Peace - learned, or enforced?

Talk about anything under the sun or stars - but keep it civil. This is where we really get to know each other. Everyone is welcome, and invited!

How might we come to the end of war?

Love and peace! Let people come to an understanding, then they will not fight.
2
18%
Machiavelli was right! Stomp out those who seek to upset the brotherhood of man!
1
9%
World Peace is a pipedream! People have been fighting since we came out the trees, and they always will be!
7
64%
Bah, humbug! War is the spice of life!
1
9%
 
Total votes: 11

User avatar
Janus%TheDoorman
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 563
Joined: Wed May 30, 2007 8:05 am
Title: The Original Two-Face
Location: New Jersey

Peace - learned, or enforced?

Postby Janus%TheDoorman » Wed Jul 22, 2009 1:00 am

Can mankind come to learn, as a whole, the inherent value of peace so that we might have lasting, self-imposed world peace?

Or is it better, despite the contradiction in terms, to fight for peace? Kill everyone who wants to fight - then you'll have peace!

Or, is peace really something we should be after in the first place?
"But at any rate, the point is that God is what nobody admits to being, and everybody really is."
-Alan Watts

Froth
Soldier
Soldier
Posts: 54
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 8:16 pm
Location: Arizona

Postby Froth » Wed Jul 22, 2009 12:29 pm

Maybe in the way distance future when our culture has changed so dramatically, it barely resembles the world we now know.

Or perhaps war could end in a way like OSC predicted in SFTD and sequels. No planet rebels or fights or anything because if they did, they would lose the ansible which is essential to their life. Say apocalypse comes and we only have limited resources, and one entity has to be the one to distribute the resources. And no one rebels because theyre afraid they wont recieve said resources.

Or say A terminator type scenario happens, and humans get sent back to the ice age where if anyone rebels, machines will kill and humans come to accept it instead of fighting the machines.

Or if anyone has heard of the Venus Project, if that actually worked, maybe then.

Or maybe Mutually Assured Destruction scares everyone into peace.

There are a billion different scenarios where war could end. And I think one day it could happen. The world is changing so fast, I think were either headed for so much war, well finally have so much practice in ending wars, theyll all end. Or so much war, that we cant escape it.
*Insert hilariously accurate quote about the way the world works and a tad sexist about woman, that 99.9% of the forum wont laugh at, but Ill rofl for hours at*

such is me and my humor.

Azarel
Soldier
Soldier
Posts: 97
Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2008 4:15 pm
Location: Outside

Postby Azarel » Tue Jul 28, 2009 7:28 am

I believe in peace.
I believe in hope.
I believe peace can exist between millions of inidividuals.
I believe Greed, Fear and Hatred are among the most dangerous threats to peace.
I believe something in the way of 'relatively quick' if not instantaneous global peace is not possible given the wars and age old feuds currently in effect.

Peace that is forced, wars that are fought for peace are dellusional oxymorons. War is the opposite of peace and wars fought in order to gain peace do not gain peace, but serve to silence the enemy; assuming they are irradicated otherwise, given enough time, they will avenge their losses.

Peace is possibly the most fragile possession of humanity and yet we throw it away so quickly to make ourselves be understood or to belittle someone else.

No, given my standpoint as a Christian, I believe that if I am wrong about God, and it is up to us to create that peace, then mankind has a long, long way to go.

But as I said, I believe in Hope :)

User avatar
wigginboy
Soldier
Soldier
Posts: 277
Joined: Wed Sep 27, 2006 11:38 am
First Joined: 0- 2-2004
Location: Red Deer, Alberta, Canada

Postby wigginboy » Mon Aug 03, 2009 2:38 am

Human nature simply does not allow for global peace. There will always be something one country, group or individual has that another wants. If it cannot be had by peaceful means, 9 times out of ten, war is going to ensue. No matter what the resource is, if it is not possessed by one group, that group will fight to attain it. But it does not even have to be about resources. Ideology has much to do with it, political and religious. We have seen the result of holy wars (ie, the crusades) and these wars were fought bloodily and mercilessly so that whichever side ended up the victor could wipe the opposing ideology from the earth. Lets face it, difference at all is a problem in this world, racial, national, political, religious, economic. And to even the balance, people are ready to do whatever. As long as humans are alive, our nature dictates that we will fight for what we want and what we believe. Even peace accords that have been made have either been broken or circumvented in order for one side to gain the upper hand. The shaky league of nations set up by wilson and its successor, the UN, have both proven that even though nations may come together in the interest of peace, disparity and difference serve as a wedge that is driven between peace and those who wish to attain it.

