Do you believe world peace is possible?

[Daedalus66]

Do you believe world peace is possible?
I dont. Human beings are flawed...we will never stop hating and fearing. All we can do is look for the peaceful options in our own lives and enjoy the peaceful friendships and relationships that surround us.

[Inactive Cargo]

Once we get rid of the stupid belief that there's a God out there then yes, world peace will be possible.

[Trainwreck]

no, world peace will never be possible...

there has to be bad for there to be good

[Inactive Cargo]

there has to be bad for there to be goodThat was a trainwreck of an answer, "bad" doesn't have to be catastrophically bad. If we never have another war (world, national, civil etc) or huge conflict there's going to be world peace but still bad.

[Sofa of Death]

world peace is impossible.....

theres always goign to be a power-hungry body trying to get more power..... we as humans can't deny the thirst for conrtol

[Hacky]

Only way world peace is possible is to live in a world like The Giver. In other words, we'll lose our humanity.

[Daedalus66]

But if we lose our humanity, and we attain world peace, then we as humans are not getting world peace, since we have lost our Humanity. I guess i should have said, AS HUMANS, is it possible for us to attain world peace?

I still don't think it it possible. Even if we were to make a temporary peace, one person would start an arguement with another person over how much...I dunno...land, he has. It escalates, and suddenley, there is people fighting again. Just seems so pointless. A vicious circle if you will.

[Mooters]

Once we get rid of the stupid belief that there's a God out there then yes, world peace will be possible.

i dont think so. War will still go on, even if belief is gone, people are going to want money, land, and power. But it's mainly cause of belief fault, so I know saying.
So screw your world peace everyone.

[System_Zero]

We can archive world peace if we all work towards some form of a greater good, and to achieve that we must set aside all selfishness. I agree that without religion things would be less brute as a factory as to how a society is shaped but can still serve a more watered down moral compass.

But seeing as none of that is ever at all possible, the best you can hope for some a colony on Mars full of intelligent Atheists with the enlightenment of Buddhists monks.

[Mooters]

We can archive world peace if we all work towards some form of a greater good, and to achieve that we must set aside all selfishness. I agree that without religion things would be less brute as a factory as to how a society is shaped but can still serve a more watered down moral compass.

But seeing as none of that is ever at all possible, the best you can hope for some a colony on Mars full of intelligent Atheists with the enlightenment of Buddhists monks.

easier said then done. Because, People most can never get along.
their always have to be something they dont like about someone.
When we all truly realize how stupid we really are, then that will a small step forward. :salute:
Because, you have to admit at times, a lot of the things we do are kinda stupid.
But oh well. I'd probadly be wayyy dead and old bones when we ever gain world peace.
So good luck in archiving world peace future

[Shins]

Solve all of the imperfections of humanity, and you might come to a point that could be seen a world peace, but as pointed out above, it demands a sacrifice of our humanity.

If we all had lobotomies, I'm sure we'd me more docile, but is it worth the trade-off. The same human defects that cause use to hate and fear are responsible for our love and creativity. Things like intelligence and self-awareness are double-edged.

inactive cargo, you really believe all of humanity's problems are rooted in religion? There's plenty of other horrible fucking ideas we've come up with as a species. Don't single that one out alone to eradicate! Let's also be sure to destroy philosophy and science. Both of those are cause for strife, and in the absence of religious divides, they will step in and fill the void.

As long as there is free thought, there will be zealots.

[Destagow]

Once we get rid of the stupid belief that there's a God out there then yes, world peace will be possible.

There have been wars over things other than religion.

[crooked]

There have been wars over things other than religion.

i recomend watching the newest southpark. they make a very good point about that.

[Denial]

Possible yes, but it's hardly likely that all the right pieces would fall into place.

[Slevin57]

It depends on your definition of world peace.

A mutually agreed upon world peace? I doubt it. Take away religion, we will fight about race, take away race we will fight about gender, take away gender we will fight about intelligence...so on and so forth.

Now a forced peace, in the form of a "one world government", after the death of most Islamic and Christian people's (One World government = rise of the anti-Christ to Christians). Is very possible. It might be a forced police state where you loose every freedom you value today, but hey it would be peaceful.

I don't really want to go on and on, so I'll just say.. Half Life 2, the scenario set up there was pretty peaceful.

The problem becomes, what are humans as a race willing to sacrifice to have something? I'm sorry but I am not willing to sacrifice some civil liberties that have been fought over for thousands of years to get for a little false peace.

