Well is it a world war yet?

yellum

One shot...

Uhm, hasn't the USA and UK been involved in a good few wars in the past twenty years ? Their war machines have constantly been going.

We have the internet thanks to arpanet a military network. We have gps because of the american military. Military sponsored research has given us a lot in the past twenty years.

Adam, you need to read fightclub. I admire you're beliefs but humanity is still at the level where only when violence is used and people and property destroyed and damaged do governments and people sit up and take notice.

After that the negotiations begin.

Typedef

Most of you are wrong on several different levels.

War is endemic of the human's psyche's slavery to the id. If humans were more evolved there would be less violence, for example in our primate cousins interpersonal conflicts are regularly (especially in chimpanzees) resolved by physical conflict. The tendancy in human society is for democratic resolution of interpersonal conflicts by an entity called the state. Now groupings of humans 'states' fight in much the same way our primate cousins fight for control of terroritories and resources, however once humanity evolves and technology advances sufficiently to propell humans into the cosmos we will more than likely encounter other space faring lifeforms and more than likely these lifeforms will be pretty hostile.
Therefore once humans reach into space, we humans will have to unify because we will more than likely come face to face with spacefaring races who are extremely hostile because of Darwinian notions of survival of the fittest either humans will eventually supplant these other races or will come to be exterminated by these other space faring lifeforms.

Much the same thing happend to Homo Neanderthalis and Homo Erectus when Homo Sapiens spread out from Africa, the competing groupings of humans vied fro resources, 'possibly' made 'war' on each other and eventually Homo Sapiens became the only species of homonid on the planet. Therefore one day it will not be intra species warfare as humans are preiodically preoccupied with now, but inter species, interstellar warfare.
It is this kind of reasoning that has led leading thinkers in human society such as Stephen Hawking to call for humans to begin to genetically reengineer themselves to be as smart as strong and as physically resiliant and as long living as science can make, so that when it comes time for our species to compete with other high technology species, we have the best 'Darwinian' chance we can give ourselves.

Typedef.

Clintons Cat

(re britain and americas wars)
One thing that typifies these wars is the inability of the enemy to strike back directly at either Britain or America.
Wars like memories grow better the futher away they are.
Unfortunately Tony Blair seems to love these kinds of wars,heaven help us if we ever pick on a nation that has developed the ability to hit London using manly weapons like tanks,artillery,bombers,fighters and missiles,not cowardly weapons like suicide bombers and civillian aircraft .
War sucks.

mike65

Originally posted by Typedef

...however once humanity evolves and technology advances sufficiently to propell humans into the cosmos we will more than likely encounter other space faring lifeforms and more than likely these lifeforms will be pretty hostile.
Therefore once humans reach into space, we humans will have to unify because we will more than likely come face to face with spacefaring races who are extremely hostile....
Typedef.

Bloody hell Typedef, you don't want to delete that
section do you?
The chances of coming face to face with alien life form that are sufficently evolved to communicate with on any level are soooo small as to not be worth even considering.

Anyway we'd win - we have Hollywood on our side.

Mike.

Typedef

You make a valid point.

The other possibility is that humans will spread throughout the galaxy and in a Asimovian Foundation like model will begin interstellar pan Galatic war at frist between the strong spacer colonies and the earth, but then eventaully against Trantor like superpower power bases.
Fortunately the robots will be looking out for us.

Typedef.

mike65

Actally thats' a lot more likely if still in the far future, btw I should have noted in my post that we may not be sufficently evolved to comunicate with any other species either!

Mike.

dahamsta

Uhm, hasn't the USA and UK been involved in a good few wars in the past twenty years ? Their war machines have constantly been going. We have the internet thanks to arpanet a military network. We have gps because of the american military. Military sponsored research has given us a lot in the past twenty years.

