Peace and Cooperation?

HamaticBabylon · May 18, 2005

Will planet earth ever be at peace with itself? Will this new unity be because of some kind of extraordinary event? How will we achieve unity as we advance into the space era? Will a nuclear war unite us, and if so what will be the reasons behind this?

Perfection · May 18, 2005

I dunno, I think with the means to communicate readily and at the same level with people accross the planet we gain perspective and lose the desire to hurt people liek those we chat with. If there is a hope for world peace, it lies in communication.

North King · May 18, 2005

HamaticBabylon said:
Will planet earth ever be at peace with itself?

Planet earth and all but one of the organisms living upon it have never found much reason to quarrel with each other in any large scale efforts.

The human race? Probably not. It's been divided for too long.

Will this new unity be because of some kind of extraordinary event? How will we achieve unity as we advance into the space era?

I doubt we will. Look for competition between nations and corporations in the race for space. All the previous treaties are liable to be thrown out the window.

Will a nuclear war unite us, and if so what will be the reasons behind this?

Nuclear war usually destroys before it can unite.

amadeus · May 18, 2005

Worldwide peace in what aspect? Nations at peace between each other? If you go by that criteria, I suppose you could say we're at a relative peace now.

There will always be guerillas and terrorists.

SeleucusNicator · May 18, 2005

Perfection said:
If there is a hope for world peace, it lies in communication.

Communication also serves to make differences between oneself and groups that are not oneself's much more clear, and, in that sense, it has contributed greatly to the rise of nationalism and other forces typically seen (sometimes unfairly) as leading to conflict.

The trick is not communication, but rather common interest. If there were to emerge some sort of threat common to all nations on Earth which could only be met by unity (say, an alien invasion), that could very easily result in world unity.

Of course, once the aliens are defeated, don't expect lasting world unity necessarily. There are many instances of counter-balancing that did NOT result in the merging of national identities.

blackheart · May 18, 2005

SeleucusNicator said:
The trick is not communication, but rather common interest. If there were to emerge some sort of threat common to all nations on Earth which could only be met by unity (say, an alien invasion), that could very easily result in world unity.

Of course, once the aliens are defeated, don't expect lasting world unity necessarily. There are many instances of counter-balancing that did NOT result in the merging of national identities.

It is like in the book Ender's Game, humanity was united against a common alien foe, and as soon as the foe was defeated, humanity splintered again. World peace may be achieved, but it would not last. There will always be strife and a need to find an enemy to fight, and a cause to fight for.

On another note, world peace does not always equal serene environments. One could achieve world peace by wiping out every race but one, or something along the "evil" line.

Perfection · May 18, 2005

SeleucusNicator said:
Communication also serves to make differences between oneself and groups that are not oneself's much more clear, and, in that sense, it has contributed greatly to the rise of nationalism and other forces typically seen (sometimes unfairly) as leading to conflict.

I would argue the binding and commonality is far greater

SeleucusNicator said:
The trick is not communication, but rather common interest. If there were to emerge some sort of threat common to all nations on Earth which could only be met by unity (say, an alien invasion), that could very easily result in world unity.

I would argue that communication brings common interest as we become concerned about folks we like on the other side of the world.

Yom · May 19, 2005

In the next 100 years? Of course not. In the years that follow those 100, though, it is a possibility. Never underestimate humanity's stupidity, though. I'm sure we'll achieve worldwide peace and screw it up at least once.

Zardnaar · May 19, 2005

No. Hates to easy.

Ramius75 · May 19, 2005

Nope, we are not getting any peace anytime soon with warmongers invading other weaker countries for resources and terriotory using lies and deceptions. We still have a long way to go.

one way to have peace is to create a multi polar world with equal military might as all sides and no one country is dominant. And no country is also in cahoot with one and other, this maybe avoid some war.

And of coz to have a common enemy or goal. this will help too.

Nonetheless, i still hope that there will be more gradual change of mindset in human being that its better to work together than in conflict and hope it wont only happened after a world war.

amadeus · May 19, 2005

Ramius, the last time we had any sort of bi or multipolarity, hundreds of millions of Eastern Europeans were under the iron boot of the Soviet Union.

Ramius75 · May 19, 2005

rmsharpe said:
Ramius, the last time we had any sort of bi or multipolarity, hundreds of millions of Eastern Europeans were under the iron boot of the Soviet Union.

yeah, but maybe there is a new world order coming soon. i can see that the european and joining together. binding together using geography and culture. and also Russia and china having closer coorperation.

yeah, there is a chance that there might be another war using this method. Thats why the best alternative is still the UN.

There are still too many conflicts since WWII. Korean war, vietnam war, kosovo war, falkland war, iraq war and many many others. So far the UN is working in some situation, not in some, but at least there is a chance.

plarq · May 19, 2005

Ramius,the new world order seems uncertain and there're many hidden dangers on the way,yet we're still going for world peace.
But,due to endless debates on any news media anyday,I don't see the future as rose-colored peaceful wonderland.

Ramius75 · May 19, 2005

plarq said:
Ramius,the new world order seems uncertain and there're many hidden dangers on the way,yet we're still going for world peace.
But,due to endless debates on any news media anyday,I don't see the future as rose-colored peaceful wonderland.

i know, there are still few potential hotspots all over the world atm. And as resources are getting lesser and increase in demand, there sure to be some conflicts sooner or later.

Right now, there are still.

North korea (getting worse)
Taiwan (slightly better recently)
Iran (not good)
Iraq (Horrible)
Phillipine
Sri lanka
Pakistan
Thailand
Sudan
Ivory Coast

So i think the UN can actually play a better role here, if only most countries can speak in one voice.

Winner · May 19, 2005

That depends on how long will it take for EU to take over the world. I guess one century will be enough :evil:

Verbose · May 19, 2005

Is the question if there will be conflict in the future, then the answer must be 'of course' but conflict doesn't necessarily mean war.

We might have to come together over things like stopping the deterioration of the global environment. We might become so technologically interdependant that open warfare becomes a loosers game.

eyrei · May 19, 2005

We will either learn to cooperate or we won't be around another 100 years...

stormbind · May 19, 2005

Mankind will put it's differences asside when threatened by an alien invasion fleet, and no sooner :sad:

HamaticBabylon · May 19, 2005

rmsharpe said:
Worldwide peace in what aspect? Nations at peace between each other? If you go by that criteria, I suppose you could say we're at a relative peace now.

There will always be guerillas and terrorists.

Well there will always be terrorist until the Jews evacuated the Palestinian lands and go back to Eastern Europe for were they came form

I guess a guy like you who just dreams about having lots of money and astronomical Celebrity status where every thing revolves around you is just typical of "rmsharpe" critical thinking or more accurately arrogance of extreme perfection". :coffee:

eyrei said:
We will either learn to cooperate or we won't be around another 100 years...

I think it will take about 230 years for mankind to be "not around".

Shaihulud · May 19, 2005

Maybe if all us nerd type people gather around, we can convince the world that earth is in imminent danger from Aliens. That might unite the world

. Basically the peaceful unity of the world is in our hands, noone else dream those dreams.

Peace and Cooperation?

Will we achieve worldwide peace in the next 100 years?

No, mankind is too selfish and greedy!

yes, one day we will put our differences to one side!

Deity

The Great Head.

blech

Serenity now

Diadoch

unenlightened

The Great Head.

Re-ese Mekwanint

Deity

Deity

Serenity now

Deity

Crazy forever

Deity

Diverse in Unity

Deity

Deity

Retenta personam!

Deity

Deity

Similar threads