Debate Info

yes no
Debate Score:13
Total Votes:13
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 yes (4)
 no (8)

Debate Creator

feelingtruth(2775) pic

A World Peace Treaty

This would most likely work: the ultimate goal of humanity is world peace right? Well, obviously the people who dont sign this treaty are our real enemies, right? If you dont support world peace you must be against it right? The treaty could declare all military items to be melted down to further improve our human race, and obviously there would have to be a war first if some people didnt want world peace...

What do you guys think? Surely if the US or our allies didnt sign it, it would mean something, and once all those who are for it/against it have signed, well we could split the world into two states: freedom and peace, or war and control...


Side Score: 5


Side Score: 8
1 point

To form a treaty of peace and cooperation with the entire world, you would need all nations to agree.

Any nations who didn't agree would likely be singled out as enemies, and if they were places like North Korea or China, we might need military force. Once they agree, I would expect us to help rebuild them, alone with bringing all nations out of third-world status.

Side: yes
garry77777(1794) Disputed
1 point

"Any nations who didn't agree would likely be singled out as enemies, and if they were places like North Korea or China, we might need military force."

So you're saying the US should wage war in order to enforce a peace treaty?

"Once they agree,"

You mean once a master-slave relationship has been established.

"bringing all nations out of third-world status."

Ah yes, a noble goal, one I'm sure very few people in the West would disagree with in theory, however the reality is for the vast preponderance of the time the 1st world has existed the 3rd world has also existed, this isn't an accident, in order to have a 1st there needs to be a 3rd world, you think we'd be able to stuff our faces with steaks and drive humvee's if there wasn't another few thousands people somewhere staving for it?

Science is wonderful, it has cured many of humanities ills, and will continue to do so in the future, but at the moment it cannot overcome the physical and material limitations of our planet, and shows no sign of doing so anytime soon. I think this guy puts it rather well:

Not so great
Side: no
1 point

Should? No, if they were to do this, that is what would likely happen.

I personally support scientific development over time, as has been done before in order to make lives easier for people. Technology will spread, along with ideas.

Politics has never accomplished anything people alone could not do. If you wish for freedom and peace, then have the people be free and peaceful. You think politicians have magic powers? If we refused to wage war for any reason, not just us, but all nations, then no matter what politicians say, they would have no real power.

Side: no
1 point

Ok, I have gone off the reservation again...wait, has that ever happened before? So I go this crazy idea...petitions! My developer has been hard at work on the concept, and I want to prove it can work for CreateDebate. So, here goes....

The above link takes you to my new petition created for the sole purpose of developeing a world peace treaty! Go ahead and sign it. It points right back here when you are done!

Would you like to see petitions on CreateDebate...I hope so!

Side: yes
2 points

Huh? I just did that.... not sure I get it? Are you talking about applying a petition feature on CD? Or using that petition site to drive traffic to CD? Or both?

Side: yes
1 point

i meant call for the UN to put forth a treaty, and the world would split into two sides, those who are for, and those who areagainst, freedom fighters vs. the superpowers, lol

Side: no

A World Peace Treaty is needed to secure world peace in these dangerous times.

Side: yes

This would not work because some nations would cheat and if they are not caught cheating, they can attack and get the upper hand. Hmmm..., maybe we should get everyone to sign, melt down their weapons and then we can take our weapons out of hiding and get the upper hand ;)

Side: no

World peace will never last, anyone who thinks so (especially because someone signed a piece of paper) is delusional.

Side: no

the ultimate goal of humanity is world peace right?

No, the ultimate goal of any species is survival. Nature efficiently does that by killing off the weak

and killing of it competitors. By coddling the weak and cuddling with your enemy, you're actually weakening the species. The U.S. And it's allies have managed to maintain a position of dominance because of the strength of its military and the strength of its economy.

When we go getting all John Lennon on the world, that's when China kicks us in the balls and puts us in our place.

Side: no
1 point peace. I dream about this every time I decide there is nothing better to do in life...which means I NEVER dream about it. Why? Look at the simple internal strife in countries...civil war...war against races, etnicities, religions...we all can't get alon in the US. If we can't, how do we expect anyone else to do the same? We don't!

Side: no
1 point

A really nice idea but i don't think it would work. Why ? Simply, we are all humans and each and everyone of us have different ideas on how we should live and most annoyingly we, for some reason, try and force this onto others. Do you really think countries that have democratic societies can agree with other non-democratic countries ? The answer is no and with disagreement comes war meaning after a while even if that treated was signed i expect it will be 'thrown at the window' after all it is only paper.

Side: no