Well, what about NASA? They've given us a hefty chunk of innovation since their inception, a good chunk of which wasn't driven by military applications, but our curiosity, our natural instinct to explore. How about the World-Wide Web, which was conceived by Tim Berners-Lee in CERN, and nearly didn't come to fruition at all because he was supposed to be working on the particle accelerators? It really only came to fruition because Berners-Lee said to his bosses: "Look, this is a really good idea, how about turning a blind eye to my development work?"

This is really difficult to argue, because the natural response is: How do we know that that these innovations wouldn't have come about in another way if we didn't have this natural preponderence to scrap? Couldn't ARPANET just as easily have been created as a network for communication between businesses? The argument against that is that businesses would have tried to keep a tighter control on it, but who has a tighter control over things than the government? Again though, it's difficult to argue, it becomes more of a discussion on the existance or non-existance of fate than anything else.

But here's one final example to tickle you though: Public/private key cryptography. Whitfield Diffie and Martin Hellman (Diffie-Hellman) are credited with inventing public/private key cryptography in the mid-seventies. (Another man, Ralph Merkle, is all but forgotten, although he played a critical part in this. Also, Diffie-Hellman invented just the concept of public/private key cryptography; it was Ronald Rivest, Adi Shamir and Leonard Adleman that actually came up with a working implementation of it (RSA).)

However, almost in parallel with the work being done in the "public domain" above, the UK's GCHQ (Government Communications HeadQuarters) was starting to get ticked off with the key distribution problem, and started looking for a solution that would boost security and cut the cost of key distribution (in the old days, all keys had to be delivered in person by agents, which added up to quite a lot). And so James Ellis, Clifford Cocks and Malcolm Williamson invented public/private key cryptography too, shortly (very shortly) before it was invented in the US.

So, in this example, the military application beat the public domain example, but only just. Both implementations were developed almost in parallel, and critically, the military application was hidden from the public until just five years ago, when Clifford Cocks gave a talk on it in 1997. In fact, the British government battled Cocks on this, they didn't want him to give the talk at all. If it hadn't been for Diffie, Hellman, Merckle, Rivest, Shamir and Adleman, Phil Zimmerman wouldn't be releasing PGP until round about now.

Again, this is an arguable example, because there is no doubt that the drive to protect communications stems from our preponderence to fight. But the critical factor here is something that may be being misunderstood: I don't think humanity should stop fighting, period; I think humanity should stop fighting with physical violence. Earth would be a very boring place to live if we never disagreed, never argued, and never stamped our little feet and sulked. But it would be a far more productive and happy place if we all agreed to stop shooting, stabbing and blowing one another up.

Adam, you need to read fightclub. I admire you're beliefs but humanity is still at the level where only when violence is used and people and property destroyed and damaged do governments and people sit up and take notice. After that the negotiations begin.

Well, I /saw/ Fight Club, but I'm not sure it's the same thing. And I'm not disagreeing with the notion that humanity is at this level. My point is, again, that we should not accept this, whether implicitly or explicitly, we should battle against it. There is a preponderence in people to say, just as has been said above, that "that's the way we are". It is the way we are, but we should recognise that our preponderence to fight (with violence) is a flaw, and what do you do with flaws? You fix them. We should always keep that flaw in the back of our mind, and always use our minds as our primary weapon.

adam

yellum

Most of NASAs work is done for the military.

And I agree that our violent tendencies are a flaw, but what can you do if not using violence doesn't work ?

king of fifa

as the hippies used to say :make love not war man

azezil

gee's Typedef you're a bigger sci-fi nerd than me ROFL!

handyandy

Originally posted by yellum
Adam, you need to read fightclub. I admire you're beliefs but humanity is still at the level where only when violence is used and people and property destroyed and damaged do governments and people sit up and take notice.

I have not read the book (seen the film about 6 times), but are you espousing the theories of a guy suffering from (movie

)split personality disorder

/ sleep deprivation / chronic depression and sociopathic / psychopathic / megalomaniac tendancies?