==

If more people have been killed in the name of Religon, it stands to reason that a great many have also been helped/or feel they have been helped by religion. Religion provides a powerful language to justify fanaticism as well as peace. God doesn't make people bigots and massgonists. People are just bigots and massgionists.

The people who represent a very large religion get drowned out by talk of violence and condemnation. I know quite a few Christians that are happy to believe and God and not force it upon me.
==

[BuFFMb]

not on this planet

[Daedalus66]

World Peace is a relative thing. If I lived on an island, with absolutely no contact with other people, or the outside world, in a sense creating my own little world, then I believe world peace is attainable. But even then, after a year of this "one-man worldpeace", I wouild go insane with no companions, maybe causing a split in my psychy, so in a sense i would be having an internal war. Would that be fracturing the fragile peace of my own little world?

[Orbixx]

Without the belief of God and religion, world peace will still not be possible, although God and religion most certainly DOES NOT contribute to world peace (except for some small minorities).

[BuFFMb]

yea, religion just fucks up all chances for even living together with even minimal problems

[Hacky]

Religion merely gives people a reason to disagree. Without religion, people will still disagree on things like homosexual marriage etc.

In order for world peace, in my opinion, everybody has to agree. Because there will be topics that certain people are passionate about, and they will gather others around them, and they will fight with other groups of people that disagree with them on these topics. Thus: War.

In order to agree on everything, there has to be a world created much like The Giver, and in essence, we lose our humanity.

So no, world peace is nice, but impossible.

[Evonus]

Seeing how it is actually an evolutionary adaptation that humans kill each other over survival and limited resources, then no, there will never be world peace, because prevention against it is rooted in our genetic fabric.

[nick]

Religion will bring on war. I dont know much about this, however, wasnt the Crusades as religious war? There will alwaysl be war, and as long as there's religion, there will never be peace. Man [and woman] cannot accept the fact that they are not the smartest ones out there. "War is a terrible place" - GWBush. [Lawl]. Nevertheless, we should always fight for freedom. However, the war in Iraq. Is just dumb. Operation Iraqi Liberation = O.I.L. We cannot have world peace, but we can try.

[Shins]

God I hate you, nick.

[Napalm]

I love you shins

[Shins]

I love you too, Zombie Jesus.

[Coolguy]

it is possible....just HIGHLY HIGHLY HIGHLY improbable.

Anything is possible, and as soon as someone believes something is impossible...it becomes exactly that.

[Evonus]

God I hate you, nick.

:thumup:

[one]

LOL

[MasterGlitch]

Religion will bring on war. I dont know much about this, however, wasnt the Crusades as religious war? There will alwaysl be war, and as long as there's religion, there will never be peace.

So what your saying is that since the Crusades happened, that makes religion the number one disruptor of peace? What a weak argument.

I think that religion is really only bad when used as a vessel for corrupt people to justify their evil actions in front of a religious majority. It's not religion itself that disrupts peace and causes war, it's the way people go about upholding it.
War is not caused by belief alone. It is caused by people who have poor ways of carrying out that belief. To say religion itself causes unrest is just an ignorant idea.

[Evonus]

So what your saying is that since the Crusades happened, that makes religion the number one disruptor of peace? What a weak argument.

I think that religion is really only bad when used as a vessel for corrupt people to justify their evil actions in front of a religious majority. It's not religion itself that disrupts peace and causes war, it's the way people go about upholding it.
War is not caused by belief alone. It is caused by people who have poor ways of carrying out that belief. To say religion itself causes unrest is just an ignorant idea.

Religion directly causes it, because religion creates more huge differences for people to fight over. Nowadays people are defined by three things, race, social class, and religious affiliation. Those are the three largest differences between people (in no particular order). If you remove one you have 1 less huge reason for people to hate each other, because no matter what the religion preaches it still creates negative diversity.

[speedster]

n0p3, i7z n07 0f hum4n n47ur3

W3 w3r3 cr3473d 70 ki11, i7z n07 in 0u7 n47ur3 70 m4k3 p34c3

[Wo1ke]

Depends on your definiton of world peace. We could have no human vs human wars if something like Terminator happened, and robots became militarilly superior to us. or, we could loose our humanity. Maybe, in 1000 years (when all humans are expected to be one race) if all religion is erased, it would be POSSIBLE to have world peace. But unlikely. And, yes Southpark Pwns.

:banana:

[Steve]

n0p3, i7z n07 0f hum4n n47ur3

W3 w3r3 cr3473d 70 ki11, i7z n07 in 0u7 n47ur3 70 m4k3 p34c3

lol?

