49 replies to this topic

[Short Stuff]

In my opinion, Peace is impossible, even in The Holy Books, and Fairy Tales, There has never been peace...So how is it possible here? I'm not saying I wouldnt want it, But in my view it just not possible, theres too many ethnic groups offended by one-another and we cant forget the human instinct to argue constantly....

Whats your opinion?

[G-sus]

IMO for humans it´s completely impossible.
but that doesn´t keep it from having it as goal...

[Rayburn]

Humans are violent creatures by nature and other than animals, we kill for other motives than food and self-defence. In history, many of man's greatest technological inventions which are now in peaceful use where originally made in order to kill more efficiently. Look at rocket science. Today we send manned rockets into space and build a station up there. That's possible because Von Braun originally built the V2...not for space travel but to carry warheads to London. Today, we split the atom in order to power our homes...Originally, this was done in order to annihilate an entire city. Intending to kill others of their kind, humans are most creative and that is because they are violent beings by nature. We don't kill for food or protection. Some of us kill for money, kill for goods, kill for other resources or kill for fun!
Today, we learned from our faults and most of us realised that war is not the way to solve most problems. This part of mankind does live in peace, but then again, it doesn't: There is peace within the borders of that one country but in other parts of the world, the very same country is fighting.

Edited by Rayburn, 07 July 2007 - 07:07.

[Athena]

I believe it would be possible. Not every human has intention of destroying humans, animals, things and to have greed.

[Areze]

Blaat85, on 7 Jul 2007, 3:40, said:

I believe it would be possible. Not every human has intention of destroying humans, animals, things and to have greed.

No offense, but do you honestly believe that? We humans are by nature power-hungry, greedy and vicious. Even the purest of people will get greedy when given dominance over others. It's a proven fact. Peace is NOT possible no matter what peple say. We will always be fighting, always be killing. While there are some who might not want to fight, they would still give in to the seductive calls of power. Even moderating this board counts. Everything.

I guess I'm just misanthrope, but getting along wise, we will never manage, we need to kill each other. It's an instinct. And it will never die. Peace is but a fantasy for any species on earth. And fantasys don't come true. It would be nice to have peace, but it's impossible. Pure and simple. Also, peace has it's side affects:

-Over-population = War serves a purpose. It keeps us from over-populating, which leads me to my next point.

-Running out of food = Goes hand in hand with over-population. You can't grow food fast enough to feed something THAT numerous. We would starve.

-Tyranny = If we were at peace, we would probably get rid of our weapons. What if a crazed madman built an army? What would we do? We wouldn't be able to do anything. We'd be sheep waiting for the slaughter.

[Shirou]

Current wars are being fought over different religion and societal ways of life (terrorist wars @ Iraq and Afghanistan), population (Pakistan - India, or ofcourse Israel, or disaster (Darfur, chaos dismisses society, and a lack there of can easily emit a war).

Corruption is also a big problem.

@Nightshadow

I don't fully agree with your statement that a peaceful world would always have to create overpopulation. In the next few decades western countries will be diminishing their population because the raise of wellfare and the women emancipation makes having children less important. This means that there will be more racial diversity among the world, which encourages peace imho. If the entire world was to be as civilized as say, western europe or the states, then overpopulation would not rise if it wasn't already there.

But that will never happen because we are too far off. There's already too much people on this little planet and it's been calculated we'd need fifteen similar planets if every world citizen would life a life like most of us do. This get's me to the point that war is inevitable. The world will have to face another world war, i m sure of it. If nature doesn't take care of our overpopulation, then we will ourselves.

[General]

Its impossible even all humans believe in same thing

[Golan]

I guess some of us can live in peace without any problem, prospering and advancing. Question is how to get rid of the rest...

[Areze]

Shirou, on 7 Jul 2007, 5:47, said:

@Nightshadow

I don't fully agree with your statement that a peaceful world would always have to create overpopulation. In the next few decades western countries will be diminishing their population because the raise of wellfare and the women emancipation makes having children less important. This means that there will be more racial diversity among the world, which encourages peace imho. If the entire world was to be as civilized as say, western europe or the states, then overpopulation would not rise if it wasn't already there.

But that will never happen because we are too far off. There's already too much people on this little planet and it's been calculated we'd need fifteen similar planets if every world citizen would life a life like most of us do. This get's me to the point that war is inevitable. The world will have to face another world war, i m sure of it. If nature doesn't take care of our overpopulation, then we will ourselves.

If we didn't have frequent cullings to keep the population in check, we would only grow. And eventually we would over-populate. The countries of China, India and I think Japan and parts of Korea are all over-populated. We need to have wars or else there would be too many humans to feed. And we would die out. I would rather have wars and conflict instead of the whole race starving and dying. I don't feel like going the way of the Dodo.

[CodeCat]

'What if they had a war, and nobody came?'

