What could replace War?

[Wicky_42]

Government leaders having duels with flintlock pistols

Or maybe Rock Paper Scissors, two out of three

A duel can't solve national disputes - would you rest everything on the performance of a single man? Would you give up your liberty, your home, your wealth just because one man lost a duel? It would be a case of "Fuck that, I could do better!", and cue warfare, lol.

Solving war would require a completely different culture, one that didn't seek profit and personal gain, perhaps one that saw the dissolution of boundaries between one culture/region/belief system and others, for if all are equal and everything shared there is far less impetus for conflict. Plus, with less power in single individuals, personal motivations (greed, revenge, whatever) loose sway to mass opinion, doing things that are in the interest of many rather than the few.

Huh... I wonder if that's what they were talking about... *goes off to find a copy of Communist manifesto*

 

[LockeDown]

I'm in agreement with others in this thread. The world needs more giant Gundam fights anyway.

Gundam fights (thank you to whoever gets this)

Spoiler

 

[Zildjin81]

The BIGGEST MW2 match ever made.

That or the invent like a really really complex game...kinda like Risk...but more complex.

Like you know, life?

 

[w1n5t0n]

I dont think any alternatives would work. Whether you have a race, a game, whatever, if a country that loses thinks their army could beat the country who won, they'll just go to war over it. If there was an alternative then it would have to be something where less people die, but the losers can't do anything about it. So far giant robot battles sound the most logical(that sentence sounds wierd) Since the winners would have giant robots to keep the other countries in line and the losers' giant robots would be destroyed.

 

[Life_Is_A_Mess]

The nature of any kind of animal you can think of is survival.

Why do we want money? To survive.
Why do we need territories? To survive.
Why do we need to reproduce? To survive.
Why do we eat? To survive.
How do we survive? We wage war.
For this, we need to be greedy. And greed fuels war.

So my answer to this problem is simple: Unless we destroy all of our human essence, we will still be greedy *goes on forever*.

As you can see, I'm not very concise, so I'll answer the thread now:

Total unification of the world,(?)
Even wealth for everyone in the world,
Enviroment Laws respected,
Unified goverments,
Respect for all cultures,
Curruption elimination,
many, many others

 

[DSEZ]

NO matter what we pick China is gonna win.

I like the idea of a champion from one country fighting a champion from another country.

Knights or something equaly medievil.

its a even contest between china or brazil

OT:i like the idea of a fighting tournament but i say we have videogame tournaments

 

[GrinningManiac]

There was a bit in All Quiet on the Western Front where one of the soldiers thought that war was stupid, as it got the people who didn't care fighting to the death over something they didn't start and dosen't affect them

Instead, this chap suggested that the ambassadors and leaders of the opposing country have a bare-knuckles fight, and all the little people could come and watch and enjoy themselves

I'd love to see that, but Putin would have won everything, and Brown's an ex-rugby player, so I don't know what Obama could do

 

[AkJay]

Technically, the Nuclear Bomb ended war. with it's creation and first time use, people were scared shitless. Sure, we've had conflicts in the past (Vietnam, Korea) but nothing that would classify as a full-scale war. So now instead of fighting, we created the UN to talk things out.

Over 2 million men died in Vietnam. Show some respect, and get a dictionary. If that isn't a 'full scale war' then you're an idiot.

I've been on this website for almost a year now, and you are the first person to call me an idiot. why has it taken this long!?!?

 

[cha05]

laser tag... or airsofting

 

[sauerkraus]

Capitalism, global economic dependence. /thread

 

[SonicKoala]

Technically, the Nuclear Bomb ended war. with it's creation and first time use, people were scared shitless. Sure, we've had conflicts in the past (Vietnam, Korea) but nothing that would classify as a full-scale war. So now instead of fighting, we created the UN to talk things out.

Over 2 million men died in Vietnam. Show some respect, and get a dictionary. If that isn't a 'full scale war' then you're an idiot.

To be fair, over 60 million died in World War 2. We will never have a conflict of that nature ever again, which is what I think he was trying to say. Because of that precedent, using the term "full-scale war" to refer to something like Vietnam just doesn't seem appropriate. Perhaps the term "world war" would be a better term - we'll never have a world war ever again (lest we get completely destroyed by nuclear weapons).

 

[Orcus The Ultimate]

GAMES DUH!

 

[RanD00M]

A epic game of human chess.1 chess piece is one platoon.And there no no kings.The man with the last piece or pieces wins.

 

[dietpeachsnapple]

A constitutional requirement that anyone who votes for a country to GO to war, has to fight on the front lines.

thats actually it yes. Now i just have to rule the world to get this thing through

a bonus is, the idiots who actually do sign can kill each other and we get rid of them.

Please do. I have been looking forward to this for some time.

I would also accept, if they felt that they were not physically fit to fight, that they could send their children in their place.

If they are ready to send sons and daughters to die, they should be ready to send their own.

 

[mrbones228]

There will always be war.

war is always won by the guy with the bigest stick and if you have a nuke you have a tree.

 

[cannot_aim]

boredom

 

[EMFCRACKSHOT]

I have 2 different ways, both stolen from different comic books.
The first (and my favourite) is taken from Commando and involves high tech vertual reality rooms where two teams from the opposing countries fight against each other in historical recreations of famous battles alongside a number of ai npcs'. The winner gets to make terratorial claims from the loser.
Nobody dies, the dispute is settled and everybody had a good time

The other way, as seen in Judge Dredd, involves two teams of four each with one reserve from the opposing countries fighting in specially designed combat arenas (they fight to the death with whatever weapons their country gives them). The winner again gets to make terratorial claims from the loser.

A great thing with both of these is that they can be televised for your viewing pleasure and people can gamble on the outcome

 

[Triple G]

As said in "Lord of War", war is an essential human need like eating or recreation. There will always be war, and even if the big countries can scare each other with nukes, there will still be war. I mean, if the NATO and the SCO(i.e. Russia & China to show the biggest 2 countries in this organization) get fed up at each other and start a war they won't nuke each other because that would be the end of the world. They are already making plans to minimize the influence of nukes, and and nukes will never be used, because if you nuke your enemy, you can't take their land and their stuff.

 

[The Rogue Wolf]

Beatboxing tournaments. [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YaMdbyXctJQ]

I'd keep an eye on Germany, they seem to be practicing for this....

 

[breadlord]

Football? It's nationalistic and violent enough.

Then you would have a lot of confused people. Americans would think this [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_football] football, while the rest of the world would be thinking soccer.

American football is the ***** of rugby, that doesn't want his nails to get hurt, and has to wear full tanks of armor to feel a slight bit safe.