If a person wants to have a war and another person wants peace, how can they coexist?

Nefarious people will always exploit the goodwill of those that are not.
They will play dirty and exploit and subvert the rules to eventually abolish them, relying on the other side not doing the same.
Perhaps that is the main reason that, inevitably, societies eventually break down, no matter how idealistic or constructed to be “stable” they were in the beginning.

Ask FDR and US in 1941 with Japan wanting a war ?

The war will start.

They can’t co-exist. It is as simple as that.

You lost me at this part: “And, now that I think about it, that’s the answer: the only way to avoid conflict and have opposing views of love/war, life/death at the same time, is the lack of privacy. Being accountable at all times whatever you do. Only then can we learn to be more responsible. Otherwise, wars will continue to exist.”

That is, not only does Big Brother ruin life for everyone who wants privacy and/or freedom, it also doesn’t even solve the problem the way you framed it.

That is, your solution is to overpower the person who wants violence, which is not living in harmony – it’s overpowering the person who wants violence, and preventing them from doing what they want.

And, if that is the solution, then it does not require Big Brother. It just requires preventing violence.

The war thirsty nation can “demand tribute for their patience”, over and over.

By murdering eachother in cold blood.

I was thinking of another example, a romantic relationship where one partner wants to argue all the time and the other doesn’t. The one who doesn’t might retreat and want to be left alone, but I don’t see the relationship working because the one who wants to right will be incessant and the one who wants to be left alone can only hide so much.

No coexistence. You can’t survive a war by being peaceful.

In everyday human interactions. It’s not healthy to allow someone to bully you and do nothing about it. Also you cannot live a peaceful life with a narcissist. After a while of being abused with unwanted criticism, being ridiculed, laughed at and gaslighted a strong peaceful person must stand up and walk away and not take it anymore.

It seems to me that the usual traditional answer to the title question “If a person wants to have a war and another person wants peace, how can they coexist?” is, one or both of them can compromise.

Wanting something but not getting it, does not prevent coexistence.

Write a book.

One side, will have to die.

The war monger would win if the other side does not fight back.

@MrGrimm888 Not necessarily.

@JLeslie Wanting peace is not the same thing as not fighting back when attacked.

@Zaku I agree.

@Zaku Agreed. Not necessarily.

I’m going to throw Japan in, here.
After WWII, Japan vowed to forever be passive. They have mostly held to that, until China claimed The South China Sea…
There is the constant threat of North Korea, firing missiles over their territory…
There are pirates. Still…
Somehow…

I don’t know the exact date, but they “reinterpreted,” their pacifist constitution, and have been designing and manufacturing offensive weaponry and machinery.
The JUST launched their first brand new submarine, with the sole purpose of countering China.
Surely American diplomats have been trying to get Japan back in that mode, because America pledged to protect Japan, as part of the treatises that ended the second world war…

I encourage you, to research why. As it was NOT, something Japan took lightly.

Obviously, what makes this extra relevant ro this discussion, us that the US, was trying not to get involved in WWII. They were in peace talks, while Japan was planning the surprise attack on Pearl Harbor.

Even more interesting, the US eventually used 2 nuclear bombs, on Japan (the only nukes EVER used in combat.)

There are countless debates, about sustainable peace. But most fail to take into account that some nations have NO INTEREST in peace. None, not for any reason.
Mostly, these are tyrannically led nations, Oligarchs, or Communist countries, but many Middle Eastern nations, have been in different degrees of military conflict, for thousands of years.
Ironically. Iran, was once famous, as a very peaceful, trading place. Reliefs, and artwork there, often depicted people of different ethnicity and race, with swords sheathed, and open hands. This was how peace was illustrated, a few thousand years ago.
And where is Iran now, as far as being peaceful?

I’m not a violent person. But, I’ve had to be, on occasion.
On a personal level, Iike between just two people, sustainable peace, can be difficult.
Usually, because one of the people, is incapable of letting things go.

When you mix in religion, and “class,” this exponentially complicates things, because people will not even bend, on religious beliefs.

Many times, “to secure peace, is to prepare for war.”
I unfortunately agree, with that quote.

I will add a second option. Being extremely intimidating.
But. Even military might, doesn’t mean anything, unless you occasionally display it…

Obama drew a red line, for Russia. Putin called his bluff.
Obama wasn’t a war monger. YES. He ordered the deaths of a lot of US citizens, but they were “terrorists.”..
The US could have loaded up, and headed that direction with everything we had, and Putin would have tucked tail.
Obama was (rightly) concerned about nuclear weapons being used.
The US may have several hundred less warheads than Russia, but the US has enough nuclear weapons, to destroy the world.

So. Now Crimea, is Russian.
And of course, eventually, Russia fully invaded Ukraine.
And despite them loosing perhaps 200,000 troops and countless war machines, the war goes on. The Russian people, don’t seem to want the war either. But they can’t unseat Putin…

Perhaps the biggest issue, is that the behavior of so very few, are really what keeps this cycle of violence turning.

One of the most interesting movies I’ve ever seen, was “The Last King of Scotland,” starring Forrest Whitaker, and James McAvoy.
It tells a timeless tale, of leaders in Africa. And how they often go from revolutionary hero, to warlord. I HIGHLY recommend this movie, in regards to this subject.

A way bigger problem, is the international arms market. See “Lord of War.”..

If a person wants war, they don’t know how to do peace.
If a person wants peace they can still do war.

I once read that a very literate person can write like an illiterate person.
But a very illiterate person can’t write like a literate person.
Mark Twain and Margaret Mitchell came to mind.

@MrGrimm888 Yes, there are so many interesting related subjects.

It can work if they don’t have to interact with each other.

