Will we EVER have world peace?

[The Black Wolf]

Will we? Will all peoples and nations someday live in complete harmony? Will North Korea and South Korea give each other a hug?

Is world peace just like Santa Claus, part of the imagination or some unrealistic?

Bonus Question:
If the world had one leader or one government for the whole world, would that bring world peace? Is that what's necessary to bring world peace?

[Acid Snake]

There will be world peace when we are all dead.

[Kuro]

I honestly don't thinl theyll be world peace. There will always be a "bad egg" that will influence a group of people to do crazy stuff.

[admartian]

Probably not anytime soon.

Heck, we can't speculate (or make jokes/light of the matter) about a fucking electronic gaming machine without people freaking the fuck out - let alone world peace!

[Vulgotha]

No.

[Bitbydeath]

World Peace isn't possible while the humans are here.

[Cyn]

Only if/when the population as a whole has to band together in common interest and effectively become one state. Like, for example, alien contact or a war with an Earth colony. The same way countries emerged from squabbling city states and fiefdoms centuries ago.

Conflict is in human nature so the only thing that will stop conflict between nations is greater conflict on a larger scale

[Syphon_Filter]

There will be world peace when we are all dead.

That's right friend.

[Yuuichi]

Nope and if we do THAT will be the end of the world. It is foretold the world will have two years of peace before Armageddon. So long as we all at war I can remain clam, when peace hits stock up time for everything.

[Chille]

I hate to be the one to say this, but world peace would be incredible horrible, the impact it could have would be bad, world peace would mean the death rate would lower tremendously, which sounds jolly good but unless the amount born is lowered would mean over population a lot faster.

Also as we would have to have no free will or atleast no real free speech.

[Cyn]

I hate to be the one to say this, but world peace would be incredible horrible, the impact it could have would be bad, world peace would mean the death rate would lower tremendously, which sounds jolly good but unless the amount born is lowered would mean over population a lot faster.

Also as we would have to have no free will or atleast no real free speech.

Far, far more people die of a number of diseases than are killed in war.

Would it be worse than incredibly horrible if we cured cancer? If malaria was wiped out?

[Chille]

Far, far more people die of a number of diseases than are killed in war.

Would it be worse than incredibly horrible if we cured cancer? If malaria was wiped out?

True I guess but unless we find a balance eitherway things could just get worse.

[Sir_Scud]

Only if/when the population as a whole has to band together in common interest and effectively become one state. Like, for example, alien contact or a war with an Earth colony. The same way countries emerged from squabbling city states and fiefdoms centuries ago.

Conflict is in human nature so the only thing that will stop conflict between nations is greater conflict on a larger scale

Well said. That could happen, and would be really interesting to see develop. I believe for the world to become 'one nation', would mean many countries fighting for dominance. Since that's how a lot of city-states were unified.

I doubt peacefully you could solve such unity issues (like the whole Israel Palestine issue), so there would have to be a lot of bloodshed to achieve world peace. But then you have to question if forcing others into 'one nation' is truly achieving lasting peace. But at this point I'm getting off-track.

In short, no.

[The Black Wolf]

I hate to be the one to say this, but world peace would be incredible horrible, the impact it could have would be bad, world peace would mean the death rate would lower tremendously, which sounds jolly good but unless the amount born is lowered would mean over population a lot faster.

Also as we would have to have no free will or atleast no real free speech.

In a world full of peace, all the government has to do is what Japan does: limit the amount of kids. It may not be Japan, but one Asian country only allows couples to have 2 children. That would stop the world from over populating.

I think there can be world peace with freedom of speech. Why not? No war would start over something someone said.

Here's a question for the people who said "No",

If the world had one government or one ruler, would your answer still be "No"?

[Yuuichi]

Here's a question for the people who said "No",

If the world had one government or one ruler, would your answer still be "No"?

Of course because there would be rebellions trying to over through the power in charge because in some country people would disagree with how things are ran and try to over take the government.

[Chille]

In a world full of peace, all the government has to do is what Japan does: limit the amount of kids. It may not be Japan, but one Asian country only allows couples to have 2 children. That would stop the world from over populating.

I think there can be world peace with freedom of speech. Why not? No war would start over something someone said.

Here's a question for the people who said "No",

If the world had one government or one ruler, would your answer still be "No"?

Unless people are drugged or brainwashed there would be a lot of riots about the limiting of children, problem with all this would be the few would have power over everyone, and if we are taught anything its that power corrupts.

[Sir_Scud]

In a world full of peace, all the government has to do is what Japan does: limit the amount of kids. It may not be Japan, but one Asian country only allows couples to have 2 children. That would stop the world from over populating.

I think there can be world peace with freedom of speech. Why not? No war would start over something someone said.

Here's a question for the people who said "No",

If the world had one government or one ruler, would your answer still be "No"?

Things that would cause open rebellions in various parts of the world:

Dominant Religion
Dominant Race
Cultural beliefs vs whatever the gov't is trying to enforce

Since we're being vague, whatever the gov't or ruler does will piss off at least a couple hundred million people. And regardless of where you hail, if something the ruler/gov't does that suppresses your way of life, survivability or beliefs, there's high chance for war.

[Gantz]

In a world full of peace, all the government has to do is what Japan does: limit the amount of kids. It may not be Japan, but one Asian country only allows couples to have 2 children. That would stop the world from over populating.

Think u maybe are thinking of china and they only allow one child.

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

[BingBing]

World peace although sounds great would be devastating for our planet, all progress would slow to a halt unless... you know we were fighting the covenant from Halo....well actually pretty much what happens in halo will happen with history/future give or take a few small changes. like we might or might not ever make contact

[Dave-The-Rave]

Never, way too many morons in the world to allow that.

[The Black Wolf]

Think u maybe are thinking of china and they only allow one child.

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

Darn! I thought it was two!

[Morganator]

There will never be world peace. To think so is to be naive. We will never come together in common interest and then be at peace with each other. Fact of the matter is that the problems humanity has are problems that can't just be washed away by some common threat, enlightenment or intellect. The problems we face won't magically go away because people wish it so. This isn't to mention man's inherent self-destructive nature.

We are by far, the most destructive species on the planet. We nuke each other, gas each other, bomb each other and impose our will on each other as if we have a divine right to rule over one another. We screw each other over in every way imaginable and say to hell with the consequences and once those consequences come home to roost, we push them onto the next generation of ourselves as if they will somehow have it all figured out all the while handicapping them based on some medieval ideology we've boxed ourselves into imposed by our predecessors.

[Fijiandoce]

there was "Peace" when the Romans conquered most of Europe. in fact, it is the longest known period of peace that has been observed, if i recall correctly.
as long as there are conflicting ideologies, peace will be something that will be difficult to obtain. there isn't enough common ground between countries to facilitate a cohesive relationship.
each must look after their own above all else.

assuming we're talking about countries of course.

about individual people....people are stupid

[PSgamer28]

Man I've thought about this a lot since I could remember! World Peace... I'd love to think it will happen someday. So few of us think unlike the people in power... It is possible I think but it will not happen in our lifetime.

[PSgamer28]

"We Tried To Be Decent Men in a Indecent Time"