Hey guys, it's 1:30am and I been up for like nearly an hour and a half writing up this essay due tomorrow
Basically I need help, i'm not happy with it. I tried to structure it as good as I could in terms of words; the teacher promoted the use of a thesaurus... I'm very tired, lol... But what can I do to make my argument sound more believable, also critique the sentence structure, use of words and help me make it 'passable'.
Here it is;
---
There is always an alternative to War?
Disparity in the world is inevitable, therefore peace can never be resolved, and thus war is provoked.
There will always be a difference in opinion, and war eradicates from differences (i.e. beliefs, societal issues, laws). Nobody can generalize one collective view without causing any conflict and commotion – which is relatively a disagreement that arouses from dissimilarities in views. A good illustration for a view that weeps war is religion.
Most people would deem peace as the equitable alternative to war. But that’s just a preconception that we would all aspire. It’s what we want to occur, or continue to consider. But we need to reflect on the real nurturers of war. As long as political affairs continue to rule this world, war shall remain animate. As long as there is religion, there will be a continuing conflict of views, thus can and will generate ongoing hostility.
There are so many firm positioned sentinels that stand in the way for peace that it can never be resolved. Even if religion and politics never existed, our own countries themselves will be under on going war fighting over ‘resources.’
Yes, resources are another thing that eradicates war. A prime example is the current invasion on Iraq. Iraq is proven to be occupying one of the leading preserves of oil in the world - which remains a conscious threat to America. Many believe that America intended to go in and reap a substantial amount of control on the oil there, to prevent any supremacy collapse - as America is one of the most economical funded countries in the world today.
Despite the fact governments say war is their last option, it’s basically there only option. Or what they require to attain what they want, or to prove. Violence can also be used as an example to show resilience.
To me, war unconditionally comes down to defending yourself, and your honor. Violence also in a sense is necessary; especially in a time of war. Violence has stopped extensive conflicts. A good instance is during World War 2 when America dropped the A-bomb on Hiroshima. America could have easily set it off on an untenanted region, but doing what they did showed that America is willing to go to any measure to defend themselves. Subsequently, the war was in doubly shortened and resolved a form of tranquility.
In conclusion, war needs to be accepted. Bias as it may seem, it’s true. No point us enduring our lives in denial that one day peace will reign utmost. All we can do is acknowledge the fact war is inevitable, and that in every bad comes good; surprisingly enough, war has funded what the world is today, even in its positive influences; e.g. America’s solitary birth raised from defeat of British rule.
Threats will remain constant as long as we humans linger in existence. It’s human instinct to protect ourselves and comparatively resort to violence, especially when it comes to our beliefs. Thus inescapably we need to fight back, especially when under the rule of politics, war remains the only option…
---
Ehh?
Linear Mode
