Would a peaceful world have a single army?

[Mole]

The tragedy occurred when we raised standing armies.

Standing armies make war inevitable and much more lethal particularly for civilians.

All war is evil but sometimes you have to choose between two evils.

Unfortunately standing armies give us a plethera of choice.

So we need to take temptation out of our hands and abolish all standing armies.

 

[Feops]

The world generally agrees now that peace and diplomacy is the answer.

This doesn't stop the big players from having large, well funded armies, and occasionally sending said army out for various reasons....

 

[Feops]

So we need to take temptation out of our hands and abolish all standing armies.

Bahahaha.

 

[Sniffles]

The tragedy occurred when we raised standing armies.

Standing armies make war inevitable and much more lethal particularly for civilians.

All war is evil but sometimes you have to choose between two evils.

Unfortunately standing armies give us a plethera of choice.

So we need to take temptation out of our hands and abolish all standing armies.

WTF? Victor actually makes a legitimate point for once!

 

[Mole]

Bahahaha.

Well, standing armies are a recent invention. And if I am not mistaken an invention of the Nation State.

So although is seems impossible now to abolish standing armies, if we lived without them once perhaps we can do it again.

 

[antireconciler]

All war is evil but sometimes you have to choose between two evils.
...
So we need to take temptation out of our hands and abolish all standing armies.

We are all happy when the lion lays down with the lamb, but if there was no war, could there really be life?

I NEVER thought I would say something like that ... but it seems increasingly plausible that there would be nothing unless there were division and separation. "That one Real Entity wished: Let me become many, let me multiply myself." But if this multiplicity already started with mutual understanding and peace to begin with, then there would be no sense in which it would have to return to unity, and thus no sense in which it ever became a multiplicity. Without division, there is no object for consciousness, and thus no consciousness, and thus nothing at all worth mention.

War is peace! Oceania, 'Tis for Thee!

 

[Kangol]

I imagine a peaceful world to be much different from ours right now, and perhaps it would not have a single army because there would not be a single person. That, or all minds would be united to form a collective entity, changing the operating definition of humanity but negating the need for conflict beyond synaptic disputes.

I think peace ought to be defined before it can be further discussed. No war? No hate? No suffering?

 

[Blank]

War is peace! Oceania, 'Tis for Thee!

This is the point I would bring up. A 'peaceful' world would either be run under a dictatorship like in 1984, or it would probably be drugged and sexed up like under Brave New World.

However, I think the word 'peaceful' is relative. To me, peace may be that people on the Earth could live together in harmony, whereas to another person, it may just be that there are no large-scale wars and that we may come back to things the size of clan rivalries...

Then again, I suppose we could envision a world where everyone has a shit-ton of nukes and everyone is afraid to move because they all know it would end in a stalemate (a stalemate of the greatest order.) In that case, you wouldn't need to have only one army.

I think a lot of the question is loaded on how we're supposed to perceive a peaceful world.

 

[Nocapszy]

no because it hasn't evolved yet.

 

[Feops]

Well, standing armies are a recent invention. And if I am not mistaken an invention of the Nation State.

So although is seems impossible now to abolish standing armies, if we lived without them once perhaps we can do it again.

The only way to abolish standing armies would be to abolish armies period.

Also I'd be curious why you think standing armies are in themselves a bad thing. If they're a recent invention as you say, I would reply that countries have been engaged in long, bloody wars, far before recent times.

 

[Sniffles]

The only way to abolish standing armies would be to abolish armies period.

No not necessarily. A militia and a standing army are not the same thing.

Also I'd be curious why you think standing armies are in themselves a bad thing.

"War makes thieves, and peace hangs them."

If they're a recent invention as you say, I would reply that countries have been engaged in long, bloody wars, far before recent times.

Standing armies as we know them today are a relatively recent invention, but the basic concept is much older. One only needs to read Book One of Machiavelli's Art of War(not to be confused with Sun Tzu's text); which deals with issues of standing armies and why they're a bad idea. Not was this written in 1520; but deal quite abit with the example of the Roman army!

 

[Feops]

No not necessarily. A militia and a standing army are not the same thing.

Do you see a militia as being capable of conducting modern war?

This was the basis of my point.

 

[Sniffles]

Do you see a militia as being capable of conducting modern war?

Yes actually it can. As I argued before here, the main form of conflict in the world today is commonly called "Asymetrical warfare"(among many other names); which is well suited for militia style forces. If anything, it's standing armies that are at the disadvantage in this case.

The whole conception here seems to be heavily based off geo-political precepts dating from the Treaty of Westphalia, which dictates that the state has a monopoly on military force. This came after the devastation brought by the Thirty Years War, which was characterised by fighting between a wild mixture of armies with no formal structure or even alliegiances at times.

 

[Eruca]

The only way to abolish standing armies would be to abolish armies period.

Oh yeah I suppose we could do that. Of course, we would have to enforce this rule some how. I guess we could set up a special group...and they would need special training...and they would need weapons for when diplomacy fails...and...oh damn...