In a technical sense, we all know it's possible to win a war. However, I agree with Einstein on this matter, because in a war even the "winning" side comes out of the conflict worse off than before. The only exception is a war of conquest - and those no longer really occur.

It all depends on what you call a war? Can we win the war on terrorism? Probably not. Should we still fight it? Absolutely. It is the right thing to do. Can we win a war to expel an invader from a territory? Yes. That is a winnable war. Does that mean wars should never be fought? Hell no.

I agree, for since an earthquake is a natural disaster and cannot be prevented,it can't be won.It causes devastation from sever to minor.Wars are manmade and are devastating in different levels also.But no war was ever really won by any side for each has losses of life,and the side that has the least amount of loss of life is not the winner.Everyone losses.

That is how it appear's to be in this life - Yes I agree

I'm against war but I think I could beet an earthquake none-the-less.

I agree, because the war never ends. It always leave wounds that take centuries to heal, but the scars always remain. This is especially true if the war is over idealism or religion.

I agree. When a group "wins" a war, they've only won because they've declared it, and decided to believe it themselves.

Agree...in war there is always loss...

I don't listen to Austrians. They are all nutters. :)

Disagree. Losing a war may entail the regretable loss of life due to our own aggressive impulses. But human nature is not so easily modified to accomodate a more peaceful serene nature. Human history is a battlefield of identities and differences, each motivated by a will to power. Nietzsche stated that "all great things first have to bestride the earth in monstrous and frightening masks in order to inscribe themselves in the hearts of humanity with eternal demands." Refraining from injury, violence, and exploitation, and placing oneself on an equal level with someone else is considered good manners. However, in reality, life is the imposition of one's forms. There will always be masters and slaves. Earthquakes can be detected prior to the first tremor. Human nature is unstable, longs for freedom, has a demanding instinct for happiness, and has a stronger, more evil, and more profound nature than Nature itself. The victors ultimately see their actions as a means to an end. The earthquake is simply the outcome of impersonal forces resulting from a lack of design. Humans choose to kill in the name of their prize. An earthquake kills indiscriminately without ever being rewarded.

Einstein was one smart fellow, but he didn't say that. Jeannette Rankin, the first woman elected* to the U.S. Congress -- before many women in the U.S. could vote -- did. She voted against U.S. declarations of war** in both World Wars, lived long enough to protest U.S. involvement in Vietnam and was the second woman to be honored with a statue in the U.S. Capitol's National Statuary Hall. * as a Republican from Montana ** for those born before 1952, a "Congressional declaration of war" was an ancient ritual whereby the legislative branch of the U.S. government made a state of war official; the modern practice is to leave this distasteful chore to the discretion of the President (or Vice-President), Constitutional provisions to the contrary notwithstanding

I disagree, a war can be won if the principles of Sun Tzu are applied. Always keep the war short, any enemy you take, make them your friend and restore or better the life they had (make them allies), use the enemy against themselves so they lose by self defeat.

Regardless of who said it, it's a clever, satirical quip that is just as meaty as anything Einstein or Mark Twain may have said. Fighting a war, the coiner says, is as futile as fighting an earthquake - and I think even more so in the case of "wars against social conditions". These include the war on poverty, the war on drugs, and yes, the war on terror. You cannot possibly win a war on a social condition because it is a war of ideas, of abstractions. The more intelligent course of action is not a reactionary one, but a proactive one. Wars are reactionary; cooperation is proactive. There is something in political theory called the Prisoner's Dilemma, which says that while it is in each "prisoner's" (apply to nations) interest to betray each other in order to minimize their losses, if they were to cooperate, they would maximize their gains. That is why the great legal minds at Nuremburg advocated a strong body to govern the entire world via a system of international laws. This is not pie-in-the-sky stuff, it was championed by some of the world's greatest leaders and the US's greatest presidents. Sun Tzu lived more than 2200 years ago. Humanity is moving faster and faster toward globalization and consumption of limited resources. Wars represent an outdated and unproductive means of resolving conflict - yes, not unlike fighting a natural disaster.

If it indeed was Einstein who said this, then who am I to disagree (in the words of the Eurythmics)? I do agree - everything in life has a cost, so even the "winning side", for want of a better term, has lost lives, money, time, etc. Some of this can never be made up - you can't recapture the time you spent fighting the way and use it for something more productive, for example. As for earthquakes, you might survive one, but again, there is a huge cost - people do die, buildings collapse, road cave in, property gets damaged, and while most of it can be put right (apart from the deaths, of course), it take time and money to do this, and in the meantime, Mother Nature carries on regardless.

Einstein should have stuck to physics.

That depends on your objective. If your objective is to preserve human life and quality of life, the I agree. However, there are far too many people -many of whom, sadly, are in perfect position to declare war- whose objective in waging wars is similar to that of making a horror movie: Provide an ending that satisfies the audience, and *Always* leave the opportunity for a sequel.

jeannette rankin said that not einstein

There is a later quote that puts it better: "What kind of victory is it when someone is left defeated?" - Gandhi