Would this take Switzerland out of being Neutral and into war?
117615
C'mon... the Swiss were never neutral.  They have always picked a side.  In WWII they picked the Germans.  Just cuz they didn't pick up arms doesn't mean that they didn't pick sides.  Anyway... when was the last time the Swiss sucessfully prosecuted a war?  I think it was about the same time as France or New Guinnea.  In other news... Swiss Miss Instant Hot Chocolate warms the hearts of children around the world.
256453
no, but it should be. the fastest way to end the war would be to make everyone take part in it.
536662
I think Switzerland is probably a high contender.  While it is a part of Europe, the Swiss have their own ways about them and do their best to stay out of foreign affairs.  The taxes are very high, but the quality of life is superb, the environment is beautiful, with conservation efforts constantly being undertaken, and the people care more about one another than MANY other places in the world.  The Swiss are not a conceited people who only think their way is the right way, though they are very proud about their ways, but a people who want others to have the chance to grow and develop in a safe, family-friendly environment.  Don't believe me?  Ask Shania Twain why she and her family choose to live there instead of America, despite their need to work in American often.
1140931
Now that Bush has gotten this country into this seemingly unending quagmire (see the history of the middle east-the warring never ends), I am afraid that "cut and Run" may not be the best option....yes it will make America look bad, weak, defeated in the eyes of the world (thank you Bush), but worse, I feel it will give the insurgents and terrorist cells everywhere the idea that they are the victors, this will only strengthen their resolve....If they can keep the worlds strongest military at bay....the skies the limit....know what I mean?  I wish there were an easy solution, however, now that we ARE there...I feel it might be necessary to re-strategize somehow, perhaps even a greater surge of troops, one big enormous assault, no holds barred....I don't know....but pulling completely out may not be the best thing.   I would at least try the diplomatic approach with all these western European countries that have more to lose in the long run than does America....much greater troop support from Germany, England, France, Italy,Spain etc.  whether for oil or to fight terrorism, or WMD...It is pertinent that Europe stop being so DAMN wimpy and fight for the safety of their own people and their own borders!  An extremely difficult question to answer indeed!  But, since I'm no military strategist...that's the best I got for you.....By the way, i'm a liberal!
333750
They found out the best way to survive as a nation was to isolate themselves from the outside as much as possible, and build up a strong national militia that would hide in the hills until the invaders ran away.  Nazi Germany didn't invade Switzerland because it would have been too costly, and provide too few resources.  They also thought they could attempt to politically coierce them into a union such as like the German-Austrian Anschluss.
1104401
Throughout the world and history there has always been a clash between two opposing factions.  The radical involvement of Gorilla Warfare and Terrorism is an offshoot of these actions.  Look at specific clashes to see them.  Northern Ireland's primary conflict involves Religion between the Roman Catholics and the Protestants.  You have the clashes in the middle east in Palestine, Israel and the like over land claims.  If Hitler had succeeded it would have been a short lived victory as the nations of the Allies would have revamped and taken another run at him.  Could it have been possible that the US bomb Germany with an Atomic Bomb rather than Japan?  The ramifications would have been astounding!
332183
no war is good for anyone.  I really think that if one coutry has a problem with another....the two leaders should duke it out and who ever is still standing wins!!  It would only cost for the flight there and back.
426012
It's invalid.\n\nThe question assumes that the only important input into this was American.  The Treaty was between a number of countries.  The attitudes and negotiating positions of the UK, France etc. were important, too.\n\nWilson was in fact far more realistic than most of the WW1 victors in realising that excessively punitive reparations demands on Germany would be counterproductive.\n\nI hope some of your US History lessons actually acknowledge the existance and importance of other countries in history sometimes!
892943
The only way this would work is.. If you buy a Island beside lets say America. America will come over and try to make you pay taxes and obey their laws. You then develop your own country and break away from America. Now America isn't gona be nice about this so you will need a nuke to get to back up off you.
