Discussion in 'Off-Topic' started by Bigfoot3814, Jun 16, 2009.
JAPAN, 1941, anybody?
Scarcity causes war. Once we eliminate scarcity there's a good chance we can war as well. All we need is fusion power and universal constructors (molecular nanofactories).
I've discussed this book more times then I felt like it (both on this forum and others). So I'll just sum up:
- his historical data on wars is for a good part wrong or fabricated
- his postulation on desensitization and lessening the impact of killing by modern military training is correct mostly
- humans are not violently opposed to killing, the basic instinct 'him/her or me' is very hard to ignore and as a result they will still pull the trigger even if they will feel guilty/bad afterwards
The problem there is there was no interdependency. Japan needed our oil. We didn't need anything from them.
...except a pretense for us to go to war with them!
War, war never changes. It would be too difficult to change it.
Bingo. And one of the things that tends to avert war is when each nation has many people who have experience in and appreciation for the other. They may even have many nationals actually located inside the other country (who would be killed if a bomb dropped on a city) at any given moment. This raises the possibility of a technologically driven change that could prevent wars - if people became so mobile that the idea of attacking other countries became comparable to (the way you would now view) an attack on your favorite restaurant, art museum, university, resort area, etc etc.
I didn't say there were, it could take 500 years.
How long is not important.
The fact of the matter is people are perfectly capable of not trying to kill each other.
without aggression you wouldnt even bother to try to eat and drink.
meh, you know what I mean.
Good flick. I got a real kick out of the patdowns at the protest. It's always a good idea to search peace protestors for illegal weapons.
It's good to see what are apparently more and more military who are refusing to kill in an illegal war. I wish them all the best as they are persecuted for their views regardless of when they finally decided to make that decision.
It would also appear that international wars on a massive scale have already ended forever due to nuclear weapons. I seriously doubt there will even be another "Cold War". From now on, it is going to be the 500 lb gorilla telling some smaller, and essentially defenseless, country where he can sit.
Not so really, when nanotech advances to a point where you can build a fleet of modern fighter jets for chump change the only important thing will be manpower and that is also probably going to be obsoleted by wireless control of military assets. But then again when that happens (20, 30 years from now I reckon, provided global tech progress remains more or less constant and in fact it appears to be snowballing) you will be able to devise weapons so lethal that nukes will seem like children's toys.
Oh good, wars of ideology unconstrained by resource limitations. That will be fun to watch.
It sounds like science fiction to me. Got a source?
This reminds me of Haldeman's "Forever Peace": the ending was so disgusting that I was wishing that the "bad guys" would just kill add the peace-loving nuts or destroy the damn world. It was just not human...
Wars will continue, but they'll be fought with drones like a really cool virtual reality game.
And then when they evolve true artificial intelligence they'll suffer the hardships of war and ponder deep questions about it for us.
Well, I don't think the establishment of said government is insurmountable. Consider that developed nations don't fight each other.
Plenty of material to read.
Separate names with a comma.