is world peace possible?

[anveena]

No, it's just some pipe dream.

[Sandrox]

Until there is a universal culture and religion (or lack of one), I dont think so.

[Dairyking101]

No, people are too greedy and would not stop till they have everything in their palm, by then he has destroyed the world...

[draykorinee]

Religion has not been the main source of warfare or violence for a very, very long time.

What a wonderfully generalised comment, I think one has missed the religious violence in Nigeria this year, the suuni and shiites in Iraq, the oppressive violent regimes of the middle east, the violence in Burma, the violence in Egypt over easter, Indonesia has sectarian violence, really I could go on and on, I think religion is chalking up a pretty decent bodycount so far this year alone, even the Buddhist are getting on the act this year.
There is no main source, no outstanding reason for violence or warfare, its really not a scorecard, religion alone is not the deciding factor for peace, but why religious apologists keep saying its not a majot factor is beyond me, the main source of violence this year is looking very much like religion, whether thats the media hype who knows.

[Gestopft]

Religion has not been the main source of warfare or violence for a very, very long time.

Yet for some reason, the two sides in most conflicts just "happen" to be of differing religions.

Edit: above poster beat me to it

[mvaliz]

Eventually, yes...

In our lifetime... IMO - doubtful.

[Deleted]

In the eyes of nature, no.

[Skroe]

Possible and probably not desirable.

Many of the differences large swathes of humanity has are very big, very signficant and very important and shouldn't be neglected for the sake of wide-eyed utopianism.

In the "great arguments" about the manner and ways in which humankind shall live, and what liberties and rights he or she should enjoy and where they are sourced from... there needs to be definitive resolution to these disputes before world peace is possible.

And the people who say "religion" is the key problem are wrong. American and Chinese political thought are very different from each other, and both are different from Anglo which is different from Continental European.

Americans support capital punishment. Most Europeans find it abhorrent. China not only practices it an order of magnitude greater than anyone else, but also affords its citizens far fewer human, civil, and political rights.

There will never be peace so long as these disputes are not resolved. In the case of China, frankly, the world isn't big enough for the both of us.

[Erolian]

tbh without the fear of death/mass extinction or an overpowering presence to rule over the entire population of the planet I'd have to say no.

[Deleted]

possible sure, get rid of certain countries and we'd have world peace right now, however that means that it will get worse before it gets better

[mikeakanice]

What a wonderfully generalised comment, I think one has missed the religious violence in Nigeria this year, the suuni and shiites in Iraq, the oppressive violent regimes of the middle east, the violence in Burma, the violence in Egypt over easter, Indonesia has sectarian violence, really I could go on and on, I think religion is chalking up a pretty decent bodycount so far this year alone, even the Buddhist are getting on the act this year.
There is no main source, no outstanding reason for violence or warfare, its really not a scorecard, religion alone is not the deciding factor for peace, but why religious apologists keep saying its not a majot factor is beyond me, the main source of violence this year is looking very much like religion, whether thats the media hype who knows.

This is a stupid comment. You mention one or two years and it covers the history of war. Let me educate you just a little bit over some wars that weren't because of religion

1.) The Seven Years’ War (Britain & France)
2.)The American Revolution
3.)The French Revolution
4.)The Napoleonic Wars (France & Europe)
5.)The Revolutions in the Americas
6.)The Wars to create and preserve the British Empire (Boer War, Irish Revolution, and the Great Game with Russia would all be examples)
7.)The American Civil War
8.)The Crimean War
9.)The Spanish-American War
10.)The Great War, The War to End All Wars, or World War I (whatever you want to call it)
11.)The Italian invasion of Ethiopia
12.)The Spanish Civil War
13.)Stalin’s invasions of Finland, the Baltic states, and Poland
14.)World War II
15.)The Chinese Revolution
16.)The Cold War, including but not limited to the Korean War, the Cuban Missile Crisis, the Vietnam War, the American intervention in Grenada, and the Soviet campaign in Afghanistan
17.)The Cultural Revolution in China (If you don’t want to call this a war I’ll concede it)
18.)Pol Pot’s Khmer Rouge Revolution
19.)The Falklands War
20.)The Persian Gulf War between Iran & Iraq
21.)The Persian Gulf War between the United Nations and Iraq
The Breakup of Yugoslavia (beginning with Slovenia).

That's just a few. I could give you many more.

Also, I'd like to just add that the whole arab spring was not because of religion. It was because of dictators

[Deleted]

if u continue discussing forbidden topics (religion) this thread is gonna be closed in no time.

[soulzek]

If you really want to theorycraft it, you can also take into account that roll is off the GCD, but pacifies you for the duration. You can attack a split second before you roll. Chi torpedo will end a tad after the GCD from your attack this way, slowing you down a bit, but minimizing damage loss. If you do it right, Chi Torpedo will also damage the boss due to hitbox size. Takes a bit of practice to pull it off, but chi torpedo can actually be a bit of a dps gain on that part.

[mercutiouk]

And I'm saying that it's neither possible nor desirable.

Without competition we wouldn't have evolution so thus this entire argument wouldn't exist. If every random failed offspring got to reproduce equally the useful genetic improvements wouldn't surface quick enough (due to dilution among the population) to keep up with environmental/etc changes and most of your population of said organism would slowly starve/freeze/bake/etc to death as they didn't all gain the needed change quickly enough. Competition ensures that doesn't happen and useful changes are spread quickly.

[soulzek]

Neither of those are necessary to survive. You are also not as likely to be driven to crime in order to vote or get a gun compared to how driven you will be to get food through illegal means, especially as time passes and you go without for a while. Neither of those affect the family in a negative way either, from what I can see.

[NewOrleansTrolley]

Tyr from Dungeons and Dragons said it best.


"World peace is possible once everyone gets what they need or want."

[-aiko-]

Maybe without religion, even then probably not.

[Hypasonic]

Aslong as men have a bit of skin drooping between their legs.....no, never.

[Kraenen]

Tyr from Dungeons and Dragons said it best.


"World peace is possible once everyone gets what they need or want."

So democratic socialism is necessary?

[WeaponXAnimosity]

World peace is possible but will never be a reality. People's greed and weapon manufacturers will never cease to exist.