Due to human nature, would peace isn't possible. Though it's a nice notion.
It's like how once upon a time Thomas More thought up Utopia. Nice theory, not feasible.

[Darkytehsexydrood]

I just know Peace would be hard, becuase without wars people lose jobs, and ofter things.. War can really be a great tool to jump start the econ.

Also SOO much of our tech is from war, with out war people would nat have ever needed the large ships, that today are helping us learn about our oceans..

Without war how do humans express are selves? Humans have been at war ,fighting, and what have ya for ever.... Sports is a way of helping contain that need to fight. but come on humans as a whole are not peaceful creatures...

I think they may be alien races that are peaceful, but never humans, lol if any thing we will come across these peace loving aliens and kill each and every one of them,
"History repeats its self class, that why you have to learn it ." < one of my wise ol history teachers :p

[Evonus]

I just know Peace would be hard, becuase without wars people lose jobs, and ofter things.. War can really be a great tool to jump start the econ.

Also SOO much of our tech is from war, with out war people would nat have ever needed the large ships, that today are helping us learn about our oceans..

Without war how do humans express are selves? Humans have been at war ,fighting, and what have ya for ever.... Sports is a way of helping contain that need to fight. but come on humans as a whole are not peaceful creatures...

I think they may be alien races that are peaceful, but never humans, lol if any thing we will come across these peace loving aliens and kill each and every one of them,
"History repeats its self class, that why you have to learn it ." < one of my wise ol history teachers :p

If we could gear ourselves towards other industries we wouldn't need to kill people to keep the economy going, just FYI there.

[Napalm]

So what we're all agreeing on here, is that as long as I live there will be no world peace.

[Shins]

But you are dead.

[Napalm]

Sorry, I meant. If you say to yourself: "As long as I live there will be no peace."

[RoboCop]

WAT DA FUK PPL

of course wrld peace is posible, once u all LERN 2 WORSHIP ME

hahaha u is lama lol lol rofl

WASSUP from ROBOCOP


fk me ur all n00bs.

[baklava]

There won't ever be a true world peace, it would simply be impossible to achieve without every person in the world achieving nirvana.

I think that after a few nuclear wars, some space colonies, and a globalization of communications technology, we could live as a more united world rather than as nations.
It won't ever be world peace, though maybe it'll be closer to it.

[Marlin]

I know i'm probably gonna get flamed for this and have my ass ripped apart cause i'm going against everyone else, but, I think world peace is possible. It is possible for humans to be, for lack of a better word, "good". If humans are all created equally as we seem to state, then how different are we from the Martin Luther Kings and John F Kennedys? Why do they have the ability to act maturely and have morals yet so many of the Human Race are unable? Is it that we just don't want to try to accept people? We ALL have the ability to be humanitarians (even napalm).

[Steve]

I know i'm probably gonna get flamed for this and have my ass ripped apart cause i'm going against everyone else, but, I think world peace is possible. It is possible for humans to be, for lack of a better word, "good". If humans are all created equally as we seem to state, then how different are we from the Martin Luther Kings and John F Kennedys? Why do they have the ability to act maturely and have morals yet so many of the Human Race are unable? Is it that we just don't want to try to accept people? We ALL have the ability to be humanitarians (even napalm).

Humans have the capability to be *this* way. i.e. Martin Luther Kings and John F Kennedys, but people don't choose to be, and circumstance doesn't always permit. Especially when taking human nature into consideration. Just because one has the capacity to do, doesn't mean that they'll do it. I'm sure world peace is possible, I mean, if someone can come up with the theory and peace on some levels can be achieved and maintained (thus far) then on a broader level it would theoretically work. But it's incredibly doubtful seeing as all humans are different and we have plenty of goodandbad. I'm thinking the only world "peace" could be achieved, is if either six billion+ people all have an epiphany and decide never to do a bad/wrong thing again, or if some big tough strong wo/man comes along and takes over the entire world and controls us.

[Evonus]

Humans have the capability to be *this* way. i.e. Martin Luther Kings and John F Kennedys,

I love how you listed two martyrs, who because they were killed at the height of their popularity may be slightly overrated?

[Marlin]

Are you saying that Martin Luther King wasn't a good person?

[MasterGlitch]

Are you saying that Martin Luther King wasn't a good person?

Are you saying that Martin Luther King never did anything bad at any time in his life?

