Why was this post deleted? And why do people act like war is a given? Conflict is a given, yes. Not war.

Conflict is different than wars fought with horrendous weapons that can destroy the environment and wipe whole civilizations out. Conflict will always exist, yes. That doesn't mean that we have to have catastrophic wars or wars at all.

It's really getting under my skin that people are misconstruing what OP is saying though I think they probably know better if they think about it. It's like you're being deliberately obtuse.

WearyToday4693, your comment is a great example of why we have stupid conflicts and why the people who create those conflicts insist they're inevitable.

I agree, ButFez. I just meant war is glamorized, as you said, in movies, video games, even politicians (look at T&*$%, who declared at one point that we should "carpet-bomb" the Mideast).

Well, I'm American. The U.S. public needs to insist. Personally, I am beyond disgusted by my country's meddling and shady deals and pouring arms into conflicts. When it comes to Ukraine, maybe we have to, I don't know, but there are a lot of conflicts that we should never have been involved in. I think the US public is, unfortunately, underinformed about a lot of bad actions of some of our government and military leaders. If more people were made aware, especially young people, there might be more support for cooperating with the ICC.

Edited to add...I know I'm being optimistic about my fellow Americans.

Edited again to add... what's with the downvote? Tell what's wrong with what I said. I'm trying to be nuanced yet optimistic here.

Agreed. There are so many things we're capable of doing in terms of diplomacy and cooperation but people give up before even trying or even thinking about trying.

1. The ICC (Intl Criminal Court, which prosecutes crimes against humanity and war crimes, is a great tool for peace, and that's the spirit in which it was conceived. If the major world powers (namely the U.S., China, and Russia) recognized its jurisdiction, we could go after bad individuals and groups instead of going to war with entire countries.

2. The U.N. was also created for the primary purpose of keeping peace, intervening in conflicts, and finding diplomatic solutions to problems. But the Security Council is always deadlocked and can hardly take action on any intl conflict because, again, the world powers who are the controlling, permanent members (the U.S., China, Russia, plus the U.K. and France) each have veto power and block any resolution the "opposing side" (Russia-China vs. U.S.-U.K. typically) suggests. It's stopped the U.N. from intervening in Syria and Ukraine, most recently.

3. We can cooperate on environmental issues and resources NOW instead of waiting until there's a conflict and going to war. We can plan and take action together. There's so much potential here for this sort of "preemptive cooperation" A term I made up, I think?? And I don't even care if a think tank steals it! I flatter myself but anyway, this isn't actually my original idea but the idea of a guy, an Iraqi environmental engineer whose name escapes me, who brought the Iraqi marshes back from the brink of extinction.

• One problem is, peace is boring.