There will probably never be World peace,conflict is just worth too much to powerful people.
If I had to put money on who would fire the first nuke though,it would definitely be the USA
There will probably never be World peace,conflict is just worth too much to powerful people. If I had to put money on who would fire the first nuke though,it would definitely be the USA
They already have done, and are quite proud about it.
I would say radical Islam. Those idiots from the Middle East are so wanting to start a war with outsiders. Either that, or they're wanting world domination.
There will probably never be World peace,conflict is just worth too much to powerful people.
If I had to put money on who would fire the first nuke though,it would definitely be the USA
you think the planet would be peaceful if human beings didn't exist?:D
Conflict and killing are at the core if all life on earth.
The thing is, wild animals only kill others when they're in need of food. Conflict in the animal kingdom could happen because of a group that defends their territory. There's been countless wars in history that have resulted in unnecessary kills, and probably all because of power hungry leaders.
America....don't think we would have all the problem with radical Islam without their interference or some of the past problems with Russia come to that.
If I had to put money on who would fire the first nuke though,it would definitely be the USA
as has been said, they were the first, and they did it when the country they dropped it on were negotiating details of their surrender.......nice bunch !
The thing is, wild animals only kill others when they're in need of food. Conflict in the animal kingdom could happen because of a group that defends their territory. There's been countless wars in history that have resulted in unnecessary kills, and probably all because of power hungry leaders.
Animals attack for more than food, they wan territory, mates, resources, just like us, some even kill just because they can.
We are no different to other animals, the only difference we have the intellect to analyse our own behavior and discuss it with each others.
Nature is cruel and violent, just as much so if we are there or not.
Actually a Marxist view to see history as development of conspiracies rather than as shaped by individuals.
:kitty:
I don't think you have to take a particularly Marxist view. Putin is not Kim Jong Un. He is hugely popular among people who actually understand that there is an alternative. There is no reason to suppose that Bambi would take his place if he fell down a well one day.
It's hard to gauge the extent of Putin's territorial ambitions; certainly he might feel that a lot of lovely oil is going to waste outside Russia (mainly in Kazakhstan), and would be better inside it. Russia vs Kazakhstan is not a war any of us would want to see. And he might fancy some kind of grab in the Baltic states.
But I think the middle East is a bigger threat at the moment. I think it's too simplistic to say 'radical Islam'; as in Saudi Arabia, the threat is generally from different political groups, all of them islamic, and is focused round wealth and power, not around doctrinal differences. In Iraq, for example, Sunnis and Shias often used to inter-marry (and Christians were in powerful positions) until the removal of Hussein destabilised everything.
Probably the place that has been destabilising countries all over the world, funding coups in any country without one of their puppets in power and has intervened directly or indirectly in over 50 countries since WWII, who knows how many deaths they are responsible for. Or it could be russia
bluefb
Posts: 15,461
Comments
If both were wiped out we would still never get it.
The biggest threat Humans
But as the poster above Humans all day every day.
If I had to put money on who would fire the first nuke though,it would definitely be the USA
They already have done, and are quite proud about it.
you think the planet would be peaceful if human beings didn't exist?:D
Conflict and killing are at the core if all life on earth.
Agree with that.
The thing is, wild animals only kill others when they're in need of food. Conflict in the animal kingdom could happen because of a group that defends their territory. There's been countless wars in history that have resulted in unnecessary kills, and probably all because of power hungry leaders.
Another Putin would just take his place. You hardly ever improve a situation by taking out one individual.
as has been said, they were the first, and they did it when the country they dropped it on were negotiating details of their surrender.......nice bunch !
True but for the rest of life it's about survival and food, not for pleasure or because they can.
:kitty:
We are no different to other animals, the only difference we have the intellect to analyse our own behavior and discuss it with each others.
Nature is cruel and violent, just as much so if we are there or not.
Major difference I would say, and yet we don't seem to use it.
I don't think you have to take a particularly Marxist view. Putin is not Kim Jong Un. He is hugely popular among people who actually understand that there is an alternative. There is no reason to suppose that Bambi would take his place if he fell down a well one day.
It's hard to gauge the extent of Putin's territorial ambitions; certainly he might feel that a lot of lovely oil is going to waste outside Russia (mainly in Kazakhstan), and would be better inside it. Russia vs Kazakhstan is not a war any of us would want to see. And he might fancy some kind of grab in the Baltic states.
But I think the middle East is a bigger threat at the moment. I think it's too simplistic to say 'radical Islam'; as in Saudi Arabia, the threat is generally from different political groups, all of them islamic, and is focused round wealth and power, not around doctrinal differences. In Iraq, for example, Sunnis and Shias often used to inter-marry (and Christians were in powerful positions) until the removal of Hussein destabilised everything.
Which I mentioned. Yes, if two males are after a female, I can imagine conflict happening.