Aha! Mr Zambezi, this is the first time that I agree with anything that you have said. Does that mean that there is a chance that there will be an end to all wars?
If we can avoid some sort of nuclear armageddon, world peace is inevitable. Given time, genetic homogenization is inevitable. Given enough time, we should have a future where “white”, “black”, and all other racial distinctions are obsolete. We’ll all probably look like (a guess) vaguely Indonesion people, but I have no idea. Cultural homogenization should follw in short order, and by that time technology (combined with the newfound lack of cultural animosities (sp?)) should make a world government feasible. Of course, this may take another 50 or 100 generations, but it will happen.
So smile the next time you see an interracial couple walking down the street: they’re doing their part to further world peace. Laugh the next time you see a piece on TV decrying the death of an obscure language: we’re one step closer to brotherhood!
If we had a land free of war, the people could concentrate more on making things and bettering their society. The some warmongers would want what the country has, and attack it. The country falls to ruins.
Hey, if we had a nuclear holocaust, the atomic glass in Syria would still hat the atomic glass in Israel.
In order to have world peace, there must be an end to conflicts (axiomatic). So who gets to decide the results? Out of the 2 views of any conflict (I’ll assume just 2 for simplicity) either one has to be suppressed, or a compromise which neither side can be happy with must be enforced. Would you still be in favor of world peace if it’s your own views that are declared wrong?
pinqy
Peace on Earth, Good Will towards Men, Utopia is possible… as long as you get rid of all the people first. 
Seriously, tho… It will happen someday, when everyone realises it doesn’t solve problems as fast as just talking and bargining about it. The US and other countries aren’t in the agression business anymore (don’t need to be, really), but some countries still are. Until we balance all that out via natural progress, we will still have “wars and rumors of wars”.
There will be two periods of world peace, if you believe the Bible. The first period will be brief, during the reign of the Antichrist. The second period will last 1,000 years, during the reign of Christ on earth. If you take the secular view, then no, there will never be world peace. Trying to get a few billion people to cooperate peacefully is beyond logic.
There are a number of problems with this statement. Sure, there might not be any grown up nasty wars between democracies but… There are a number of instances where democracies have invaded other coutries for greedy selfish reasons. As well as a number of instances where democracies have conspired to overthrow other democracies and replace them with dictatorships. There have also been a number of cases of democracies invading each other in africa.
oldscratch: It would be helpful if you had at least one example of each…
PeeQueue
Fine don’t accept my arguments at face value.
There are a number of instances where democracies have invaded other coutries for greedy selfish reasons. …
US into Iraq, Much imperialism in the late 19th early 20th century, US into panama, NATO into Serbia, US into Philipines, on and on. If any one else wants to throw out more examples feel free.
As well as a number of instances where democracies have conspired to overthrow other democracies and replace them with dictatorships…
US into Chile, US and Iran, US and Indonesia, there are others but I can’t think of any off the top of my head.
There have also been a number of cases of democracies invading each other in africa…
South Africa has invaded Lesotho, South africa has invaded Angola, the war in the Congo attracted a number of outside countries.
Three doesn’t make much sense, changing human nature means the end result won’t be humans we’ll be something else. Maybe we can genetically modify ourselves into peaceful lethargic beings but that isn’t what being human is about. Kinda reminds me of a sci-fi story where someone slowly turns himself into a plant. No thanks.
One and two are pretty much the best bet for a hypothetical peaceful planet as the main motivators of agression are economics and national/ethnic differences. I’d think just getting number one to work would probably do the trick, an even distribution of wealth would end a whole lot of problems as want and economic class wouldn’t exist anymore. Probably needs to be carefully monitored to make sure it lasts.
Two alone wouldn’t really do much as the national identity (which is quickly dissolving in first world nations anyway) would be replaced with many different groups at each other throats instead of just a few.