CAN ANYONE HELP ME FIGURE OUT THE MEANING TO THIS QUOTATION BY BERTRAND RUSSELL?

Question

"WAR DOES NOT DETERMINE WHO IS RIGHT- ONLY WHO IS LEFT"

PLEASE GIVE ME SOME EXAMPLES

Answer 1

war does not solve anything....the victor is not necessarily  morally correct....it depends on who has the biggest guns!

              "Might is Right"

What he means is...that the winner is the strongest physically...with more manpower, weapons etc....but that does not make them morally right.....and the only real result is that many people die ( on both sides) and war determines who is left ( alive)

He is juxtaposing left & right to make an impact.

Answer 2

WAR DOES NOT DETERMINE WHO IS RIGHT- ONLY WHO IS LEFT is a play on words to make a point .

War is an argument between 2 entities that ultimately resorts to the use of weapons and the killing of the opposition to determine who will win the argument. Therefore, it is not a discussion or debate or a meeting of the minds to end the  disagreement peacefully, instead the greatest rate of destruction or attrition( the number of ultimate dead) will ultimately prove which side is the victor. That side will have the larger number of survivors. So you could also say WAR DOES NOT DETERMINE WHO IS RIGHT- ONLY WHO Survived. Because of this war is an ineffective way to solve grievances.

Example

US Civil War- this war was fought over slavery. - 620,000 men  total perished. More men died in this war than all other U S combat combined.

These figures illustrate that the larger union army suffered one death per  8 or 9 men while the rebs lost one soldier in 3 or 4.

The Union armies had from 2,500,000 to 2,750,000 men.

Death toll 360,222

The Confederate strength, was from 750,000 to 1,250,000.

death toll 258,000

        Of every 1,000 Federals in battle, 112 were wounded.

        Of every 1,000 Confederates, 150 were wounded.

Answer 3

Rome fought three Punic Wars with Carthage.

At the end of the Third Punic War Rome totally destroyed Carthage, and killed or enslaved ALL the inhabitants, destroyed or burned ALL the buildings, and even plowed salt into the ground so nothing would grow there anymore.

There were no Carthaginians left.  (It's a pun).

Russel was a pacifist and in my opinion, in many respects a fool, but in this case he is more or less right.

What he is saying is that winning a war does not prove your cause is "just" or "right". Lots of people in Russel's time still thought that "we must prevail because our cause is just" or "God is on our side". Russell is pointing out that winning a war only proves that your side won.  In that he is right on target.

Where he is wrong is that he extends this line of thought to  imply that this means war is meaningless and unnecessairy.  The general line of the pacifist is that "War never solves anything"...which history shows to be fundamentlally false...just ask the Carthiginians...if you can find one...or the American Indians. Loosing the Indian Wars had a pretty fundamental effect on their lifestyle.

Russel is right when he says the morality of the cause you are fighting for has absolutely no effect on the outcome of a battle or a war.  Wars are won or lost based upon things like who has better tanks, who has a better trained army, who has a larger army, who has better weapons, etc.  Good guys can, and do, loose battles and loose wars. Bad guys can, and do, win wars.    The biggest determining factor in if you are going to win a war or not is how much money you have spent on your military in the five to ten years before the war starts, and how hard your military trains; not how moral or enlightened or democratic your society is.

Most people would say the Dutch were the "good guys" in the Battle they fought against the n***s in the spring of 1940.  They tried to stay out of the war, they stayed neutral, they didn't attack anyone...and the n***s took over Holland in less than a week. Being "right" didn't matter. At the end of the day the n***s were left in control of Holland and the Dutch were left as a conquered population that was subject to the n***s every whim.  The war didn't prove who was right, only who was left.

However the n**i take over of Holland also demonstrates where Russell is wrong.  War is important becuase the consequences of loosing a war are incredibly severe, (just ask the South Vietmanese) and to someone like Russell who was born at the height of British Imperial supremeicy, pretty much unimaginable. (Pacificsts always turn up in rich, militarily strong states you will notice.) The fact that Holland was "morally right" and the n***s were "morally wrong" didn't matter one whit in the outcome of the Battle for Holland. In fact it probably worked against the Dutch as the n**i terror bombing of Rotterdam (a basicly immoral act) is what pushed the Dutch to finally surrender.  Even after the bombing, Rotterdam, and the population thereof  was in better shape than Lenningrad or Stalingrad would be after their battles, or Warsaw or Berlin would be after the Soviet finally liberated them. In those cases the Soviet (and n**i) governments didn't care about morality and didn't care how many civilians died, so they just kept fighting...long after a more moral government would have surrendered in order to spare the civilian population.

In that sense Russel's quote would seem to argue AGAINST Russel's pacifist views...namely if one wants to be the country that is "left" at the conclusion of the war, one had darn well make sure that one's military  is stronger than any of one's neighbors.  

Answer 4

i don't think that literal meaning applies here.....right and left in this quote surely don't refers to directions do they?

well,its the consequences of war that we are talking about here....wars are fought in the first place not to determine who are on the right side and who are on the wrong side,but instead it is more of a show of force.....war is actually a medium and the best way to test the military superiority of a nation against another......that is all....all the reasons that they gave us i.e. to fight terrorism are mere cover up stories to blind the eyes of society.....and so does the rest of the world.....the only thing left behind after the war is the bad effects of it.....the killed lives,destruction and poverty followws after.......i leave the rest to you......

Answer 5

just because you go to war doesnt mean you did it for the right reason, doesnt mean you had the right to do it, doesnt mean you are the top dog...the one with all the answers....

only who is left  means you are the one that survived.

Look at any war....  Lets say USA and Iraq.   Just because USA invaded doesnt mean they were right or wrong or that they had the right or didnt, going to war isnt the deciding factor in justifying a war.  There are times that the "bad guy" wins a war....look at Hitler and the battles he won!   Just because he won those doesnt mean his way was right!!!!

Only who is left....means sadam is history!  and that was determined by the USA.  

some people will argue that God led them to war and chose to inspire them to eliminate sadam or led them to find him.   But I will leave that to you to decide.  

Answer 6

this quote means that war is something nations may do to try and show strength, and though sometimes it is necessary, the outcome is determined by who has more people and supplies.

"...only who is left."

This means that the one who started/wins the war is not better, in fact,they are on the wrong path toward peace.

For example, in school bullies may pick on other kids to try boost themselves up. They are merely on the wrong path.

Hope this helped you(:

Answer 7

I think the other answers are too deep. What he is saying is that at the end of war the victor may not be the one with right on his side but is the one still standing or to put it more simply, war can't tell who is right or wrong only who is still standing at the end of it.