All it takes is for you to say no. And say no no matter what. If everyone does it, there'll be peace.

[Areze]

Thing is, not everyone will do it. There's always the bloodthirsty, patriotic, press ganged criminals and mercenaries.

[Whitey]

There can be peace as what CodeCat said, but really, is peace all it's cracked up to be? An overcrowded world, a lack of competitive advances in society, we'd stall where we are and never move up technologically, ever again.

[CodeCat]

Why do some people keep thinking that progress has to come from trying to outdo and compete with each other? Hasn't anyone ever tried to improve something for improvement's sake?

[Golan]

@δαίμονας
Why should we? We´d have more than enough problems to face in time of peace, perhaps even worse than those encountered in times of war... as many of you said, I may add.

Edited by Golan, 07 July 2007 - 16:58.

[Whitey]

Thus my point Golan. We can have peace if EVERYBODY complies (which is doubtful, to say the least) but what then?

@ Codecat: Advancements develope quickly out of conflict, be it armed or economic. And while we may advance under peace, it won't be at nearly the current rate. War has its benefits as does peace, and we need to find a common balance...

[Short Stuff]

Theres allways an extremist amongst people... get 5 people in a room (Random people) One is most likely to be an extremist in some way
(Although this may be exagerateing, its preaty close)

We've wanted peace for as long as humans have been around...And yet we havnt acheived it yet? Extremists take things too seriously and usualy ruin it for everyone...Think of a kid at school...the one that "acts out" the rest of your class will obey the teacher, while he says stuff like F-Off, and your whole class suffers...and you have one in almost every class

Thats what we have in the world, that will most likely never go away, the only way to get rid of extremists...is well....unspeakable. So I Beileve Peace is a good thing, but an out of reach thing, allthough it does keep us friendlier with each other, we all need something to beileve in.

Edited by Short Stuff, 08 July 2007 - 13:22.

[Golan]

δαίμο&#, on 7 Jul 2007, 17:03, said:

Thus my point Golan. We can have peace if EVERYBODY complies (which is doubtful, to say the least) but what then?

Erm, sorry, I intended to reffer to the last part of your post...
Humanity has by now shown to be most innovative when facing imminentproblems in war time. Peace holds such problems as well though, even more pressing ones, so we should just aswell be forced to be innovative and advance technologically.

Edited by Golan, 07 July 2007 - 17:17.

[Whitey]

So war is equivelant with peace when it comes to consequences, so why bother trying?

Edited by δαίμονας, 07 July 2007 - 17:27.

[Sgt. Nuker]

CodeCat, on 7 Jul 2007, 12:57, said:

Why do some people keep thinking that progress has to come from trying to outdo and compete with each other? Hasn't anyone ever tried to improve something for improvement's sake?

Some people have, and I'd put money on that. Fact is though, you almost never hear about that happening. It's human nature to want to be better than someone else, to strive for the top. There's no denying it. Your ideologies mean well, and they are true, but snap back to reality with me for just a moment. Look around you. A competitive world is what we live in. Do you know how much it would take to change it? Yes, I know all it takes is one, but finding that one person who would find another, who finds another.....etc, etc.....you get my point. Fact of the matter is, for the word to change, and I mean completely change from the cut-throat, get-a-step-ahead-and-stay-there,I'm-better-than-all-of-you world, to the peace-loving, idealistic society people can only dream about will take nothing short of a miracle to happen.


Regards,

Nuker

[Golan]

@δαίμονας
Because the number of people beeing killed by their own kind is much less. Because war can easily annihilate our whole species. Because it´s a waste of ressources spending our lifes killing each other instead of advancing. Because war is much more unpredictable. And so on...

Edited by Golan, 07 July 2007 - 17:40.

[Whitey]

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?

Edited by δαίμονας, 07 July 2007 - 17:45.

[Areze]

I'd rather die by Assault Rifle then starvation any day. Hence, in the longer run, War > Peace in practicality and defiantly possibility.

[Soul]

I don't think peace will ever be possible, cause we as a race are just to dumb, violent and crazy and the ones who are lucky enough not to be those things and try to bring peace only die trying sadly.

[General]

Nightshadow, on 7 Jul 2007, 19:16, said:

I'd rather die by Assault Rifle then starvation any day. Hence, in the longer run, War > Peace in practicality and defiantly possibility.

Instead of trying to find better and easier ways to kill each other , humanity should have find a solution to food and water now , but what happen is happen , there is no turning back and nothing will prevent the humanity to destroy their own world with their selfishness .

[Nerdsturm]

I'm not quite sure how you guys are defining peace. If you mean complete non-violence, theres always going to be homicide just because some people are crazy; there's no avoiding that. Eventually it will be possible to avoid violent, large-scale conflects between groups of people, but I have no idea how that would come about and it isn't likely to happen in any of our lifetimes.