Do you believe we truly have begun the journey to world peace? Or do you believe that history will repeat itself?

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 07 Feb 2015 23:36:56 -0500

At the conclusion of WWI, "the Great War," it was truly believed to have been the war to have ended all wars. The violence was so great, the scale so enormous, that it was thought no nation would ever dare risk such a war again for risk of history repeating itself. Then WWII happened.

Despite the conflicts that have raged since WWII we are arguably living in the most peaceful era of all recorded history. From a global perspective interpersonal violence is at historic lows, and the worlds great powers have largely not risked any direct confrontations since the end of that last World War. This is of course obviously a matter of chronological perspective and relativity, but the point stands.

So my question to the RallyPoint community is this. Do you believe we truly have begun the journey to world peace? That the trend is real and will continue? Or do you believe that history will repeat itself. That another genocide equal to or greater than the scale committed by the Third Reich is not only possible but inevitable? Are we living the dream of the people after "the war to end all wars," or do you believe we are just living in a lull with the next figurative invasion of Poland coming closer one second at a time?

Response by COL Jason Smallfield, PMP, CFM, CM made Feb 8 at 2015 12:31 AM

COL Jason Smallfield, PMP, CFM, CM — Sun, 08 Feb 2015 00:31:34 -0500

Have we begun the journey to world peace? No for several reasons.
- The US has averaged a major military engagement every 20 years since 1776. The Strauss-Howe Generational Theory helps explain tangentially why this is and is articulated in their 1991 book "Generations". I think this trend will continue.
- Read "Clash of Civilizations" by Samuel P. Huntington. Good book that basically is an argument against the argument that we have begun the journey to world peace.
- Historically, wars have been fought for three main reasons: religion, resources, and royalty. Royalty is still around but is not the driver of wars that it once was. Religion and resources, however, are a different matter. Huntington lays out Religion in his book. Resources, meanwhile are finite except for renewable energy (solar, wind, sea). The competition for these resources will only increase as the human population exponentially increases. I think religion and resources will be the main drivers of future conflict and that the journey to world peace is a temporary phenomenon. This does not mean I am looking forward to future conflict but the best way to have peace is to be prepared for war. Many in today's US society do not seem to understand this. They seem to think that what occurs in the US occurs throughout the world. They are sadly mistaken. Many parts of the rest of the world operate on the "might makes right" principle where the force that has the guns/power gets to decide what is right. ISIS, Boko Haram, and Al Quaeda are but three examples.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 8 at 2015 1:51 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 08 Feb 2015 01:51:52 -0500

I believe in mathematic algorithms however, this documentary reveals significant foresight to the nuclear question. The "read" is a time consumer -

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 8 at 2015 2:02 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 08 Feb 2015 02:02:43 -0500

Intriguing display.

A Time-Lapse Map of Every Nuclear Explosion Since 1945 - by Isao Hashimoto

Japanese artist Isao Hashimoto has created a beautiful, undeniably scary time-lapse map of the 2053 nuclear explosions which have taken place between 1945 an...

Response by Sgt Jason Tanner made Feb 15 at 2015 12:12 PM

Sgt Jason Tanner — Sun, 15 Feb 2015 12:12:22 -0500

As long as so many World Leaders refuse to objectively learn from history, or just blind to it we are doomed to have to relearn the lessons of history. When you have world leaders, like our current CnC who refuse to accept history and learn from it. They will continue to make the same mistakes as British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain and French President Albert Lebrun and believe that peace can be achieved through diplomacy and appeasement. The other problem is that so many world leaders refuse to realize that in our modern world isolationism is not possible, and that looking only at things in their own country is a recipe for disaster. Today, more so than at any time in history, every country is interdependent on each other for commerce and security that to look only at the economy and policies of your own country neglecting to look at others is economic suicide. They also think that ignoring the social (war/strife) situations in other countries is unimportant, when these thinks effect markets not only in those countries but regionally and world wide. They also think that they can use diplomacy to 'control' radical element in other regions, which didn't work out too well for Briton and France with the Nazis in the 30's did it?