3622
First, you must acquire territory.  Since all territory on the Earth is currently affiliated with a country, you would need to either buy it or take it by force.  \n\nAlternately, you could attempt to form an artificial island in international waters (no one owns the sea out about 10 miles from land.)  This has actually been done- google "Sealand."\n\nThen you must be able to defend it.  This can be done by either forming and maintaining your own military (this is the ususal way) or by getting other countries to protect you.  Monaco and Luxembourg are both tiny countries with no real military power, but if anyone invades them NATO allies will probably stop that (because, really- why beat up on Monaco?)  Sealand, for instance, was attacked several times.\n\nYou will also need some citizens and a form of government (republicanism, communism, democracy etc.) \n\nFinally, you need a sustainable economy- your people have to do something to support themselves and your government.
938142
Make war an impossibility.
690471
No it was not.  It singled out Germany for punitive measures and not the Austro-Hungarian Empire for such measures.  It so financially was hard for Germany and led to WWII.
646097
No.\n\nHistory will judge the blatently fabricated rationale for the invasion to be less qualified than, for instance, Hitler's attacking Poland.
464051
You're startin' to rile the natives...\nBut to answer your question, If they keep it up, the whole damn world will be addicted, so there won't be time for wars. \n\nGOOD JOB Y!A Team!!!!
428065
Switzerland wouldn't be too bad, either. Talk shows and news reports can tend to exaggerate everything, but I think the US is heading downward, too. But hey, what goes down must come up! Ignorance isn't bliss! Knowledge holds the power to make changes...
108667
We are not going to have a WWIII anytime soon.  The polarization that affected the world in the 20th century is not present.  Democracies rarely if ever go to war with one another.  Since almost the entire worlds wealth is in 10 countries, all democracies, I do not see a political conflict ever arising.  The only wild card is China. When they do rise to economic and military prominence, there could be a destabilization of Asia.  If they also convert to a social democracy there will be no real threat of a world war.\n\nCulturally there is a war, between Jedo-Christianity and Islam.  The birthrate in European countries is so low that their Islamic immigrants will outnumber the original inhabitants of France, Italy, and Germany in 100 years.  The distinct differences beftween the cultures will have to blur or there will be another holocaust, which side will do it, who knows?  Remember Bosina-Herzogovina??  Orthodox Christians decimating and raping muslims to wipe them out.   If nations are pushed to the brink of extinction, they will use all means available.  Another cultural wildcard, India.\n\nNo one knows what will happen, I just hope that the Israeli-Palestinian confllict is resolved fairly and justly for both sides, that moderate and tolerant religeous leaders of all faiths prevail, instead of the fear and hatred that is growing all over the world.  \n\nI have hope, that with no facist or expansionist communist regime with any money or resources, our world will eventually learn to be at relative peace.
403822
Nothing can prohibit aggressive acts by other nations outside of self interest. Our modern era has shown that nations are reluctant to act aggressively unless they believe, correctly or not that these actions are in their own self interest. \n\nThe U.N., for example is the primary governing body for the global "league of nations" if you will. Each of the member nations are sovereign in their own right, and, while one would hope for benevolence and good will among all history has proven that the interest of the sovereign will supercede that of the greater good.\n\nThe idea that liberal democracies do not wage war against one another is not new - however is this argument based upon political systems and societal infrastructure, or the inherent fact that most liberal democracies have mature economies that depend upon external trade for their very existence? \n\nTo position this argument China is certainly not a liberal democracy, and their constant sabre rattling over Taiwan might eventually lead to very real slings and arrows being tossed over the Taiwan Strait. \n\nIf China were to invade or attack Taiwan, is it OK to fight because they are not a liberal democracy? Or, do we sit back because eliminating trade with China would cripple our economy?\n\nIf you were the Chinese leadership, in the contrary position, what decision would you make? Would you really launch an aggressive war against Taiwan, alienating your growing economy from the global market and starving your nation of it's desperately needed energy supply?\n\nI don't ever see China invading Taiwan unless they truly believe, correctly or incorrectly that it is their best strategic option.\n\nThus, this is a really long way of saying international law doesn't mean jack - Nations act based upon what their leaders want, because they think it will get them what they need. "Laws" aren't going to stand in their way. \n\nIf you're looking for more evidence, Google Germany, 1939-45.