(10-15-2015, 03:27 AM)earth_spirit Wrote:(10-15-2015, 01:20 AM)Aion Wrote: It is easy to get in to such a victim mentality
Not really. Live by the sword, die by the sword. The only people whom "Warriors" are truly victimizing is themselves.
(10-15-2015, 01:20 AM)Aion Wrote: I see it that the opposite of war is not peace, it is leisure.
That works if you believe "War" means the same thing as Struggle.
(10-15-2015, 01:20 AM)Aion Wrote: I see war and peace as being two sides of the same coin.
Your previous statement "War and Peace are not opposites actually" is difficult to reconcile with this one. I don't mean to nit pick, but your outlook appears to be lacking in consistency.
(10-15-2015, 01:20 AM)Aion Wrote: This war does not cease until you pass in to Sixth Density. It is the microcosm of the war between polarities internalized.
The cannibalistic, dog eat dog warfare ends with the beginning of 4th density positive. I would even go as far as to say that it also ends in 4th negative, when the initial struggle for power has ended and order is established.
It would appear that you have a rather wide and romanticized understanding of "war". I think it is a bit of a stretch to use it in the context of fighting wild animals for survival.
(10-15-2015, 01:20 AM)Aion Wrote: It is funny as you seem to insult the warrior.
I don't find it funny that you see conflict where none exists.
Third density war provides unique and valuable experiences of anguish and seperation to the Creator. It also provides a speed boost in terms of developing polarity toward either STS or STO.
But apart from those two reasons which are quite important on their own, there is no justification for the existence of third density warfare. In order for it to exist, there must be a surplus peaceful citizens and workers on whose backs the noble, cannibalistic Warriors can "wage war" with their own species. After the Harvest, those who still want to "wage war" with their own people will have to go elsewhere to play their third density war games.
I said 'seem', although I still see it, but you say not. There is little point to me saying anything more. I am well acquainted with that viewpoint and I will simply suggest that you perhaps have a your own romanticized view. I feel you already have a very biased perception of war, as do I, and they are likely not reconciliable.
I admit, your 'tone' comes across as condescending but since you love to point out hypocrisy Ill just jump right in to, 'yes, Im wrong, I contradict myself, ignore me'. It's all me and in my head, Im the one with all the distortions and confusion. Thanks for your reflection. C'est la vie.
I'm just going to agree to disagree. I respect your viewpoint even if I don't share it.
Note: Oh wait, maybe I should use a more peaceful way of talking. People seem to like me more when I am not abrasive. Sorry about that.
The mentality of 'peace' is ironic to me. "Not going to be peaceful? Go somewhere else!" How very accepting and compassionate...
Wait, I'm supposed to be polite, aren't I? Otherwise I will have to go to another planet.