions, attitudes, dividing it into two sides, white And black, not seeing that there are deep shades that lead to other meanings.
Destruction, fall– this is not only a negative action. Let's imagine that at the entire course of our life is a positive phenomenon.

home– this is positive.
Death– this is positive.
Disease- this is positive.

And then it turns on, with what look at this. There is a superior position and a inferior position. And the higher Will and position is always right .
Superior Will of the Father in the form of a military cleansing of the Planet can only happen under these conditions, no matter how hard it is for a person in physics. Therefore, now in new Metagalactic conditions There are so many military conflicts going on (Syria, Ukraine, and so on).

What means « war» ?

First, read the wording home in 19 dictionaries . So that you can compare with the option that you will read below.

« IN» –
« Y» - Hierarchically enters matter
"ON THE"– leading her to Absolute matter

Various extremes arise: on the one hand, knowing the everyday, usually human Meanings of words War, as a rule, it is destruction, heaviness, suffering, death, agony and grief - everything is very bad for a person. On the other hand, a person begins to think, analyze, and take non-standard actions at the level of instincts in order to save his life and that of his loved ones.

Two options for understanding:

• First option- This is the struggle between good and evil for justice and truth.
• Second option– this is when a person (old matter) resists manifestation in matter (in physics).

There is resistance to new, transforming, large-scale, global processes development. We understand that, as in a fairy tale, the forces of good must defeat the forces of evil - this is a mythical or mythological view. People's attitudes and interpretations that justify killing people for the sake of punishing the guilty.

In military confrontation there is a principle of conquest, defending one’s rights, freedoms, methods - in a not entirely human (power animal) way.
War is born out of the inability or unwillingness of two sides or one to reach peace agreements. A different perception of a person, when war is simply not acceptable and where it is necessary to have accumulated Will And Wisdom to be able to negotiate. And, finding himself in such difficult living conditions, a person is forced to change, transform, rebuild under the pressure of aggressive external conditions. As a rule, a person undergoes a switch, restructuring, rethinking of values, new Meanings and Essence of what is happening are included, against the backdrop of constant stress.
Home Essence wars- this is the burning of planetary negativity (for example, historical incorrect layers and much more), collected on one territory of a country, state, region.

What means« world»?

From the beginning we read the designation of the word World in 23 dictionary .

"M"- Matter
"AND" -
"R"– Reasonable

"World"– this is where there is a peaceful life without war, where there is a peaceful path of human development.Will Father included in the Hierarchical Absolute matter and The world of human life by the Father.

World person- this is what we see around us, have with all the perspective of our lives, with all our capabilities.
Real World – this is a constant dynamics of development without resistance to the Father, without military action. You can get acquainted with a deeper understanding and decoding of the word Peace in the article . U Father there is no contradiction between these two words. Gradually this line is erased, where Will of the Father enters matter and leads to the World of life by the Father.

And the following happens. Two different situations: first ( war) there is resistance to the Father and a second ( world) - this is when there is no resistance to the Father, if we remove the word “resistance” - there is simply a gradual process of restructuring, transformation, development of human life. What war So what world lead to one whole: namely, to the DEVELOPMENT and TRANSFORMATION of man (matter) by the Father. Same result and same goal. Both peace and war ultimately have one ultimate goal: to rebuild humanity in the Father, only in different ways and in different ways.

If we look from matter from bottom to top at these Meanings, then this is the position of the Planetary Observer, where it is difficult to see all the hidden processes and the depth of the action taking place behind the scenes. And here our observer position, which we will take, is important. And only a person who has a higher Metagalactic position of the Observer will see and decipher these events as the Father sees it.If we do not resist what the Father reveals and manage to rebuild ourselves, accept the new that gives Father for a person, after all To my father it is clearer how to develop and transform us.
The problem with people is that a person looks at the same picture, event, but in different ways, since each person has his own accumulations, records in the Spirit (experience), and they do not always express human principles. Unfortunately, the animal principle of development, certain trends of the past era in the expression of the lower globe of life (demonic), where different cultural values ​​and religious traditions are intertwined, prevails more. And it turns out that one people looks and sees one thing, and another, the same situation, sees it differently. And it turns out that perception does not fit into Meanings And Essence, as well as lack of information on one side and the other, or deliberate distortion of true information ( information wars, stuffing and so on).Disagreement and disagreement based on, as a rule, religious fanaticism, extremism, radicalism and so on, or between individuals and even entire nations, countries due to unequal perception of depth pictures of the world. In most cases, this happens due to a person’s low intellectual capabilities, his lack of education, intolerance, and underdevelopment, unfortunately. And also because of excessive ambition, arrogance, exclusivity and impunity of the leaders of countries and states who do not respect the interests of other countries and peoples, imposing their democratic (demonic) values. And to get away from such incorrect, dead-end, involutionary options modern development. The Father is transferring humanity to a new type of relationship in new Metagalactic conditions, to interactions between people, countries, and states.

Confederation

Confederate principle of life brings to man the basic law of the Father “First among equals or First equal”
Confederation- this is a new type of interaction with the Father, where there is equality of all in hierarchical competence.
- this is a society of people (Initiates, Employees, Hypostases), united by one goal, task, achieving the solution of this task on the basis of hierarchical competence, representing Father yourself.

This law from the point of view Father creates man as a true man. To be truly human, you need to be “ First among equals and to be equal among first.”. Such a person respects every person for creating him Father, and he is the same cell (Omega) from Father(Alpha) like yourself. We are all different and on different paths of development, with different expressiveness. We also need to see if we only achieve equality, as was the case during the USSR, then we can achieve herdism and facelessness, and each person differs from another person in that we are all unique in Father. With our uniqueness, we have our own destiny from the Father, and only we can fulfill this destiny: to live our own path and express the Father only in this unique way because each person has his own unique

In conclusion: the confederative principle of life helps to interact with the Father and support each other, increasing each other’s capabilities. And then such a person grows much more powerful, more correctly. Teaches how to properly organize interaction in a team and among themselves, when everyone is equal before the Father, but all are different specialists, working in a team together and harmoniously. Consequently, the Father is involved in this command action. All together, when each is coupled with the Father and with each other, are coupled according to the principle “First among equals”- performed Confederal principle in completeness. In such a team, the Father manifests himself more, deeper, more powerfully than to each individual. Read more about this on the page MGKR - Metagalactic Civil Confederation of Russia.