You may deny it as much as you want but greed is just one part of the dark side of human

nature, we

wouldn’t admit it, of course, but we would very much like to be in the spotlight. The one in charge, the one in

power. Greediness, selfishness, ego, non-contentment, insecurities, ambition; these are parts of us that makes

us human. Think about it, without all these, would the world war 1 ever happen? Would the world war 2 even

exist? Or would even the word “war” exist? It’s so hard to see or envision the world without all these things

because by that, it’s like imagining a world without humans. And imagining a world without humans, there

would be so much peace and harmony that it’ll be deafening.

When the First World War happened, the context of war isn’t at all new to humanity. We all already

know the cycle of engaging to a battle where some of us might die and hoping and may be even praying that

more of your enemy’s dies. The world war was extremely bloody, drowning Europe for five years with

screams of terror, detonating bombs, gunshots and dead bodies. The real objective of the world war 1 is to

be the war that end all wars, as how America proclaimed it. Then if ending a war means engaging into a war,

they might have as well used another word rather than making it sounds ridiculously ironic. It’s like saying that

you could only put down a fire by adding some more fire and help it spread a little more.

In both wars, we should have and must have learned three things: First is that the struggle for power

is very real. How people would kill and drag their own kind to the ground just to be on top or bring a city or

an island down just to prove their point. The second thing is that there might be no other way to end a war

but to start another war. That the only thing that could counteract death is more death and the only thing that

could neutralize violence is to give out more guns. And the third and the most important thing that we should

have learned: In the reality of war; no one actually wins. It’s neither a game nor a competition, it’s about

survival; someone would definitely die, someone would definitely mourn and someone would definitely kill.

While the liberalist would believe that these wars are just challenges to the interconnection or

interaction of all nations, that it’s the time’s form of strengthening their relationships. Then I have one

question: do all the bloods that flowed out due to all the wars necessary in strengthening international

relations?
 The wars in the 21st century are no different to these previous wars. They still all revolve around

conquering and defending.

Tony Blair, a political editor says that religion is the world’s biggest source of conflict. He believes

that the acts of terrorism are perpetrated by people motivated by abuse of religion. He believes that it’s the

perversion of faith. Perversion in a way that we are no longer talking about bibles and rosaries or sacredness,

we are talking about killing; shotguns, grenades, a bit of prayer here and then and more guns in defending

their faith. Tony Blair says that the battle is no longer about extreme political ideology, like those during the

20th century but because of cultural and religious indifferences.