Is it easy to conquer world with love than war ?

Answer 1

It's a noble concept but it doesn't work !! War is sometimes a necessary evil so there is love in the world :)

Answer 2

Honestly, I cannot give you that answer. I have not seen anybody try to conquer the world with love, so I don't know the level of difficulty involved.

I can guess though! :-)

I would say war...
either way there will be people that are against you. Either not wanting your love, or not wanting war. However, although love will probably have a long term effect, war is a lot more efficient and forceful.

Nevertheless why would somebody who wants to conquer the world, want to share their love with us too?

Thank You! :-)
I enjoyed your question!

Answer 3

I don't know about conquering the world. There was a romantic notion fostered by some B-movies at one time. But if you want to try, you will have to be prepared to die for the cause, because the guy you want to love may answer with an AK-47 or a belt full of plastic things. Many Christians did in the past, and paid for it. All credit to them, and some of them did change the people involved. But people have short memories.

Answer 4

I wouldn't want to live in the house with anyone thinking people can't get along. I can imagine their lifestyle. Intelligence overcomes ignorance in the end and man has dominion over the animals, it's just that we are still not far removed. Actually I lie, the information age is causing a quantum leap and I see a tsunami on the way if you can read the signs. "It's always darkest before the dawn." In this case the word is spreading of a new age. Everyone is getting it that it's insane to keep doing the same thing and expecting different results.

Answer 5

Your key word there is "conquer"...Who, in their right mind, would want to do that? Men??? It's been their way of doing things, hasn't it??? Tho, hasn't worked too well, from I see...kind a of a messy & inefficient tactic, to say the least.

The wise would use a more "loving" approach--instead of conquering, they would be managing & nurturing--running the show, so to speak, and making a grand production of it all.

I support the ideal "If all do well, all do well"...wish I knew who said that, but if leaders incorporated it into their governing ways, I truly believe we'd see great changes, & experience a more prosperous & harmonious society of humankind & world co-existance.

As far as "easy"--it's costing the American public over 400 billion dollars to support the war in Iraq...don't ya thing we could have done alot of managing & nurturing with that kind of money???

Answer 6

Bro Farooq,

This is a Metaphor. (eg. Holy Grail)

And this could have any number of meanings! If you remove the word WORLD from it, it is easier to understand as it becomes a more generic statement.

What I understand of this generic statement is (though very difficult to explain in words) : If you love some one or any thing you are actually starting a process of loosing yourself and becoming the Object of love. During this process you are actually loosing all the differences you have in yourself as compared to the Object of love. And as a result of this the final product will be that there is no self hence no difference between the Object and yourself.

Hence it easy to dissolve the differences if you love some one and live in the will of the other person (here comes the spiritual angle). so instead of changing the object you change yourself to acchive it.

Hope it makes sense.

Regards

Answer 7

Man's come nearer conquering the world with technology, than with war, or love. [Although from one perspective man's at war with the world]

Thus far man's only managed to knock down some trees and harvest the easy minerals. Hasn't made much of a dent toward actual conquest.

Answer 8

Neither one works well. Any time you have two or more human beings together you're going to have disagreements, and there are certain people on the planet who insist on being "right" or having their way, so no amount of reason or "love" will persuade them to change their minds. Do you think the right amount of love would have stopped Saddam Hussein from stockpiling munitions or using chemical weapons on his own people? On the flipside, the use of force always ends up in death and destruction, and you often have innocent people being killed or property being destroyed, so the end of war doesn't always justify the means. BOTTOM LINE: As long as you have human beings in the equation, there will be no peace. You'll always have someone somewhere fighting over something.

Answer 9

I hope so.

Most people speak a little Italian, because Italians have gone forth and fed people.

Most people know a few Jewish words, because Jews have traditionally used words to teach lessons, or make people laugh.

Most people, most of the time, are playing the love game. It's just that the hate game is *so* LOUD!

Helen

Answer 10

it is inevitable.

but it is very difficult to conquer the world with war.