But what if they want to wage war on one of your best friends @YARNLADY?

war between political entities are more complicated. Defense is a relative term. When a peaceful
group is attacked by a war monger, there is no escape from destruction.

Not if the peaceful entity gets pissed.

Sometimes. War snowballs, like in the 1900’s. The aggressor, in my opinion, will never relent, unless they are forced to.

Iran seems to be HIGHLY upset, that Israel exists, AT ALL.
They don’t share a border.
But ideologies can cross oceans, and eventually space.

The radical right of the Iranian government, IS actively pursuing the downfall of Israel, and vice versa…

There was a time, when I think I could have comfortably opined that Iran was the perpetual aggressor.
Leaked American intelligence, showed that the US has been spying on Israel and that the IDF has been planning an attack on Iran for many years. The pagers and walkie-talkies, were proof (if one needs any,) that IDF plans preceeded the atrocities of October 7th.

I believe that Netanyahu perceives, that the only way to protect Israel AND his religious ties to the land, was to cripple their “enemies.”

Many of the people currently in Lebanon, and likely some of Hezbolah’s soldiers, are all people displaced by different military conflicts.

I’ve seen some absolutely disgusting things over the recent Gaza invasion, posted by IDF troops.
It’s going to be 100% impossible, for the Palestinians and Israelis, to sustain peace.

In that specific case, it doesn’t even matter, that Israel killed SO many, and intentionally destroyed Gaza. The ideologies are still exactly the same.
Even America, can’t kill enough people, to kill an ideology.

We will NEVER stop fighting, over resources. Especially fresh water, going into the next 50–100 years.

BUT. If people would stop hating others, over religious beliefs, that would be INVALUABLE to sustainable peace.

It should be mentioned, that often people use religion, to drive their personal aspirations.
Very much, like Trump in America.

The religious, are easily talked into violence, and violence is the first place the religious go, if they perceive that something offended them.
It is precisely this history of normalizing hurting or killing people, over religion, that keeps the flames of war lit.
There are thousands of years, of religious beef, very much actively guiding the shape of the ever evolving world.

Well the US was clamoring for peace in the 40s, and the president refused to join in WWII….until Pearl Harbor.
“We have awakened a sleeping giant.”

Just for context: The colonies placed an oil embargo on Japan before that, and kind of forced their hand.

For whatever reason, we didn’t want to fight and they did. In answer to the OP.

As long as greed exist there will never be peace.

@Zaku: Sorry for the late reply, it’s life as usual. Anyway, I never meant big brother “overpowering”, in fact, I never used that word. I just mean everyone should freely express their own ideas in a healthy way without infringing on the others’. So, if I want peace and you want war, both people should express their freedom without hurting each other. What I mean is, people with unhealthy views must avoid conflict with people with healthy views until they find a proper resolution or relief valve. In this sense, big brother doesn’t mean only surveillance, it means confronting you with your own ideas until you can put them into context. I don’t mean censorship either and the only way I see it is if ais are in charge. –

That’s relevant Loli, but Japan only “needed” SO much oil because it had to feed it’s war machines.
With it’s plans for military expansion, Japan knew the US would eventually be pulled in, because of proximity in The Pacific.
Japan used peace talks, to mask their intentions.
Pearl Harbor, was a target of opportunity, and there may never have been such a strategic blunder by the US, before or after.

Considering Japan’s mission of expansion, Pearl Harbor was a brilliant preemptive attack.
It surpassed the expectations of the one’s who planned it.
And it completely crippled the US’s Pacific Navy.
The mistake, was not pushing into the west coast of America.
I’ve heard estimates, that they could have made it as far east as Chicago, before the US would have been able to counter attack.
Instead. Yes. They unwittingly defeated themselves…

My point is, it seems that a party must ALWAYS be ready for a possible threat, especially if they desire peace.
There are still plenty of humanity, that see being peaceful as a weakness.

Sometimes, an opportunity presents itself, and one can take advantage or not. Ideally, to be defensive, and/or even have powerful offensive capabilities, should deter attacks.

I still think, America/NATO, should have destroyed the Russian convoy, that was stuck in a line in Ukraine.
That would have been Russia’s Pearl Harbor. They would have lost their entire western flank.

The Ukrainians, just want peace with Russia. Unfortunately. America elected a corrupt POTUS with proven ties to Russia…
Ukraine’s invasion of Russia, has been in an effort to get better negotiations for peace. Not an act of unprovoked malice…

The US made an agreement with Ukraine, to rid itself of former USSR or future nuclear weapons, in exchange for US protection from Russia.

Without their nukes, and with the US failing to hold up their end, they are in the throws of a massive and infamously brutal war.

I KNOW, there are Russian citizens, who want peace.
But they have Putin, as their leader. And he’s killed countless people, to maintain his grip on Russia.

I personally, NEVER wanted ANY of America’s wars or conflicts, after WWII, and maybe Korea.
It doesn’t matter, that I want peace.

When I was working as a LEO, and/or bouncing, I NEVER wanted problems. But…
People are violent, self serving, selfish, greedy, and insecure.
So. Against my wishes, I was often forced to be violent.
Violent enough, to nullify a situation…But the peace I always kept, had to come at the cost of being violent.
“Please leave,” rarely ever works.

As long as we allow heavily flawed people great power, we will have violence.

Unprovoked violence, is a VERY human thing.

“Angles on the sidelines
Baffled and confused.
Father blessed them all with reason.
And this is what they choose.”

”Monkey killing, monkey killing, monkey over pieces of the ground.”
“Silly monkeys
Give them thumbs, they forge a blade.”
“And when there is one, they are bound to divide it.”
“Right in two.”..... – TOOL.