[Shins]

I'm pretty sure he's just saying that we remember both men more fondly because they died young, and were very popular at the times of their death. Marytrdom has a way of crystallizing a famous person's reputation.

As is, we can fantasize over what "might've been" if JFK and MLK had been allowed to live. Chances are pretty high that the reality wouldn't stack up to the dream.

[forgotten marine]

definently not possible... as stated before... we cant be at peace with each other without losing our humanity.

[Crossed]

Only one way to get world peace. all people agress and haves the same opinion about EVERYTHING. Else some fucked up person could start a war for some stupid reason.

[Marlin]

Are you saying that Martin Luther King never did anything bad at any time in his life?

No i'm not saying that he NEVER did anything bad, I'm saying that he was basically an altruistic person. A better example would have been Nelson Mandella, a person who truely sacrificed himself. We all have the ability to be good. This also means that we all have the ability to be evil, yet it is a choice that must be made. I believe that all people, whether or not it is conscious, make this decision, on all levels. The simple act of finding money on the floor, most would put it directly in their pocket, yet most know that the right thing would be to ask if anyone has lost money.

[Shins]

I dislike the concept of the "lone good Samaritan"; thinking everyone else in the world is motivated solely by greed, personal ambition, and back-stabbing makes it easy to pat ourselves on the back for doing "the right thing" when given the opportunity, but I think a lot more people do good deeds than we really acknowledge.

It's the whole "you don't notice the good parts in life because everyone sensationalizes the horrible shit".

[MasterGlitch]

No i'm not saying that he NEVER did anything bad, I'm saying that he was basically an altruistic person.

Well, all it would take is one little thing to set someone off and start a chain reaction that starts a war. You're saying that if everyone acted like MLK then we would have world peace, but I think what we're trying to say(at least I am) is that total peace is not made by basically decent people. It would require no more disputes among anyone at any time, because once a disagreement starts, all hell breaks loose.


The simple act of finding money on the floor, most would put it directly in their pocket, yet most know that the right thing would be to ask if anyone has lost money.

First I'd like to point out that you put both types of people in the majority, which does not help you prove anything("most would pocket found money, but most would find the owner"). Second I'd like to note that money on the floor is much different from other things found on the floor. If you find some money on the floor, there is no way of knowing whether the original owner is even still around, and if you ask a group of people whether someone lost money, they'd all just say "yes." I know that'd be my first impulse. Now, if you find a wallet filled with money on the floor, you could try to track down the owner of that, and it would be a test of integrity for whether you take the money out or write down credit card information before returning it. Or it might be different if you actually saw the person drop the money on the ground. But just saying "you find money on the ground, what do you do?" is not really a good integrity test. Because there is nothing to do BUT pocket it and maybe give the money back if you see someone asking if they found money.

[MaudKip]

Total agreement with Inactive Cargo.

EDIT: For some reason I couldn't quote him..

[Marlin]

most would put it directly in their pocket, yet most know that the right thing would be to ask if anyone has lost money.

Not


("most would pocket found money, but most would find the owner")

Meaning that they KNOW what the right thing to do is, yet they choose not to do it.

I'm also assuming that the other people involved would do the right thing as well.


If you find some money on the floor, there is no way of knowing whether the original owner is even still around, and if you ask a group of people whether someone lost money, they'd all just say "yes." I know that'd be my first impulse.

The people should not claim the money, they should be honest and say no. I'm not claiming that this is a situation that would happen in this way, I am saying that were this a world in which people were honest, it is what should happen.

[Slevin57]

Before we can all be at peace, we must all be equal. **Communistic moment**

It is impossible for us to be equal in all ways.

[Spanky Ham]

Nope we will never be at peace...closest we will get is a stand off because everyone has nukes, but then some idiot terriost will fire a nuke and start a war that will kill us all and we will all go to hell because we are made of sin :) have a nice day

[MasterGlitch]

Meaning that they KNOW what the right thing to do is, yet they choose not to do it.

Well you worded it strangely.

[Crossed]

Nope we will never be at peace...closest we will get is a stand off because everyone has nukes, but then some idiot terriost will fire a nuke and start a war that will kill us all and we will all go to hell because we are made of sin :) have a nice day

Sadly but true

[jdbelec]

Do you believe world peace is possible? Put short and simple. Yes

[MasterGlitch]

Do you believe world peace is possible? Put short and simple. Yes

Do you have reasoning behind this answer?

[jdbelec]

Yep, why do you ask?

[Microphotometrically]

he want's to know, that's why. :P

[MasterGlitch]

Yep, why do you ask?