Froth
Soldier
Soldier
Posts: 54
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 8:16 pm
Location: Arizona

Postby Froth » Tue Aug 04, 2009 12:41 am

Has anyone heard of the Venus project? Its an interesting idea, that although I dont think would work, is an interesting thought experiment. Perhaps if some of the idea from this ideology could be applied to life here on earth, many wars would be stopped. Resource based wars certainly one of them. And perhaps if all countries were as civilized as America or Britain (I use the term civilized very very very loosely), we could end war based on superiority of race, religion, so on and so forth.

http://thevenusproject.com/
*Insert hilariously accurate quote about the way the world works and a tad sexist about woman, that 99.9% of the forum wont laugh at, but Ill rofl for hours at*

such is me and my humor.

Lusitania_Fleet
Launchie
Launchie
Posts: 39
Joined: Thu Nov 12, 2009 8:59 pm
Location: The End of the World, as you know it.

Postby Lusitania_Fleet » Wed Dec 16, 2009 12:42 pm

I think that the End of War will come when someone is strong enough to step up and put an end to it. Like Peter as the Hegemon, the roman empire, etc. China, for example. It is an opressed sates, but before the stronger dynasties took over, it was too weak to effectively stop the warlords. Once an Emperor took over, it was peace and success.ish.
Life is but a walking shadow, a poor player who struts and frets his hour upon the stage, and then is heard no more. It is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.

User avatar
jotabe
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 2105
Joined: Tue Oct 31, 2006 11:59 am
Title: Leekmaster Kirbyfu

Postby jotabe » Thu Dec 17, 2009 3:56 pm

Can you imagine the US going to war against Canada? Can you picture France and Germany clashing again over the Maginot line? Or the UK using the Royal Navy to take Norwegian oil reserves in the North Sea? Or even Australia and South Korea teaming up to carve into Japan's territory? What about Greece and Turkey, despite their constant border bickering?

I can't picture neither of these scenarios, unless a totalitarian government seizes power. Because a democratic country has too much to lose in a war, and very little to gain. Even for a democratic country to wage war agaings a non-democratic one, it takes a huge amount of stress in their relationships.

Maybe that's all it takes for world peace.
Image

Lusitania_Fleet
Launchie
Launchie
Posts: 39
Joined: Thu Nov 12, 2009 8:59 pm
Location: The End of the World, as you know it.

Postby Lusitania_Fleet » Fri Dec 18, 2009 12:03 pm

Democracy? Is that what your saying?

Maybe. But as long as there is democracy, there will be factions. As long as there are factions, there will be disagreement. As long as the is disagreement, there will be war.

As long as there are two people in the world, somebody will want someone dead.
Life is but a walking shadow, a poor player who struts and frets his hour upon the stage, and then is heard no more. It is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.

User avatar
starlooker
Commander
Commander
Posts: 3823
Joined: Wed Sep 27, 2006 4:19 pm
Title: Dr. Mom
First Joined: 28 Oct 2002
Location: Home. With cats who have names.
Contact:

Postby starlooker » Fri Dec 18, 2009 1:33 pm

But as long as there is democracy, there will be factions. As long as there are factions, there will be disagreement. As long as the is disagreement, there will be war.
I was with you up through the part about factions disagreeing. However, the "as long as there is disagreement, there will be war" conclusion is simply not true. "War" is not a natural and inevitable consequence of disagreement. We disagree with Canada about fishing rights. We are not at war. We disagree with China on human rights. We are not at war. In the entire history of the country, there has only been one civil war. And there have been a lot of passionate disagreements before and since that time.

Witness, every four years, the following: Party leaders from two opposing "factions" walk out onto a stage, shake hands, debate issues in a civilized manner according to predetermined rules, end the debate, hug their supporters, and no blood is shed. If the factionization of people in a democracy automatically meant war, this would not be possible.

Maybe you're tryign to say something else about human nature's propensity for war. But "disagreement = war" simply does not follow.
As long as there are two people in the world, somebody will want someone dead.
If that were true, then Eve would've killed Adam for not replacing the toilet paper rolls long before there was any procreation. Disagreements between people may turn violent, but that rather depends on which people. It is not inevitable.

There is a large difference between disagreeing with someone, disliking someone, envying someone, or even hating someone and actually killing someone. Likewise, there is a difference between "wanting someone dead" and actually making it come about.
There's another home somewhere,
There's another glimpse of sky...
There's another way to lean
into the wind, unafraid.
There's another life out there...

~~Mary Chapin Carpenter

User avatar
jotabe
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 2105
Joined: Tue Oct 31, 2006 11:59 am
Title: Leekmaster Kirbyfu

Postby jotabe » Sat Dec 19, 2009 6:02 am

^ What she said.
Image

User avatar
Rodaka
Launchie
Launchie
Posts: 34
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 6:13 pm
Location: Utah
Contact:

Postby Rodaka » Tue Jan 05, 2010 8:40 pm

Peace is not something that all humans can understand, but it's not because we are stupid. It's because war is brought about by strong emotions that are shared by a large group, or enforced by a government too large to say no to.

