49 replies to this topic

[CodeCat]

Crazy people aren't dangerous if you don't give them power. Take their weapons and their followers away and they won't be a threat.

[Areze]

Something called the 'Black Market' makes that nil.

[Whitey]

Also something called the human body and ingenuity.

If not by gun, by knife, if not by knife, then by bare hands or a self-produced weapon. And if all of society has a gun, the outcome will be the same, if all of society has a knife, still the same, if no weapons are present, then chances are that the outlaw will generally come out on top... and if its fists, well yeah, same thing... Weapons are not anything but a means of killing.

So no, such peace of that magnitude is impossible.

[Sgt. Nuker]

If a person is desperate enough, anything is probable. Take in-mates for example. They have fashioned all sorts of weapons from the most harmless of day-to-day things (like paper and plastic spoons). If someone wants to get something bad enough, they'll do just about anything to get what they want. The logical thought would be to remove that need/desire, but doing so isn't always easy. The phrase "it's easier said than done" seems to apply nicely here.


Regards,

Nuker

[Golan]

@δαίμονας (Damnid, next time take a name one can write on a standard keybord )
So what? You expect a single man to hold global dominance with a can opener when others don´t have one? Physical authority has nothing to do with waging war. If none wants to follow, you can put a gun at their head for as long as you want. After all, it´s quite complicated to threaten an army of men...

δαίμο&#, on 7 Jul 2007, 17:44, said:

So you havor death by overpopulation, famine, and all other related things over death by gun and bomb? I mean death is death isn't it?

No. It´s not. There´s a difference in dying on your own and having another man´s "soul" devoured by killing you.
And yeah, shure I do favor death by overpopulation, famine, and all other related things over death by gun and bomb. The first ones can be controled and counter-regulated. The later one is a backstabbing beast that grabs your balls faster than I can start bithing about SW:Episode III. And I´m adept at bitching about things...

Nightshadow, on 7 Jul 2007, 21:55, said:

Something called the 'Black Market' makes that nil.

It´s a hypothetical situtation anyways. In order for it to function, there couldn´t be any black market in the way needed for your example.

Edited by Golan, 07 July 2007 - 22:21.

[Pandut]

peace is impossible , like 60% of humans on earth want power and riches , and somtimes they will fight to get it

[Nerdsturm]

What if production of goods became so efficient that everyone was rich and powerful?

[Whitey]

Then rich and powerful would become the norm, and thus nobody would be rich and powerful.

Think extreme inflation.

Edited by δαίμονας, 08 July 2007 - 03:10.

[Areze]

*agrees with TPAM*

100 years ago, people thought that Lower-Middle class people of today have it made.


Inflation = Higher standards.

[Dimanti San]

I think most wars are caused by religions and other forms of belief, so I think global peace is only posible if every1 had the same beliefs or if every1 was tolorant to people that belief in something else.
But, since that that's never going to happen (there will always be assholes that screw it up for the rest), there's little chance for global peace, ever.

Also, there will always be people that desire power above al else...like Sauron LOL XD

[Short Stuff]

CodeCat, on 7 Jul 2007, 17:45, said:

Crazy people aren't dangerous if you don't give them power. Take their weapons and their followers away and they won't be a threat.

Eh i dont agree, the mind is a powerfull thing...Look at marx, he was some random person, who came up with the ideals of Communism

Hitler was only wanted because of his field smarts and ideas...

Stalin? He was born into power almost, but before lenin found him, he was a major speaker, and loved for his mind.

Almost any dictator started out with no power, and no followers, They get it by speaking...

Any "crazy person" has the potential to Become a world threat...just by thinking.



Also, im wondering why everyone refers to war...Not haveing war, thats not peace...there's still murder, rape, and crimes...

Edited by Short Stuff, 08 July 2007 - 13:23.

[CodeCat]

And the world has the power to avoid such crazy people, by also thinking.

[Areze]

CodeCat, on 8 Jul 2007, 9:23, said:

And the world has the power to avoid such crazy people, by also thinking.

There are stillm way dictators and lunatics gain control. Diplomacy. They say what the populace wants to hear, and when he gains control, then he shows his fangs and unleashes his true agenda. That is how Hitler came to power. He didn't say "I GONNA KILL ME SOME JEWS!!!" He said "I will rebuild Germany's strength and will no longer be underfoot. We will not be abused!" The ladder is what the populace wanted. So they voted for him. His work ethic helped as well. But then he built an army and went on his rampage and genocide. Lunatics are experts at hiding their true thoughts. There is always the few people who would choose him anyway.

[Golan]

Erm, he actually did...

Anyways, if people are too dumb to see through such demagogues and to say "stop!" when they realize what´s going on, they don´t deserve peace.

