This discussion is now closed.

Check out other Related discussions

"What the world needs is a war."

Reply 20

Broderss

3

in any case our lives would be much easier without the middle east or east asia. south asia's alright though.

Reply 21

hardees

4

Not a WW3 but something has to be done..

Reply 22

tieyourmotherdown

14

I wonder if all the middle class students saying the world needs a war would be saying that if they lived in, I don't know, Palestine, The Gaza Strip, Chechnya ..?

Reply 23

Gallant92

Original post by tieyourmotherdown

I wonder if all the middle class students saying the world needs a war would be saying that if they lived in, I don't know, Palestine, The Gaza Strip, Chechnya ..?

one student*

Reply 24

KayK

8

Original post by Broderss

in any case our lives would be much easier without the middle east or east asia. south asia's alright though.

I really hope you were joking.

Reply 25

Broderss

3

Original post by KayK

I really hope you were joking.

why? do you not like south asia?

Reply 26

bufferz

13

Just so long as you realise that you lot would be drafted, nay CONSCRIPTED into the forces and be sat in trenches in France again, or wherever.....In fact, it would be interesting in generations to come looking back and seeing how this would be dealt with as I doubt "human rights" would count for much if we are at war on the scale of previous WWs

Nah, scratch that, theres gonna be a nuke a-coming our way, its just a case of from whom....

Reply 27

AtomicMan

13

Your class is very stupid, why would anybody want a war?

Reply 28

Fusilero

14

Original post by Broderss

why? do you not like south asia?

Not more than East Asia or the Middle East.

Reply 29

Totomack

Nuclear weapons make this question a non-starter.

"I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones."

Reply 30

stac4321

10

Clearly that boy doesn't realise how painful it is to loose someone close to him.

Besides, the cost of war is massive, especially with nuclear weapons. And with nuclear weapons there won't even be a world afterwards...

And the Arab/Isreali conflict is a different kettle of fish, both have legitimate claims to the land so it's much harder to solve than regular border conflicts and agressive countries...

(edited 13 years ago)

Reply 31

KayK

8

Original post by Broderss

why? do you not like south asia?

It's not that it's just, you'd rather eradicate the whole of East Asia? What makes South Asia better than East Asia?

Reply 32

The Cornerstone

16

Err would that make our economy even worse because we would spend a lot of money on the war which we're short of at the moment?

Reply 33

Kai.

Not sure it's a completely obsolete ideology. I understand where he is coming from.
Often the worst brings out the best in people, and as WW2 showed (as far as I recall from GCSE History) that there is a chance of lower unemployment and economic growth. I suppose too, in some sick sense it would curb the problem of overpopulation to some degree.

Practically I don't think it's plausible, for starters the global socio-economic situation isn't THAT bad. Secondly and probably more important, the threat of war brings too close the threat of Nuclear weapons.

Unlike WW2 (apart from the end; obviously) there isn't the same amount of requirement for man power, with much more advanced technology, and the use of nuclear warheads. I'd more than likely be a political war, like the Cold War, though perhaps with more dangerous consequences.

I definitley see his point, but I can't agree.

Reply 34

tehFrance

17

IMO I think we do need a WW3, as when there is war there is greater innovation, the advances in healthcare, technology and well weaponery* basically many advances that are good for us come at times of war not at times of peace :biggrin:

also wealth comes from war too and I am very much for wealth :tongue:

(*better weaponery is not really a good thing but hey).

Reply 35

Broderss

3

Original post by KayK

It's not that it's just, you'd rather eradicate the whole of East Asia? What makes South Asia better than East Asia?

they are still caucasian which means they are the same race as me. plus i like the indians very much.

Reply 36

KayK

8

Original post by Broderss

they are still caucasian which means they are the same race as me. plus i like the indians very much.

So you're south Asians are caucasian, therefore better than Eastern Asians?

And btw, only the pashtuns are caucasian.

Reply 37

MTR_10

14

Not sure about having a world war but one thing is for sure - This country (the UK) needs to be invaded at some point in the future. It will give people here a perspective on life and enable us to rebuild as a modern country.

Reply 38

BakerStreet

1

This guy sounds an art school rejection away from invading France... Please tell me he has no desire to be a politician.

Although it is true a war can bring economic prosperity, this would not be sustainable in the long term, wars can't last forever and you're headed for a fall when it's over. It's also just not worth the probable millions of deaths a third world war would bring. With the new technologies since World War II, a third world war could devastate vast areas spanning all of the continents. The last thing you want to do is give the U.S. President a chance to press that little red button.

Reply 39

MTR_10

14

Original post by tehFrance

IMO I think we do need a WW3, as when there is war there is greater innovation, the advances in healthcare, technology and well weaponery* basically many advances that are good for us come at times of war not at times of peace :biggrin:

also wealth comes from war too and I am very much for wealth :tongue:

(*better weaponery is not really a good thing but hey).

So we can all live in luxury accommodation like the post world war II style social housing?

"What the world needs is a war."

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you