Remember, sayings and sound bites are repeated by people who agree with the particular idea encapsulated. They usually contain some truth, but are not universal. Most sayings can be refuted. This one is easily so.
Some wars solve things. Rome pretty much solved its Carthage problem, I would say. Ditto for the American War for Independence. But some wars cause more problems than they solve.
Part of the problem with these simplistic attitudes is in seeing war as something unique and given to labels. War is just a process of policticized killing, diplomacy by other means. It's one political tool among many for nations to use when they believe it's necessary. Like most political animals, people who say "war never solved anything" see the tool as the problem, not the hearts and minds of people. The whole political spectrum shares this problem - they think banning the tool or the process will solve what is essentially a hearts and minds problem.
Got gun violence? Ban guns.
Got drug addiction? Ban drugs.
Got religious disagreements? Ban religious observance.
Got hate or racial problems? Ban free speech.
Got acoholics? Prohibition is the answer. - oh yeah, we tried that one...
Got teen pregnancy problems? Ban...something - birth control, abortion, sex education, coed classrooms, abstinence programs - heII, just ban everything.
I could go on and on, but you get the idea.
Back to the original question - you notice it was not bans that keeps nazisim relegated to the fringes (except for places like in Germany, where it is actually banned by law) - it's almost complete disapproval and condemnation. Ditto with the Stalinistic form of communism, which only persists in, as far as I know, North Korea, which is slowly strangling in its own incompetence, but is largely helped along by the general disapproval of most of the world.
Bottom line, hearts and minds are the key, not tools. War is just a political tool.
My full time job is in the health industry. A few years ago, I had a patient who was in the German Army during WWII. It is completely false to state anything along the lines of "when the nazi's came". Especially in relation to Russia or the Ukraine. My patient was in the German Army. But, e was not and never was a Nazi. He and the his comrades in arms were, regular army soldiers who had been ordered to do a job. Such as invade Russia. He once told me, no friend of his in the German Army were Nazi's. in fact, he hated the nazi's and everything they stood for. When the war ended, he got his family out of Germany and immigrated. Because he did not want to be a German.
To ask if WWII was unnecessy, you also have to ask the question about WWI. WWII was an extension to WWI. as Hitler wanted to regain land that were lost to Germany after the first war. And finish off what German wanted to gain. Also, Hitler blamed the Jews for Germany losing the first war.
Well, the world is controlled by a global banking cartel.
And we're relived to know that someone is controlling the world.
And America's military is the enforcer for that global banking cartel.
Good; it's better to be the enforcer than the one getting beat down.
And there you have it.
Cuba, Iran and North Korea, their banks aren't part of the global banking cartel. Neither were all those communists countires, during the Cold War, but we straigned that out.
And really, what did Iraq ever do that was any worse than any other mid-east country?
Well, Saddam Hussein accepted something other than US Dollars in exchange for oil, that's what. Kept doing it, so he got his backside handed to him. Twice. And then he choked on a rope.
Give it some thought. It all makes sense.
Oh sure, stir the pot. I haven't seen Sarge in a while, but I bet he'll show up now.
War is with us always and who is to blame is up to interpretation. None of us know what really happened to make men in authority go mad, especially those of us fortunate enough not to have been there. I am glad your friend lived this long, Inyun, and I am glad he had a friend like you to the end.
I like to think WWII solved a big problem with Hitler and Hirohito, but it also made Stalin stronger. If not for the Korean war, where would we get Hundai's and Kia's?
Seems to this old GI, that everything since Korea was designed to enrich the Military-Industrial complex Eisenhower warned us about.
How can we continually be engaged in wars without a Declaration of War?
The best part about War is every single great advancement known came as an outcome of our futile strife to own another's land. All the weapons throughout history including the freedom of speech we share online, even online technology was advanced and driven by the need for generals to communicate very fast, every modern form of communication, every modern form of transportation, and every modern form of preservation (Thank you Alppert) comes form war.
Without our design as humans to control each other, we would not be our species. We'll go to space.
I wouldn't say that war never solves anything. I would assert that war should be a last resort and is also the worst possible solution to anything.
Worst possible because it is inherently evil in its reductive premise that people are not human beings, but inanimate objects--to be traded for a taking a specific hill or winning a particular battle--using only the cold calculus of logistics to determine who lives or dies. It dehumanizes soldiers by exposing them to, and immersing them in, a set of inhuman conditions.
It is by far the highest price any country can pay to solve an international conflict.