;

North Korea: Talk or Take (action)?

>

We have the right to preserve our lives. Who has the right to endanger them with reckless warmongering and aggression? If world leaders cannot conduct their affairs without endangering our lives then we clearly need to replace those leaders with ones who can. It has been asserted that the only way to resolve the North Korean crises is to talk it out. It has also been asserted that the time for talk is over and action now is needed. Action truly does speak louder than words. Action, in the eyes of most people, implies dropping a big bomb somewhere and blowing everybody up. How blind and stupid the world and its' leaders are! Can't we see that it is the threat of dropping bombs and blowing everybody up that has created this Crisis? An alternative course of action would be to establish some security for North Korea as a country. No more posturing war games. If USA wants North Korea to reign in its' nuclear program, then it should reign in its' own first as a good example and sign of faith. Putin is right that pressurising and threatening North Korea is unproductive, but talking won't ease the tension either. What will ease the tension is to remove the threats that North Korea believes it has to defend itself against. It doesn't help either for the nation to be starving. We all know that a hungry animal is more dangerous than a well fed one. A wild animal is more easily tamed by feeding it than by intimidation. The action that will resolve this crises is to make North Korea feel secure in the world without its nuclear program and to help it resolve its considerable internal problems. The time for talk, as it has been said, is over.

>

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

 

 

Site Index:

 
     
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  
     
 

Related Links:

 
     
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?  

 

        Global warming              Natural disasters
   
        International terrorism            Deforestation
   
        Endangered species           Pollution
   
        Poverty           Child exploitation
   
        Contaminated drinking water           Illegal drug production
   
        Oppression of women           Famine
   
        Overpopulation           Energy crisis
   
        Economic Crisis           World health problems
   

                                                                                                                         

It's not an easy choice to make is it? The difficult thing about it is that by selecting one option the others are left neglected and unresolved. The one thing that all these problems have in common is that the more money, resources and manpower you allocate to them the greater improvement you are likely to effect as a result.

Now let us consider another world problem: international conflict and the escalation of arms. This problem is converse to the others in that the more money, resources and manpower you allocate to it the WORSE it gets:- one side engages ten thousand men in battle so the other side engages fifteen; one side spends two million on weapons of mass destruction so the other side spends three. The more armies and weapons there are the more dangerous the world is, and it all has the potential of going up in smoke and achieving nothing except destruction!

If the problem of potential conflict could be resolved to the extent that all this spending on arms and manpower was no longer necessary, then not only would some of the other problems be prevented from happening in the first place, but also all the money, manpower and other resources allocated to (so called) defence would then be freed up and made potentially available to any number of the other world problems we have been talking about.

                                                    Click here for:                  

Therefore our submission is that given any person can only really devote their attention to solving one major problem in the world, then the preferential choice for that problem should be to attend to the matter of international conflict and world peace, because of the beneficial effect on all the other world problems. That certainly is our choice, and we hope that a sufficient number of people reading this will agree with us:

 

               I agree that world peace should be the issue of priority to deal with (proceed).

               I prefer to devote my attention to solving one of the other important issues (exit).

 

There are eight more pages of text before you get to the active part of this website

Send your comments to : Comments@worldpeace.org.uk     (Please don't send attachments as we never open them).

Don't forget to find out what YOU can do to help!