Syrian Air Strikes - Why Did They Have To Do It?>
America, France and the UK stepped up and took action because Assad allegedly broke the rules. Who's rules did they break? Mutually agreed international rules? If that is the case then why on earth do national institutions have to enforce international law, with the risk of repercussions against them for doing it? International law ought to be upheld by an international enforcing agency, one free from any political agendas or dangers of retaliative repercussions. This website proposes a truly international peace keeping force to uphold international laws such as the one allegedly broken by Assad's army.>
The problem in this world today is that we have an anarchistic chaos of political groups and institutions; each one a law unto themselves, Islamic State, for example, does what it wants irrespective of who suffers as a consequence. Other institutions have the capacity to do the same. We saw it happening in Saddam Husseins reign of tyranny in Iraq. Any country caught up in this anarchistic chaos, has to be both nervous of the actions of the other countries and responsible for its own actions which have the potential of being aggressive.
If the power to attack and the responsibility to defend was taken out of the political equation, then the tension such as the world is currently imposing upon itself, could be dissipated and removed
The system of international defence and control that is proposed in this website, does away both with the need for any nation to take on the responsibility for dealing with the unacceptable behaviour of any other nation or institution, and with it the incurring of any risks of reprisal and retribution, and also at the same time, prevents any such nation from acting in a rapacious and self-serving way, under the guise of dealing with alleged unacceptable behaviour on the part of their intended victims. Thus the anarchistic chaos that presides over international affairs today is brought under civilised control by a truly independent and altruistic universal authority - and about time too.
We believe that within this website lies the only solution to the creation of World Peace
So far, nobody has shown us to the contrary
You may not have time to read all this website in one go. Why not save it to file or add it to favourites?
Welcome to Worldpeace.org.uk
|The World's Problems||Introduction||Your say|
|Facts and Figures||1) First things First||What can we do to help?|
|World Peace does not equal World Government||2) Plan for Peace||Program for Peace|
|3) The Status Quo|
|Jihad and Armageddon||4) The Crucial Point|
|5) The Set up|
|6) Making it Happen|
|7) Cases in Hand|
|Sword of Peace||A Better Way||Is Blue the Colour of Peace in Palestine?||ENIA (Every Nation International Alliance)|
|U.N.Contacts||List of M.E.P's||Contacts for Africa|
The World's Problems
No-one can solve all the world's problems. To try would be to dissipate one's energies and achieve nothing. The best thing we can do is to focus all our efforts and attention on just one problem and hope our endeavours will make a difference to it. That immediately creates the dilemma of which particular problem to solve. It may be a matter of personal preference, or it may be a matter of perceived priority. Given that the best way to solve a large number of problems is to solve one at a time, which one of the following major international problems would you choose to resolve first?