Gargoyle

Originally posted by dahamsta
Geez, will you get over your utopian world pipe dream? Wars happen. "War is the natural extension of diplomacy." Always has been, always will be.

Just because "wars happen" doesn't make them acceptable. If you accept war, you are by extension accepting murder, rape, child abuse and every other crime against humanity and the person.

There is nothing wrong with dreaming of peace and humanity and trying to achieve them, even if it's only with words. If you think it's wrong to express a "utopian world pipe dream", you're no better than the warmongers. You represent all that's wrong with humanity.

Your thinking is vile, I detest people like you.

Nice rant there. I never said I liked war or wanted war, only that it is ridiculous to think it is escapable. The rest of your post is unworthy of a response, except I will respond to:

Originally posted by dahamsta

Your thinking is vile, I detest people like you.

It is people like you who appeased Hitler and caused the deaths of millions by their inaction and cowardice. You detest me? Good on you. If someone such as yourself did not detest me, I would think I was doing something wrong. :cool:

dahamsta

Try reading the rest of the post Gargoyle.

Blaming "someone such as myself" for the evils of Hitler and the Nazis is mind-boggling. Do you blame conscientious objectors for the atrocities that took place in Vietnam? Even the atrocities committed by U.S. grunts?

A conscientious objector is not the same thing as a coward.

adam

handyandy

Originally posted by Gargoyle
I never said I liked war or wanted war, only that it is ridiculous to think it is escapable.

But on a different plane, taxes are also inescapable, but everyone tends to do their damndest to pay as little as possible.

king_of_inismac

so in an Ironic world, war is good for industry, technoligy, inventions, jobs, brings ppl together, of course theres death, but in the end we all die, the important thing is how we live.

This is what I regard as a rather flippant dissregard for the human suffering and tragedy involved in global warfare.Would you be so, if you were fighting in the battle of the somme?

July 20, 1918

My own beloved wife

I do not know how to start this letter. The circumstances are different from any under which I ever wrote before. I am not to post it but will leave it in my pocket, if anything happens to me someone will perhaps post it. We are going over the top this afternoon and only God in Heaven knows who will come out of it alive.

I am in his hands and whatever happens I will look to him in this world and the world to come. If I am called my regret is that I leave you and my bairns. I go to him with your dear face the last vision on earth I shall see and your name upon my lips, you the best of women. You will look after by Darling Bairns for me and tell them how their daddy died. james Milne (1896-1915)

Sharkey

Originally posted by yellum
Most of NASAs work is done for the military.

Having contracted to NASA and worked on various projects in the past, including the Hubble Space Telescope, I can tell you that this statement is pure trash.

At most, NASA provides the occasional launch vehicle to put a few military satellites in orbit (So have the Chinese and ESA). However, military satellites are not built by NASA. Neither are missiles.

Gargoyle

Originally posted by dahamsta
Try reading the rest of the post Gargoyle.

Blaming "someone such as myself" for the evils of Hitler and the Nazis is mind-boggling.
adam

I'm not placing blame for the evils of Hitler, etc. I'm saying that people such as you aided their cause.

Originally posted by dahamsta
Do you blame conscientious objectors for the atrocities that took place in Vietnam? Even the atrocities committed by U.S. grunts?

No.

Originally posted by dahamsta
A conscientious objector is not the same thing as a coward.

I never said it was.

The Corinthian

Originally posted by dahamsta
A conscientious objector is not the same thing as a coward.

"When they came for the Jews, I was not a Jew and so I did not speak. When they came for the Catholics, I was not a Catholic and so I said nothing. When they came for the homosexuals, I was not a homosexual and again, I said nothing. But when they came for me, there was no one left to speak."

But to refuse to act often comes close to it, Adam...

Von

Originally posted by The Corinthian

"When they came for the Jews, I was not a Jew and so I did not speak. When they came for the Catholics, I was not a Catholic and so I said nothing. When they came for the homosexuals, I was not a homosexual and again, I said nothing. But when they came for me, there was no one left to speak."

