1. This forum is in read-only mode.

World Peace is not possible.....

Discussion in 'Debates' started by calvin_0, Nov 28, 2009.

  1. redoperator

    redoperator Well-Known Member

    your bullsh*t detector is needs some major calibration. they coincide with each other, hate in large sums can lead to war given the right circumstance. how bout I kick you in your face? you wouldn't like something like that right? the word "something" can be a noun or a verb... you can hate something about me and if given enough somethings to hate, you might end up hating all of me and those identical to me.

    those who war against the united states hate us because we are deemed as infidels, the "something" that Muslim extremists hate the religion of Christianity, so in the best essence...
     
  2. Hypr

    Hypr Well-Known Member

    Actually, no. His bullshit detector is working well. Perhaps it is your head that is suffering from an electrical fire...

    "Liking something" and "having peace", contrary to what you think, do not coincide each other. Counter-examples to your claim: someone who likes to kill people, or someone who likes to incite hatred towards someone else or a particular group. Obviously, those two examples do not result in peace (and in matter of fact, disturb peace.) Perhaps that is something you've never thought of before posting your hasty rebuttal?
     
  3. redoperator

    redoperator Well-Known Member

    um yes... i have...

    world peace is never possible because someone in the wide world hates the actions of someone else... how bout I lay this to rest... I will teach the rest of my family's generations to hate saudi arabia and with all our hearts and fight against them tooth and nail, and untito make sure that no enemy of our caste breathes again... to make war and allies until the world ends.

    boom... world peace out the window, how you like that?
     
  4. Hypr

    Hypr Well-Known Member

    Way to diverge away from the point in which both, NeoStriker and I have made...

    As NeoStriker pointed out, "liking something" and "having peace" are two different things. You argued against that both of those two things coincide each other, when the fact is it is absolutely not true (thanks to the counter-examples I presented).

    I wonder if you were even paying attention to what NeoStriker said in the first place...
     
  5. redoperator

    redoperator Well-Known Member

    well even though you don't have to like something to have peace with it, it is advised you do... for me its have them like you or fight until you do... even a stalemate can end up to liking someone (look at us and germany and japan) , you can hate them but later down the road you might end up working together and enjoying their company. so yes in some ways it might not coincide, but in a different view it does.

    world peace cannot truly show itself unless you end up liking them... or at least tolerating them and showing that you can work together toward a greater good... until then, world peace is just a dream out of touch from the tips our fingers forever.
     
  6. Hypr

    Hypr Well-Known Member

    I'm certain the United States whooped both Germany (with help of Allied Nations) and Japan's ass in World War II. Those results were hardly called a "stalemate". Hell, the US nuked the shit out of Japan.
     
  7. redoperator

    redoperator Well-Known Member

    ok, what about iran and israel? they're sh*t's going to go on for a long time...
     
  8. Hypr

    Hypr Well-Known Member

    And? Are they at peace right now? Or have they ever been at peace before?
     
  9. redoperator

    redoperator Well-Known Member

    thanks for proving my first point hypr

    and that something is their existance
     
  10. Hypr

    Hypr Well-Known Member

    Yet at the same time, you also manage to contradict yourself, gavilatius.

    ^ You didn't know your history well right there...

    ^ Your piss-poor follow-up example in what appears to be an attempt to drive your point that a "stalemate can end up to liking someone", in which that example itself is a contradiction to your claim (i.e. even a stalemate can end up to liking someone).

    Learn to construct solid arguments please.
     
  11. VIII....

    VIII.... Well-Known Member

    um
    um im not really sure (not good at history, well i don't take much interest but) in the WW 1 wasent japan and germany fighting the in WW2 they allied or somkething? i could be wrong but thats a stalemate? (lol acually im only guessing what stalemate means)
     
  12. Hypr

    Hypr Well-Known Member

    Japan was never involved in World War 1 at all. I think you may have been confused with Italy that was once a part of the Allied Nations in World War 1, but later switched over to align with the Axis Powers in World War 2.

    And World War 1 concluded with the Allied Nations' victory, but the aftermath resulted in a horrible mess for Germany (i.e. Versailles Treaty).
     
  13. redoperator

    redoperator Well-Known Member

    balkan powderkeg?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allies_of_World_War_I yeas they did , korea was under control of japan until WWI was over.
     
  14. VIII....

    VIII.... Well-Known Member

    yeah they were http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allies_of_World_War_I
    i don't think those 415 people killed in action had nothing to do with it

    lol i acutally learned something (Reluctantly) listening to my dad ramble
     
  15. SlicedandDiced

    SlicedandDiced Well-Known Member

    they werent dude Wiki not reliable its fake dont believe wiki its crap like 85% of it are facts turned into bull crap
     
  16. redoperator

    redoperator Well-Known Member

    um, yes they were allies in WWI because you can open up any highschool textbook that has WWI in it and it will tell you "japan then declared war on germany and its ally china, overrunning posts in chinese territory and in Korea"
     
  17. Mein

    Mein Well-Known Member

    I believe the definition of peace is different to each person :(
    So that makes world peace's chance is 1%>WP%>0%
     
  18. gaynorvader

    gaynorvader Well-Known Member

    Sorry to butt in, but the US did not "whoop" Germany and Japan, they suffered many losses, only won the beaches of Normandy because they were so incompetent that the Nazi's tactics were screwed up. Also Japan's attack on Pearl Harbour was undercut by the Admiral of the Japanese Navy throwing his weight around so that only a fraction of the Japenese planes were actually sent.

    So while the US(and Allies) certainly won the war, it was mainly down to luck and some serious blunders by the leaders of both Germany and Japan.
     
  19. SlicedandDiced

    SlicedandDiced Well-Known Member

    Well yea that is true Japan did allied themselves British and the rest of the future mambers NATO, but japan has been having conflicts with china before world war I so there intension is solo to invade china. they were involved in a war but it they werent directly involved in the world war1. thats the point im trying to point out sorry if i didnt make it clear in the last post. its becuase some used Wiki as a source and i got a lil pissed
     
  20. redoperator

    redoperator Well-Known Member

    well sorry if I used wiki as a source, i was trying to prove a point as fast as I could...I apologize. Japan then loast its holdings in the 1930's.