+rep for obstinance. I think I like you already.

[Shins]

Yep, why do you ask?

It's a shot in the dark, but maybe because this is Serious Discussion, and it's hard to discuss things without elaboration.

I'm probably just fucking drunk though.

[Confero]

No i'm not saying that he NEVER did anything bad, I'm saying that he was basically an altruistic person. A better example would have been Nelson Mandella, a person who truely sacrificed himself. We all have the ability to be good. This also means that we all have the ability to be evil, yet it is a choice that must be made. I believe that all people, whether or not it is conscious, make this decision, on all levels. The simple act of finding money on the floor, most would put it directly in their pocket, yet most know that the right thing would be to ask if anyone has lost money.

No one takes good or evil into consideration when acting. No one acts "for the sake" of good or evil. Since good and evil are concepts open to interpretation, they represent nothing but individual definition. How is asking someone if they lost money the "right" thing to do?

You may rush in and claim I'm a bad guy for thinking it's not "the right thing", but I don't claim that. I'm only curious as to why it is right. Right for who? What stops someone from lying and claiming the cash?

[Wo1ke]

But if we lose our humanity, and we attain world peace, then we as humans are not getting world peace, since we have lost our Humanity. I guess i should have said, AS HUMANS, is it possible for us to attain world peace?

I still don't think it it possible. Even if we were to make a temporary peace, one person would start an arguement with another person over how much...I dunno...land, he has. It escalates, and suddenley, there is people fighting again. Just seems so pointless. A vicious circle if you will.

If by world peace you mean peace between humans, then yes it's possible. But, only if a higher intelligence conquers the earth, be it god, aliens, or robots, and makes us live in a comepletely communist state. Of course, eventually this world would become like the Giver, if the higher intelligence knows it's genetics.

[aerodan]

World peace, I don't think so. Only because of simple human nature. People are born under surroundings which cause them to obtain what ever "flaw" their environment possesses and makes it almost seem impossible to achieve world peace. Maybe if scientists took everyone and corrected what ever "flaw" they had artificially. This attempt though I can only see in a movie with robots and Will Smith running around with a gun.

[PseudoPhilosopher]

Well I see this subject as such.

No matter how flawed a person is or lifestyle or any other variable be it male or female. no one will have similar ideas...Thus full coaperation is imposible.
even if 30,000 people all had the exact same idea and wer actively persueing that Idea...All it would take is one person not of the persuation. Be it that he has a different Idea and thought it was better or he was just not cool with the idea.
The Idea though is that the human social machine "Ripples" so unless the human race was all of one mind, we will never achieve peace.

[lifeiscruel09]

World Peace... Possible?
Thats the one thing that human beings will never achieve. World Peace is impossible for two reasons:
1. Religion; more wars have been fought over religion then anything else And...
2. Power; every person wants power and how do you get power? you fight for it, hence disrupting the peace and destroying World Peace.

World Peace will never be possible!

[act1]

No:cry:
I think it is IMposible, because what is peace ? For indinans it country without machines and other things. For Japanese it is country with lot of computers,computer games, for Slovak it is country with a lot of sex and for Vatican it is sex after married. So, peace is imposible because everybody want something else, and middle between it does not exist. It's horible :(
What do you think ?:eek:

[PseudoPhilosopher]

No:cry:
I think it is IMposible, because what is peace ? For indinans it country without machines and other things. For Japanese it is country with lot of computers,computer games, for Slovak it is country with a lot of sex and for Vatican it is sex after married. So, peace is imposible because everybody want something else, and middle between it does not exist. It's horible :(
What do you think ?:eek:


My complete agreement there...

[nick]

My complete agreement there...

I must say, I completely agree.

[Evonus]

No:cry:
I think it is IMposible, because what is peace ? For indinans it country without machines and other things. For Japanese it is country with lot of computers,computer games, for Slovak it is country with a lot of sex and for Vatican it is sex after married. So, peace is imposible because everybody want something else, and middle between it does not exist. It's horible :(
What do you think ?:eek:

http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l263/Evonus/nostalgia.jpg?t=1168207119

[Beck]

While there are still assholes in the world (which there always will be), world peace will remain impossible.

And to be honest... fighting is the only thing some people know how to do.

Religion causes it, there will always be religion, even if they're proven wrong by science.

[FoxWolf]

World peace will never be possible. Disagreeing with me makes me want to punch you, thus proving my argument.