But to refuse to act often comes close to it, Adam...

That your own version of Niemoller's quote is it? This is the more common one :-

"First, they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out because I was not a socialist. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out because I was not a trade unionist. Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out because I was not a Jew. Then they came for me, and there was no one left to speak for me."

And this is reputed to be the correct one.

"When Hitler attacked the Jews I was not a Jew, therefore I was not concerned. And when Hitler attacked the Catholics, I was not a Catholic, and therefore, I was not concerned. And when Hitler attacked the unions and the industrialists, I was not a member of the unions and I was not concerned. Then Hitler attacked me and the Protestant church — and there was nobody left to be concerned."

Did you speak out about the raid on the Genoa Social Forum when people were beaten in their sleeping bags, taken to jail, tortured, humiliated and forced to sing fascist songs in rooms with pictures of Mussolini on the walls?

"I will be misquoted by idiots." Martin Niemoller

The Corinthian

Originally posted by Von
That your own version of Niemoller's quote is it?

No, it’s just the first one I found when I did a quick Google for it.

And this is reputed to be the correct one.

Reputed by who? Not that it makes any difference, as the exact text does not change the context in which I quoted.

Did you speak out about the raid on the Genoa Social Forum when people were beaten in their sleeping bags, taken to jail, tortured, humiliated and forced to sing fascist songs in rooms with pictures of Mussolini on the walls?

Of course I did, I laughed at the irony of their finally finding the ‘Fascists’ they were so intent on ‘fighting’. Don’t ask me to feel sympathy for anarchists.

"I will be misquoted by idiots." Martin Niemoller

LOL. And where is your source for that quote Von?

Von

Originally posted by The Corinthian
Of course I did, I laughed at the irony of their finally finding the ‘Fascists’ they were so intent on ‘fighting’. Don’t ask me to feel sympathy for anarchists.

Pretty much the response I expected. For your information the Genoa Social Forum was an umbrella group for over 600 organisations that were represented at the summit. It was composed of all the major NGO’s, christian groups, trade unions, environmentalists, debt campaign groups and so on.

The anarchists regarded the GSF organisations as wishy washy liberal reformists and chose to steer clear of them. If the police really wanted to go after the anarchists, they could have done so. As Susan George of ATTAC, George Monbiot and many others pointed out, the police knew where the nasty window smashers were camping but didn’t go after them. Instead they attacked all the other sections of the demonstration.

Police strategy was very simple. They not only allowed a certain level of property damage and violence, they participated in it using neo-nazis and undercover police in order to discredit the movement as a whole.

The selective abuse of Niemoller’s famous quote, illustrates that in addition to the bootboys who get to do all the actual thuggery, there’s always enough snivelling hypocrites about who take some perverse delight in seeing them batter, torture and humiliate people who happen to have different political or religious views.

The Corinthian

Originally posted by Von
The selective abuse of Niemoller’s famous quote, illustrates that in addition to the bootboys who get to do all the actual thuggery, there’s always enough snivelling hypocrites about who take some perverse delight in seeing them batter, torture and humiliate people who happen to have different political or religious views.

No more than your selective abuse, although you neglected to address that. btw, would abuse be defined by what does not follow your definition?

The World is also full of immature twits who seek to save the world from one prejudice by replacing it with their own. Personally, I'm far too old to know everything, Von...

"Hatred is gained as much by good works as by evil." - Niccolo Machiavelli (if you feel I've abused that one, I'll post it again in Italian).

Victor

Originally posted by king_of_inismac
July 20, 1918

<snip>

You will look after by Darling Bairns for me and tell them how their daddy died. [/I] james Milne (1896-1915)

Is this fiction or did he really write the letter three years after he died?

gandalf

Well as this thread has gone so far off topic that its dropped off the edge of the earth consider it closed.

Gandalf.