There have been a lot of discussions and debates about how to achieve world peace.I believe that world peace is unlikely to be attainable, because of the history of conflicts, the uneven distribution of wealth, and the misleading mass media.
Firstly, most of the conflicts frequently go back decades, even centuries. Animosity toward ethnic and political rivals has become so ingrained that terrorist attacks have become rampant in the region.
Secondly, wealth inequality is another obstacle. The vast majority of the wealth of this world is concentrated in the hands of a few.This disparity creates fundamentalist values in the public, encouraging people to join terrorist organizations for acts of violence.
Finally, the mass media stifles world peace.By focusing on violence and war, the media presents small extremist group as representing entire nations or religions.This creates false conceptions that would breed hostility.
In summary, because of the history of conflicts, the uneven distribution of wealth, and the misleading mass media are the obstacles that impede world peace.Therefore, it stands to reason that world peace is not attainable in the foreseeable future.
There have been a lot of discussions and debates about whether or not warfare has been constantly breaking out in history.I believe that warfare is inevitable on this globe, due to human nature, the futility of prevention efforts, and animosity of minority groups.
Firstly, war has been fought since the earliest history of human beings.It seems that war is a part of human nature.There have been wars, and there are still numerous wars being fought around the globe today.
Secondly, conflicts are beyond control of any one nation or the United Nations.China, for example, is a sponsor of North Korea, but is not able to control the conflicts between North and South Korea.
Finally, fundamental religious feelings and nationalism are increasing in various parts of the world, often against Western countries. These negative feelings could lead to greater risks such as terrorist attacks.
In summary, human nature, the futility of prevention efforts, and animosity of minority groups are breeding conflicts around the globe. Therefore, it stands to reason that warfare among nations will never be completely eliminated.
There have been a lot of discussion and debates about whether promoting democracy is good or not. due to political stability, economic prosperity, and protection of human rights, I believe democratic nations should encourage the spread of democracy worldwide.
Firstly, democratic nations are far more stable than nondemocratic ones. Nondemocratic regimes force policies onto their people.Democracy, on the other hand, allows for nonviolent reform through elections, stabilizing its society.
Secondly, democracy encourages economic growth.Nations thrive when people are free to innovate in business as well as participate in a market economy. Historically, international trade has prospered among democratic nations, not under repressive governments.
Finally, human rights are often abused in nondemocratic nations.Political dissidents are often imprisoned or killed.Genocidal campaigns are another possible consequence of such regimes.It is natural that democratic nations intervene by force to stop such crimes against humanity.
In summary, political stability, economic prosperity, and protection of human rights are the benefits ensured by democracy.Therefore, it stands to reason that democratic nations should encourage the spread of democracy worldwide.
There has been a lot of discussion and debates about whether terrorism can be vanished or not. I believe that it is impossible to eliminate terrorism, due to the long history of conflicts, the limitations of military actions, and the enormous cost for its prevention.
Firstly, most of the conflicts frequently go back decades, even centuries. Animosity toward ethnic and political rivals has become so ingrained that terrorist attacks are rampant in the conflict-ridden regions.
Secondly, military responses often aggravate situations.The U.S. intervention of Iraq and Afghanistan, for example, failed to deter terrorists from either country.On the contrary, the intervention bred anti-American feelings which encouraged people to join terrorist groups.
Finally, financial limitations hamper the elimination of terrorism.Although surveillance technology and security enhancements can be an effective preventive measure, enhancing security at every single target is just too costly.
In summary, the long history of conflicts, the limitations of military actions,
and the enormous cost for its prevention are the obstacle that
hamper the elimination of international terrorism.Therefore, it stands to reason that it is unlikely to eradicate terrorism from the world in the foreseeable future.
There have been a lot of discussions and debates whether or not world hunger issue will be solved. I believe that this problem is unlikely to be solved, due to population growth, widespread conflicts, and Western eating habits.
Firstly, the population growth is so rapid that agricultural population can not keep up with its speed.Feeding 7 billion people on this globe is becoming increasingly difficult.Moreover, the overpopulation creates poverty, which prevents people from obtaining food even when it is available.
Secondly, wars are displacing millions of people, creating famines and refugees.Widespread conflicts disrupt every aspect of food production cycles.Even after wars have ended, leftover landmines disable people to farm in such areas.
Finally, Western eating habits are compounding the problem.Westerners consume huge amounts of meat.Such consumption has proven to be an inefficient way to get nourishment.An acre of lad used for growing crops can feed far more people than the one raising cattle.
In summary, population growth, widespread conflicts, and Western eating habits are the obstacle that stifle the elimination of world hunger.Therefore, it stands to reason that it is unlikely that global hunger issue will be solved in the foreseeable future.