[General]

Even a nuclear weapon is worthless in a fool's hands . How ? Its because a fool should not know how to explode it .
In other way a smart person can be very dangerous without a weapon . It should be ann odd example but imagine a murderer like Hitman or something .

Actually both side is right , all of you guys and gals right in same degree , since all of us wants peace but we 'try' to find solution in different ways .

[Whitey]

It takes an infinite amount of prevention to atain peace.
It takes but one instance to throw the world into chaos.

That's why peace will never work.

[Golan]

But it´s aslo the reason why sane people should never stop working for peace and against said chaos.

[Dr. Strangelove]

Quote

As much as I hate to admit it, and I really hate to admit it, nothing would exist without "war" on some scale. It's part of my Libertarian philosophy.

War makes civilisaztion stronger by a Darwinian natural selection process among countries, just like animals, and companies (although that's referred to as capitalism). War is like market competition. Asking for world peace is like asking for the failed socialist utopia that wouldn't have been a utopia anyhow.

-Me

War=Cpaitalism

Peace=Communism

War is but an extension of the survival games we played in the African savannah, and that every animal has had to play. For all of us beleivers in the almost-fact of evolution by natural selection, it should be easy to connect the dots. Take out the competition, and hence forth the selection, you won't have much-if any evolution.

[Sgt. Rho]

As far as money, religion and power exist, war will exists.

The most wars where started because of religion.

[Whitey]

No! Most wars were not started due to religion! Most wars have been started by the mindsets of people. A mindset may be that "I hate your religion" but it ain't the religion's fault I hate it is it? Or even "My religion tells me to hate your religion", then the person still has the choice to follow that religion, no?

[Golan]

I agree with Solo Wing, religion may be barely a tool to cause war, but it´s not really a reason for war. Also, generalising that different religions/believes will inevitable lead to war is IMO a bit far-fetched. Guess someone would have allready lynched me if it were like this..

The Outsider, on 9 Jul 2007, 6:16, said:

War is but an extension of the survival games we played in the African savannah, and that every animal has had to play. For all of us beleivers in the almost-fact of evolution by natural selection, it should be easy to connect the dots. Take out the competition, and hence forth the selection, you won't have much-if any evolution.

First, we don´t have any major evolution today anyways. Second, modern society doesn´t emphasise undoubtedly "usefull" traits and some things can quite bluntly be classified as perversion of physique. Thirdly, humanity has to rely much more on social evolution and technological evolution (also including genetics). These do have a component comparable to inter-species competition: we´ll pretty much be fubared if we don´t take on the challenges posed by our surrounding.

[Thinker]

Listen or read good PEACE is impossible in our current time animals fight insects fight fish fight and so do humans we could try to do it but eventually it will go downhill the only possiblle way is if you rule with a violent iron fist witch wouldnt be peaceful at all really Riots protest rebellions would all happen if a ruler tried to do that. Wars are started with disagreements on anything religion form of goverment race money you name it so the only way to have peace is to get everyone to think believe and act the same and eliminate all poverty tell me can all of us on this planet do that remeber theres always one bad apple out of the bunch.

[Crush3r]

World peace, no conflicts (petty, small, big or major)? Not in your wildest dreams (at least while we're homo sapiens).

Although we should do the recommended thing and aim for those goals. And as CodeCat said, we can just say no to things that we let pass, and harm stability.

Currently it's impossible to stop unsuited people from having at least some influence in the world, because:

a. There is a thing called politics, which can be used to manipulate

b. They already are heavily entrenched in our system, controlling both world economy and politics.

Edited by Crush3r, 25 August 2007 - 21:41.

[Dr. Strangelove]

Religion might necessarily cause a war(though it some times does) but it acts as an extremely powerful catalyst, like dumping gasoline and nitro-glycerine over a campfire. Afterall, what is more dangerous, an enemy who is fighting you because he loves his country, or one the does so because he believes you are a manifestation of ultimate evil and wants to die because he beleives he will be a martyr.The latter has absolutely nothing to lose by hurting you.

[General Kirkov]

Peace is impossible for the following reasons:

A: War used to be a measure of keeping the population low, we now have over population, so the next real war will be for land grap purposes.

B: What war could not do for population culling outbreaks and plagues did, oops we cured those or have vaccines for that now.

C: If you want it and somebody has it there will be a fight for it. It does not have to be a traditional war, it can be economic. Why do you think the Soviet Union collapsed? The west started an arms race the Soviets thought oh jheez we need more than them so they went broke trying to keep up.

D: We are inherently violent, no matter what culture or civilization ever said they were peaceful is a load of crap. And if they were they don't exist anymore, guess why?

E: In the modern era no real wars will be fought for religion look at recent European wars and by recent I mean 1800-1950.

Edited by Capt. Kirkov, 29 August 2007 - 13:51.