Personally I think it won't ever exist, there's always an act of violence on the news, even if it's murder.

So what do you think?

-------
**Everytime you smile, the world takes photographs** ^_^

Combat technology is changing the face of war as well. Long range missile and smart bombs are making standing armies slowly decrease in size because they are too expensive to keep when unnecessary. Especially because modern countries major threats aren't nations (in most cases), they are terrorists and and other hostile groups. Threats that are rampant on our city streets, not foreign vilified countries.

World peace doesn't mean a world free of conflict, it means a world free of conflict between nations. And education is the best means to world peace. So long as rational people think about the future, we may yet inch our way into continental trade agreements to a world currency, maybe even a United Nations army to destroy threats to the union.

World Peace is very possible, perhaps even likely. But we all know there's sometimes a difference between what can happen and what will happen. However I remain optimistic that we can get our act together and focus on our next agenda. *points at space*

Wait!?!?! Nato, etc is preventing wars?  

I think you need a history lesson.  

Nato was formed to scare Russia, and also, study WW1, you will realise that the alliance system was a major cause of it.  

Did the UN prevent the war in Iraq?  -- No.  

Conclusion: - These Organizations really don't do much in order to prevent war.  



Combat technology is changing the face of war as well. Long range missile and smart bombs are making standing armies slowly decrease in size because they are too expensive to keep when unnecessary. Especially because modern countries major threats aren't nations (in most cases), they are terrorists and and other hostile groups. Threats that are rampant on our city streets, not foreign vilified countries.  


I'm really not sure how/why technology is important here.  

World peace doesn't mean a world free of conflict, it means a world free of conflict between nations.  

I disagree.  


And education is the best means to world peace. So long as rational people think about the future, we may yet inch our way into continental trade agreements to a world currency, maybe even a United Nations army to destroy threats to the union.  


Reality -------------------------------------> sci-fi year 3050 land


World Peace is very possible, perhaps even likely. But we all know there's sometimes a difference between what can happen and what will happen. However I remain optimistic that we can get our act together and focus on our next agenda. *points at space*

yet you fail to explain how it is possible/probable

Post edited at 11:04 am on Aug. 29, 2006 by Blackadder

-------
The truth is what money can be made from a lie.

Religion:

There will be conflicts here.  There will be radical; militant groups of religions that rise out and fight against the world because it is their view of what is right.

Political Ideology:

People have different Ideas about how things should be run.  There are many different forms of government such as Communism, Democracy, Socialism, etc.  This could create conflicts.

Other than that we don't know what Crisis' can arise within our society to cause conflict.  Countries can be misunderstood in their actions, things like that.

I think that World Peace is a little less likely than a cure for cancer.

-------
Click if your aren't an idiot

---

Quote: from Silver02 at 4:13 am on Aug. 29, 2006World peace is possible. There are trends that are being followed. The major european wars and then the European Union, warring Chinese states and the current unified nation. All the military alliances (ex. NATO), international collaborations (United Nations) and trade agreemants (NAFTA) are making the likelihood of a major conflict between members a lot less likely, perhaps inconcievable for current generations. And such unions are becoming more and more relevant on the world stage.  

Wait!?!?! Nato, etc is preventing wars?  

 
I think you need a history lesson.  

Nato was formed to scare Russia, and also, study WW1, you will realise that the alliance system was a major cause of it.  

Did the UN prevent the war in Iraq?  -- No.  

Conclusion: - These Organizations really don't do much in order to prevent war.  

 
 
Combat technology is changing the face of war as well. Long range missile and smart bombs are making standing armies slowly decrease in size because they are too expensive to keep when unnecessary. Especially because modern countries major threats aren't nations (in most cases), they are terrorists and and other hostile groups. Threats that are rampant on our city streets, not foreign vilified countries.  
 

I'm really not sure how/why technology is important here.  

World peace doesn't mean a world free of conflict, it means a world free of conflict between nations.  

I disagree.  

 
And education is the best means to world peace. So long as rational people think about the future, we may yet inch our way into continental trade agreements to a world currency, maybe even a United Nations army to destroy threats to the union.  
 

Reality -------------------------------------> sci-fi year 3050 land

 
World Peace is very possible, perhaps even likely. But we all know there's sometimes a difference between what can happen and what will happen. However I remain optimistic that we can get our act together and focus on our next agenda. *points at space*

yet you fail to explain how it is possible/probable

---

I never said that those alliances prevented war. I said, if you'll read again, that it decreased the likelihood of a major conflict between members of those alliances.

I think technology should definitely be take into account. I'm not going to say it prevents conflict, but it promotes diplomacy. A good example is North Korea and why we're talking and not attacking. A fact I wish I had established in my OP.

Look it up.

Granted. I'm an optimist. And clearly a Sci-Fi fan. However multi-national military groups are hardly science-fiction. Look up European Rapid Reaction Force. Although it's not a 'standing army', it's a step in that direction.

I'm saying it's likely because the steps a lot of nations are taking. A lot fewer countries are willing to act unilaterally (there are always exceptions). Diplomacy is starting to take precedence over military action. Platforms of discussion and multi-national agreements are sprouting all over the world. The world is slowly but surely starting to work collectively.

I never said that those alliances prevented war. I said, if you'll read again, that it decreased the likelihood of a major conflict between members of those alliances.

oh yes! it most certainly decreases conflict between members, but of course, it INCREASES conflict between those not allowed in.

and decides, If you want an illegitimate war, you simply leave that organisation and rage it


-------
The truth is what money can be made from a lie.

I do not think it will ever exist, there are just too many different things that can cause a fight. From the color of our skin, to the accents with which we speak.

-------
If you have a good opinion feel free to share it, if you
don't do us a favor and just shut up.