All's fair in love and war true or false? What does this mean?

It used to be true, but not so much anymore since the Geneva Convention changed the rules of war ( For those countries that follow it that is)





It used to be that there was no holds barred where things such as love or warfare were concerned. People would do whatever it took to win, either the object of their affection or a battle. That was before political correctness too.All's fair in love and war true or false? What does this mean?
';All'; is neither fair not profitable in either. But when foolish people are dead-set on something they'll resort to anything to get their way - regardless of the consequences. The result is they may get their way initially, but lose the lot in the end. Look at George Bush, who thought unilateral ';pre-emptive'; action, without the final UN reports on WMD's or UN agreement, was a grand way to go. Boing!All's fair in love and war true or false? What does this mean?
Most people either say that when they are thinking about themselves and want to know how much they can get away with in a relationship, or if they want to get a general idea of how selfish or sneaky the other person is and how far they are willing to go to get what they want. It's a very old cliche unfortunately. It was used in the movie How To Lose a Guy In 10 Days right before the two main characters tried to deceive each other. It's a perfect example.





The reason love is compared to war is because they both bring out the best and worst in people and both can have devistating effects.
It means some people rationalize their bad behavior and feel the end justifies the means. It doesn't. True love would not ever take advantage of the other so fairness would never come into question. War is never fair or wise. And no end ever justifies harming others.
So very true, as in both arenas, ';The end does justify the means.';