[Anikal]

Nope we will never be at peace...closest we will get is a stand off because everyone has nukes, but then some idiot terriost will fire a nuke and start a war.

True, but as it stands, the United States are in possession of one of the largest stockpiles of Nuclear warheads.

[act1]

Yes, the world piece is imposible, but i think :bad: , we can change our live and live of our friend to better. no :think: ?
But how, what do you think :wow: ?

[Anikal]

World Peace is possible, but it'll never happen; just like communism.

Too many people in the world want direct control of it, and those controlling people won't just become extinct.

[9483]

impossible. There will always be conflict of interest.

[Lab0mba]

It's possible, just not probable.

[RufRyder]

No i don't believe its possible...it would be denying innate nature for many people...there are so many different opinions on who is 'good' vs who is 'bad'..its a vicious cycle...everyone thinks they are right in whatever cause they are persuing...world peace will never occur to a world full of humans...there are oo many bastards out there ahaha

[poison]

without a mass genocide
world peace is only a fading pipedream.
With one group of people distuping the natural balance, theres going to be someone to set the scales right.
conflict will be ever present, because without conflict, the worlds natural balance will be tipped to far, and chaos will rise

[Anima]

Do you believe world peace is possible?

I laughed when I read the title of this thread. Does that give you an answer?


But to elaborate...no, world peace is really impossible. There are too many people and too many opinions. If everyone always agreed, then yeah, we'd have world peace because we would have no sense of self. People are always conflicting with each other, because we're always putting each other down. That's how human nature works.

[poison]

world peace is a joke
it will never be, and should never be.

[KMFD]

Do you believe world peace is possible?
I dont. Human beings are flawed...we will never stop hating and fearing. All we can do is look for the peaceful options in our own lives and enjoy the peaceful friendships and relationships that surround us.

It's not always about hatred or fearing. The reason why the world is not at peace is gread. Too many people for centuries have been greedy and wanted more and more. This kind of stuff sent people into hatred against those people, and that also made people fear others. This kind of stuff was passed on through generations...

Humans will always be greedy.

I also think that some people lost sight of why they hated others and blamed it on beliefs.

Just a theory...

[Lemmer]

no, world peace will never be possible...

there has to be bad for there to be good

No, there just has to be bad for us to recognize good.

[Slevin57]

Is Good, Good because it is, or because there is Bad? :P

The latter would mean that Bad things are required for the good. Hence making them less intense. See: Judas and Je(b)sus

[Shins]

No, there just has to be bad for us to recognize good.

Effectively the same thing, in practice.

[MasterGlitch]

Is Good, Good because it is, or because there is Bad? :P

The latter would mean that Bad things are required for the good. Hence making them less intense. See: Judas and Je(b)sus

But in that case, the opposite must also be true. Not only would bad things be required for good, but good things would be required for bad. It works both ways.

But really, my interpretation is more that bad is the absence of good. Like hot and cold.

[StopMakingSense]

it will never be, and should never be.
I understand saying it is impossible and will never be, but why should it never be?

[Hacky]

I understand saying it is impossible and will never be, but why should it never be?

Because in a world where there is no war, and we all agree on every aspect of everything, there is only singularity and we thus lose humanity.

[StopMakingSense]

Because in a world where there is no war, and we all agree on every aspect of everything, there is only singularity and we thus lose humanity.

Not necessarily. I mean, just because there is war does not mean there is no conflict or disagreement. It just means a solution to the conflict without war, which is just as impossible as world peace but thats a different argument.

[MasterGlitch]

Not necessarily. I mean, just because there is war does not mean there is no conflict or disagreement. It just means a solution to the conflict without war, which is just as impossible as world peace but thats a different argument.

That's true. World peace does not require complete agreement of everything on all sides. There can still be difference of opinion, but world peace would imply that those differences simply do not lead to heated conflict.

[Opzr1ke]

Yeah there will never be world piece maybe in some parts but
for the most part. It will never happened and yeah for there
to be good there has to be evil. Balances out the world would
be weird if every one was smiling on day rofl

[Hacky]

It all depends on your definitnion of Peace then.

If by peace you mean no wars, then alright, that's possible.

But in my opinion, peace is no disagreements. No harsh feelings, no insults.

To say that people can still disagree and not start a war is actually pretty foolish, because even the smallest topics escalate to extremes. Even a slingle murder out of anger, a single punch thrown, or single wound endured, would destroy said "Peace". And when the topic is a world-wide peace, do you think humanity remains human when we lose the emotion of anger? Or do you honestly believe that world peace still exists even with anger, fighting, murders, etc?

