I think the real danger of living in todays world is that man has the ability to not only kill himself with WOMD but also destroy the planet to point where all life could become extinct .
There is a great chasm between the ABILITY to do something and ANY CHANCE of it actually happening. During the 60s and 70s? Maybe, but mostly because the long-term effects of a nuclear war were not widely known or acknowledged.
The thing is that you are looking at WMDs all wrong. They are weapons that are most effectively used by never using them but by HAVING them. I'm sure we'll see a couple localized nuclear exchanges in the near future (India/Pakistan, for one), but nothing on a global scale to worry mankind. The superpowers will never fire them in anger - just too much at risk, and everyone knows that now.
Big corporations have poluted the environment to the point that if there are no measures to preserve the eco system that in itself could wreak all sorts of havock on the planet .
True, this is a concern. However, consider that the US is the ONLY first world country not currently *trying* to do something about it. And how long do you really think the US will be able to stand alone on this issue?
True Mankind has always had the world in a state of war throughout the history of the planet but never before in the history of man has there been attempts to negotiate with diplomacy thru a medium such as the league of nations or the UN but to no avail , so you might say it is impossible for man to live in peace under his own terms . WW1 was believed to be the war to end all wars but nothing could be further from the truth on the issue .
See?
Sorry, no offense, but this is EXACTLY the kind of....lets see....how to put this....semi-retarded?...revisionism the society uses. Or, maybe worse, exploiting the poor education system of this country.
1) NOBODY, *EVER* thought WW1 was the 'war to end all wars'. Not one person, not ever, at no point in time thought that. The whole 'war to end all wars' line was a recruitment line fed to teenagers to try and get them to enlist - but even then, nobody really believed it. It's like the modern Army's "Army of One" slogan. Does the idea of being an "Army of One" gets recruits in? Sure it does! Does ANYBODY really believe someone is LITERALLY an 'Army of One'!? Hell no! It's just a recruitment slogan, nothing more or less. There is no meaning behind the words.
2) Quick question - how many wars between world powers have happened since the forming of the UN? What's that? NONE? Huh, guess it really is worthless, huh? Look through history. Before the 20th century, the 'world powers' were France, England, Prussia (later Germany), and Russia. Earlier than that Spain and Denmark were. Find me a 50 year stretch in time before the 20th century when you didn't have at least two of the world powers at the time at war with each other. The UN has succeeded in keeping the world powers from fighting, and drastically minimized the number of 'proxy' wars fought.
Has it ended war entirely? Of course not, but nothing will. Human nature to fight over resources and ideology. MINIMIZING it is an amazing accomplishment on its own!
Seriously, please, STOP POSTING ON SOMETHING YOU HAVE NO CONCEPT ABOUT.
Really.
Stop.
Go read some books on pre-1914 society. Heck, I'm busilly reading a great one right now. "Dreadnought" by Robert K. Massie. It is about, interestingly enough, the actual cause of WW1. It's written by a journalist rather than a historian, so although it's a HUGE book (over 1000 pages), it's a very easy read. Really - VERY easy read, VERY interesting book. Covers the topic thoroughly.
