Do you think mankind will be much better off if there is total peace among the nations of the world?

Answer 1

No, the end of war means the end of man, as the end of war will only be accomplished when all men are perished from the earth.

Answer 2

It will never happen but I will give it a shot.

No, because if there were total peace, then there would be alot more babies being born and no one dying from wars. Over-population would become rampant and then people would get pissed off due to the strain on resources and start killing eachother.

Things are the way they are because they are supposed to be like this. We are currently at equilibrium. The only constant is change. People will continue to die from war. Just remember to keep your head down.

Answer 3

Nations are a transitional phase. World peace will come with world government.

Answer 4

It will never happen...NEVER


First its just impossible..There are always people that would rebel, you cant satisfy everyone

Second when the Apocalypse comes the world will end in a War that will kill 2/3 of the inhabinants of Earth..Then Jesus comes and saves Israel and his followers and etc.

So yeah either way its IMPOSSIBLE, knowing the end of the World ends in a huge war

Answer 5

Interesting question. Thought-provoking. I'm not sure, but I'd say yes - because I'm not one for defending counterintuitive answers just for the sake of being contrary.

Answer 6

World peace is unlikely as long as their are separate nations with separate armies controlled by separate goverments.

The basic and obvious connection with nation states and wars is simply -- the people in the country attacked don't get to have an input in whether they will be attacked:
one side starts a war, without getting the approval of people on the other side who don't get to have a say or vote on whether or not they will be attacked. Nations believe in unilateral use of force to compel other goverments to do what they want. As apposed to the way different governing entities within a state resolve disputes

Contrast the recent wars in Lebanon, or Iraq,whose people didn't have any say in whether their country would be attacked..

In contrast If Britain or France have a dispute under the European Union, they can resolve he dispute without going to war, as can California and Arizona if they have differences over borders, or use of water from the Colorado river, or whatever.

The diffences is the the goverments and Britain and France and the states of the US agree that disputes will be resolved by means other than use of military force.

Until and Unless there is a world government, providing an agreed upon binding peaceful way of resolving dispues between "states", and controlling all armies, there won't be world peace.

But before that happens people will have to view the interests of people in other countries as important as the interests of people in their own country.

Currently the government of the US is one of the biggest obstacle toward any movement toward a world government, because many people and elected officials in the US are afraid of the US ceding power over its own affairs, and are opposed to putting the the US under the control of world bodies, even in such areas as world court, treaties to control global, ir warming, or to ban the use of land mines, or to greater power or effectiveness of the UN or other world bodies. One reason for this fear is that a number of current nations are not democratically governed, but that is only one reason, as the US has worked to undermine and overthrow many democratic goverments when their leaders pursued interests contrary to large American Corporations, or refused to take sides in the Cold War. .

Two interesting and very thought provoking books on the subject are

The Causes of War http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0029035910/104-3188571-7759907?v=glance&n=283155

and The Parable of the Tribes
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0791424200/104-3188571-7759907?v=glance&n=283155
a list of books on the subject can be found at
http://www.au.af.mil/au/aul/bibs/cause/causewar.htm

(As explained in the parable of the tribes, which begins with a simple queston, Imagine a group of tribes living within reach of one another. If all choose the way of peace, then all may live in peace. But what if all but one chooses war?) , for better or worse a lot of our current "Western" society including, educational, business and financial , systems, goverment science, and even child rearing practices and religion, have been shaped by wars and the threat of war, because only those cultures and social systems that are able to effectively defend themselves from military attack and impose their way of life on others, survive in a system where societies sooner or later impose their will on others by military force, --a sort of survival of cultures (analogous of survial of the fittest in biological evolution) of those cultures that are most effective in being able to marshall resources for killing and desctruction. Cultures to survive have to either imitate those that can impose their will on them by military force, to defend themselves, or else get wiped out, , or are defeated militarily and have the culture of the winner imposed on them. The end result is that the cultures that survive are those best able to marshall resources to impose their will on others (those able and willing to kill and destroy on a vast scale)

Answer 7

OFCOURSE MANKIND ALWAYS LIVES BETTER IN PEACE, BUT THIS IS NOT GONNA HAPPEN. WHETHER YOU BELIEVE IN THE BIBLE OR NOSTRADOMUS IT IS FORETOLD WE ARE GONNA HAVE WAR.

Answer 8

yes

Answer 9

It is a nice concept,I just don't see it happening...Ever.