When we lose Anger, we lose Love also, being as they are both driven by the same emotional mechanism. In a world where we are withdrawn from our emotions, we lose humanity.

The only world in which we have Peace is that similar to The Giver.

[Noxis]

I do not believe that world peace can be achieved. Human beings cannot achieve total piece. It is not just nations that hold the trouble, but conflicting beliefs. without everyone having the same mindset as each other then peace can never be global. It is in human nature to be argumentive, or to challenge things. Even if the people and nations could unite, people would have to numb their emotions to get by. this is why world piece can not be achieved.

[NurBoNegro]

Nothing will ever be perfect were humans were flawed.
World Peace would be a nice thing but it will never happen
to many asses and fucks in the world.

[rabidmule]

It is in human nature to be argumentive, or to challenge things.

Tahts basically why we cant have world peace, theres always gonna be a conflict of beliefs and values.

[Demovarian]

World peace is not possible, on top of the fact that humans have the natural thirst for power, control and sometimes blood, there is also the factor of insanity, for example, world peace in itself entails the ideal of peace and harmony among everyone on earth, well even if we end war and violence in terms of hatred via racism, gangs, so onand so forth, there will still be someone out there who goes ona killing rampage due to insanity, that is not something we can currently cure or avoid, sometimes things go wrong, mentally retarded people and deformed people are sadly living proof of that, the inability for cells to divide perfectly and form perfectly every single time is an unfortunate but very real thing, so naturally the brain is subject to this as well. Wrong goings in the brain cause imbalances which cause humans to act in ways outside the norm, hence insanity and violence. And if thats not enough to convince even the most peace driven person out there, they have to take one thing into consideration,the ideal of peace no matter how appealing to them isnt as appealing to others, nor has it been for centuries, men have the natural drive and have had said drive for centuries as do animals to immediately resort to violence to protect their territory as do females to protect their young. In the case of humans this also invloves posessions. So in order to achieve world peace you would have to do the following, solve the differences between races and cultures making everyone uniformal in thought, cure insanity, and while your at it might as well cure trisomy 21, and then somehow figure a way to get rid of human instinct which ultimately destroys the human race because the human instinct is partially what we use when choosing many things including freedom, in essence you would have to get rid of almost every aspect of the human mind that makes us free individuals to acieve peace, personally id rather have freedom.

[bodagit]

World peace I think is possible but it will take awhile. Everyone right now are to different once. We have pretty much become one race and start calling ourselves Earthlings and start conqouring other planets like pluto then world peace will be possible. Just everyone will be worried about universal peace which is stupid cause THOSE ALIENS ARE DIFFERENT!

[Demovarian]

World peace I think is possible but it will take awhile. Everyone right now are to different once. We have pretty much become one race and start calling ourselves Earthlings and start conqouring other planets like pluto then world peace will be possible. Just everyone will be worried about universal peace which is stupid cause THOSE ALIENS ARE DIFFERENT!

What the hell are you talking about? I couldn't understand most of that and what little I could understand read like you had a seizure half way through typing. >.>
Reword and try again.

[mokopato]

not today not never politic religion wethever it is just imposible

[Coffee]

mokopato I'm assuming that SERiOUS DiSCUSSiON is meant for: are you ready because this one might be hard to wrap your mind around, Its SERiOUS DiSCUSSiON!! I know, its a difficult concept but heres a tip. Your post should be more than a line long (with correct grammar as well being somewhat intelligent) and try if at all possible to make it something no one else has said.(I maybe completely incorrect it is just my opinion :P) I do though have to give you credit, for you managed to spell the following words correct: not, today, never, politic, religion, it, is and just.

-sorry mods/admins for the mini flame.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The possibility for a global peace depends on the situation, whether or not this peace is permanent and your definition of world peace.
As it currently stands global peace is impossible, although if you bombed every other country in existence it would create "world peace". Also if humanity was threatened externally, I would like to believe us humans would band together. There examples of course are ridiculous so I guess the answer to your question is not unless under extreme circumstances. (I am assuming that you mean world peace as in no war, not no murder.) This is because yes humans in general are greedy, and are very hateful of opinions that differ form their own. Not to mention the number of mentally deranged people.