But I don't believe peace would be the greatest course of action. Peace is too boring for the world. Despite that belief, I do not believe war is the course of action that should be taken either. Conflict should exist, but it should be kept to minds and mouths.

Inevitably there will always be some sort of fight. If there was a way to virtualize this fights, things would be so much easier with the world. People should die on their own time, rather then when someone else decides they're not worthy, cause who are we to say who's worthy or not? We're just as imperfect as everybody else.
Last edited by Rodaka on Wed Jan 06, 2010 7:18 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"I once heard a tale of a man who split himself in two. The one part never changed at all; the other grew and grew. The changeless part was always true, the growing part was always new, and I wondered, when the tale was through, which part was me, and which was you."

User avatar
Sonikku13
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 1782
Joined: Sat Nov 28, 2009 8:34 pm
Title: Game Room Addict
Location: Maple Grove, MN
Contact:

Postby Sonikku13 » Tue Jan 05, 2010 10:53 pm

Short story - I want peace, but I don't see how humanity can get peace. There are just too many differences between humans.

That being said, resource-based wars can be stopped by becoming economically self-sufficient. Religious-based wars, on the other hand, I don't know how you can stop them. Beliefs get people fired up, I guess. I need some ideas for that.

Look, without war, diplomacy is toast. If one side is not willing to go to war, the other side wins automatically.

For example, lets say that the USA and North Korea are in conflict over nukes, and North Korea just built and test-fired a nuke ready to enter production in a few days. If the USA is not willing to go to war, North Korea will build more nukes, and that leads to the danger of nuking the USA, of course. You have to be willing to go to war, as I said, without war, diplomacy is toast. So war is a necessary hardship.
TG M203 Bunker, PFC, 1st Corps, CoD Division, PC Brigade, 1st BTN, Chungking (ST) Squad, SM

I've had 102 nukes on MW2.

I have Asperger Syndrome (I was diagnosed at birth). It's categorized as a "disability".

Image

Lusitania_Fleet
Launchie
Launchie
Posts: 39
Joined: Thu Nov 12, 2009 8:59 pm
Location: The End of the World, as you know it.

Postby Lusitania_Fleet » Wed Jan 06, 2010 12:02 pm

Too many differences between Humans, you say. Thats why the only way to ensure a secure world is with a hard military strike. Let as many people aspossible die, and continue from there. Wipe outa few factiosnand everything will ne fine. granted, in time it will erode back into the ffactions and disagreement, but after a large scale war, it would takre decadesof unity to putthe pieces back together.
Life is but a walking shadow, a poor player who struts and frets his hour upon the stage, and then is heard no more. It is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.

User avatar
Sonikku13
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 1782
Joined: Sat Nov 28, 2009 8:34 pm
Title: Game Room Addict
Location: Maple Grove, MN
Contact:

Postby Sonikku13 » Wed Jan 06, 2010 2:50 pm

Yes, I believe total war is the answer if diplomacy fails. But the UN doesn't allow total war, which hurts my view. I still would like to see peace, but I don't see how it is possible.

There are differences all over the place. Every human is different in some way, shape or form. Now, I think I was misunderstood here. I was not referring to the differences between ordinary people. Obviously most humans can coexist with each other. However, there are crazy people in the world, who will attack anyone at any cost. One that quickly comes to mind is Al-Qaeda. Al-Qaeda is in a jihad against the USA. They were willing to attack US civilians, most people would refer to September 11, 2001. I think they are very passionate about this, and if peace is to come, they must be eliminated. Another one is the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. A group called Hamas, which is the main governing body in the Gaza Strip, comes to mind. Hamas clearly wants Israel to be eliminated, and they have clearly stated that they are unwilling to compromise. So it's the USA or Al-Qaeda, and Israel or Hamas, take your pick to remove for peace.

I would prefer to not the one who attacks first, but lets look at the appeasement of Hitler before World War II. The Allies kept giving land to Germany in hope of keeping him from taking more, because the Allies were unwilling to go to war. That didn't work, as Hitler didn't know when to stop. Hitler wanted to conquer the world, basically. What happened next was World War II, the deadliest war in the history of mankind. And the Allies would have lost that had Hitler not attacked the USSR. So trying to achieve peace may lead to war, and could possibly result in the loss of the war instead of a victory.

Yes, I want peace, and I hope peace comes, but we have serious obstacles to overcome, but I can't find a way it is plausible.
TG M203 Bunker, PFC, 1st Corps, CoD Division, PC Brigade, 1st BTN, Chungking (ST) Squad, SM

I've had 102 nukes on MW2.

I have Asperger Syndrome (I was diagnosed at birth). It's categorized as a "disability".

Image


Return to “Milagre Town Square”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests