war happens because of the corrupt nature of mankind. When greed, power, lust and corruption is fed by ideology war is inevitable. Its the same cause of murder, abortion and other forms of violence. War will continue and increase until the Prince of Peace takes His rightful place. UNtil then everyone will be blaming everyone except themselves. Days such as International Day of Peace or white ribbon day normally start off well and end up being hijacked by all sorts of agendas. Its kind of like people protesting in support of Hamas. Quite hilarous really or sad!

Nathan J>> What will you be doing for the International Day of Peace?<<

Nathan I will be considering why 99.999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999% of the world’s population do not want to go to war but we do.

Then I will ask myself who wants war....and for what reasons........then I will tell myself that European financiers and the corporations they control and the military industrial complex they use to gain their outcomes are behind most of the wars.

Then I will ask do the 99.999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999% know and understand this............and the answer is no.

The day of peace, earth hour and such like are dedications to self image, "See how good I am" Tweeted into the ether then forgotten for another 364 days.

But these days don't have to be. They can be the start of something bigger. We can send a message to others and our governments we can all make a peaceful difference.

What I find strange however is that our Prime Minister Tony Abbott is sending troops overseas at present, at the same time when people like myself are recognising the International Day of Peace - and he is not - along with our Opposition Leader Bill Shorten.

Both seem to agree violence is the solution, when I believe peace is the better way to go. Less death and destruction. Or am I alone on this?

There is a big difference, Nathan J, between belief and reality.

>>I believe peace is the better way to go. Less death and destruction. Or am I alone on this?<<

I believe that the 767 deaths on Australian roads so far this year are a massive waste of human potential. I believe that road safety is the way to go. Less death and destruction. Or am I alone in this?

More to the point, since you are talking about "peace" as a global objective, I believe that the 1.2 million traffic-related deaths on the world's roads every year are a massive waste of human potential. I believe that road safety is the way to go. Less death and destruction. Or am I alone in this?

It is all very well to sit in a corner and say "if only everyone thought the same way that I do", but there are many things that are outside your control. And human weakness is one of those things. Until and unless you rid the world of religious hatred and greed, for example, your ability to actually bring an end to war is severely limited.

But yours is the sort of activity that can give a certain type of person the warm glow of easy self-righteousness, so go ahead, knock yourself out.

I'm going to be repeating myself here but here goes
anyway.

A fundamental insight of sociology is that once people
no longer take their world for granted, but instead
understand the social authorship of their lives and
futures, they can become an irresistible force in
history.

Whether we choose to destroy our civilisation or save
it is a collective decision - and it is one that may well
be made within our lifetimes, hopefully. One thing that
scares the heck out of me is nuclear warfare. If more and
more nuclear weapons are built, and if more sophisticated
means of delivering them are devised, and if more and more
nations get control of these vile devices, then we surely
risk our own destruction.

However if ways can be found to reverse that process, then
perhaps we can divert unprecedented energy and resources to
the real problems that face us, problems such as poverty,
disease, overpopulation, and the devastation of our
natural environment.

History has shown us that through collective action,
ordinary people with few resources other than their own
determination were able to change a national consensus
for war to a national consensus for peace.

I'm talking about the Vietnam war that came to an end
largely as a result of the antiwar movement, a social
movement that consisted disproportionately of young
people, including many college students. When the
antiwar movement first challenged the war, it
received little support from politicians or the press
and its goals seemed almost hopeless. But the tide of
public opinion gradually began to shift. In the 1968
US Presidential primaries, an antiwar (Senator McCarthy)
backed by student volunteers did unexpectedly well
and President Johnson decided not to run for re-election.

From that point on, political debate on the war focused
not on how to stay in it, but on how to get out of it.

If a modern society goes to war, it is
not just because the leaders have opted for war, but
because the people have implicitly or explicitly done so
also - or at least, they have not opted for peace.

Pericles,

You talk as if I am the only person worldwide with a belief. I do however like to provide facts.

"Current methods of collecting data on those killed during war are plagued by biases that produce inaccuracies and underestimate the number of people actually killed. This can lead to widely varying casualty estimates. For example, in Iraq, a report published in the medical journal The Lancet in 2006 estimated that 650,000 Iraqi civilians had been killed by that time since the start of the war, a claim disputed by the White House, whose own estimates put the death toll at 30,000."

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/Healthday/story?id=5207645&page=1

Then of course there are the other deaths that flow on from wars such as medical related illness, mental health, starvation and other flow on effects that have a link to war related activities and daily well being.

People and governments worldwide (even in 2014) haven't found an intelligent, peaceful solution to our world and the problems that it faces at present.

Julia Gillard for example couldn't even vote yes (Australia abstained) in relation to Palestine in terms of the United Nations. No violence required at all for a potential solution there. Yet when we go to war, it is seen as fine. It has become so embedded within government as the only option we have.

In my view linking this matter to road deaths, or even some extreme United States websites which refer to falling out of bed death rates and links to war - is disrespectful to all people who have lost their lives of any nature.