[mokopato]

i do not really give a pito about what you say my english can not be good at all but i can kick your ass at spanish grammar fu so # 1 you are ass uber noob user as me and secon whterever

Quote:1. Don't use correct punctuation. Actually, just don't use punctuation at all. Spelling doesn't matter, and use obnoxious acronyms. Also, use "lol" or a similar acronym as many times in a sentence as you can.
lol i meen no 1 liks it rite evr1 wl thnk ur so kewl if u typ lik dis lol

2. Post replies that are completely irrelevant to the original topic, or are just useless, such as "Okay." or "LOL!" or "kthx" or "HAY DID U HEAR ABT TAHT OEN THING!11?" Everyone wants more posts, right?

3. Post a stupid thread in the Serious Discussion board. No one is serious here anyway.

from some master user i think who post the rules vato

at last i can read

[Demovarian]

i do not really give a pito about what you say my english can not be good at all but i can kick your ass at spanish grammar fu so # 1 you are ass uber noob user as me and secon whterever

Quote:1. Don't use correct punctuation. Actually, just don't use punctuation at all. Spelling doesn't matter, and use obnoxious acronyms. Also, use "lol" or a similar acronym as many times in a sentence as you can.
lol i meen no 1 liks it rite evr1 wl thnk ur so kewl if u typ lik dis lol

2. Post replies that are completely irrelevant to the original topic, or are just useless, such as "Okay." or "LOL!" or "kthx" or "HAY DID U HEAR ABT TAHT OEN THING!11?" Everyone wants more posts, right?

3. Post a stupid thread in the Serious Discussion board. No one is serious here anyway.

from some master user i think who post the rules vato

at last i can read

I honestly don't know what to say to this, this has to be the hardest few lines of text I have ever read, although flames are looked down on in here, Coffee was in the right on this one, this guy has no business in here, especially when he can't understand the concept of sarcasm in the posts made by the mods, sorry dude, but you fail. Lack of understanding FTL.

At any rate I have yet to see anyone come up with a compelling arguement to counter mine on this topic, and honestly I would LOVE to see one so if anyone can effectively argue my point on this please do so, I am always looking for a wider view of things than my own.

EDIT: Coffee, not to flame you on your flame, but you may wanna re-think your sentence structure towards the beginning, I had to read it a few times b4 i got what the first few sentences were trying to imply. =) Just a friendly suggestion.

[kinny]

if you look in the timeline of mankind, there's barely a day without war.

Religion, power, territory gains, resources will always be the number one factor for waging war.

[baklava]

i do not really give a pito about what you say my english can not be good at all but i can kick your ass at spanish grammar fu so # 1 you are ass uber noob user as me and secon whterever

Quote:1. Don't use correct punctuation. Actually, just don't use punctuation at all. Spelling doesn't matter, and use obnoxious acronyms. Also, use "lol" or a similar acronym as many times in a sentence as you can.
lol i meen no 1 liks it rite evr1 wl thnk ur so kewl if u typ lik dis lol

2. Post replies that are completely irrelevant to the original topic, or are just useless, such as "Okay." or "LOL!" or "kthx" or "HAY DID U HEAR ABT TAHT OEN THING!11?" Everyone wants more posts, right?

3. Post a stupid thread in the Serious Discussion board. No one is serious here anyway.

from some master user i think who post the rules vato

at last i can read


Sure. mokopato, the spanish grammar master, with quotes such as


a k la tsnada ya vali madre me kede solo haber cualkiera k hable espanol favor de comunicarse al area de servicio se le solisita


Also, it doesn't take more than a retarded brain to figure out that my quotes there are from a thread called "How to NOT get upgraded."


NOTE: These directions mark the exact opposite of what you should be doing, in case you were too dumb to figure that out.

[ipwnu]

Absolutely not. We are humans. It's impossible.

[Demovarian]

Absolutely not. We are humans. It's impossible.

You obviously didn't read the serious discussion rules.... If you are going to post on a topic in here you need to back up what you say with reasoning.

[Moni]

Well from what i have seen, and heard, and read about in the news and the history books......the only way to have peace is to go to war and kill everyone that opposes u, which to me..for some reason, seems like irony cause everyone wants to get what they want by doing the things that they dont want to do anymore. SO in conclusion...when the planet earth is a dead floating rock out past Pluto someday, YES world peace will be possible. (Was that too descriptive?):o

[Wander]

I know how to attain world peace.

Simply destroy it. No more war and no more suffering.

But what kind of pansy ass world would that be?

[Stalin]

Yes, by destroying the world, and everyone on it we will be at peace.

[Moni]

Zomg did stalin just make a rational statement? O.o Gratz man, i was pushin for u....remember that.