What if there was a war and only one side showed up?
957660
That's what we used to ask in the 70's.  Unfortunately, someone always shows up and you better be there to defend your way of life.
958092
Thers no telling how long the war would have lasted If we had not used the bomb. It likely would have gone on for years, probably killing even more people. The bomb made a very strong statement. Still I understand what you mean. I suppose no one really knows for sure.
262773
We can only speculate on that. Look into the counter world of this. Each choice you make causes something different to happen. History has the same effect. I believe somewhere that happned. All the worlds are balanced. Okay i got off topic.\nI believe there would be no more u.s.a\n~Blessed be~
932876
when a nation is at war with it's own people
176108
The main reson to oppose WWI...\nIt's over.\n\nReally, specify which side your interested in...\n\nThe whole war or just US involvement, etc?
719825
maybe something abut how they are still at war and there have been many minor skirmishes or incidence over the years, there was a great program on the history channel about that, alot of stuff I didn't know.  sorry I don't remember the name of it.
1005204
its a conflict in terms i guess. a oxymoronic idea but isnt all war moronic anyhow
600783
German resistance would have collapsed sooner.  The Allies were going for "Unconditional Surrender" no matter who was in charge for the Germans.  The result for the most part would have been the same, probably saving a significant number of lives on both sides. The political climate may have been more friendly between east & west over the next 60 years.  There might not have been the partitioning of Germany the way it was.  And maybe it could have freed up a lot of needed resources to get the Pacific war ended sooner also.
1174117
As long as there are religions, there are wars against countries.\n\nIf there were no religions, the wars would be of a more honest kind.\n\nnow there`s christians declaring wars for "democracy" in the name of god.\nIt would make a slight difference in honesty, if a president or nation would just say "we want your oil, period"\n\nreligion is a shield for real intentions.
871605
I think that depending on the issue; the divisions can be relatively shallow, if the issue is rather mundane.(zoning debates, civil suits)  In a really serious issue,(like declaring war or even declaring peace, something that strikes people in the cores of their being), The division would probably be better described as polarized, with no middle ground. Now, if we were attacked from outside, there would be a joining of spirits and all of a sudden we would all be on the same side, willing to share a foxhole with someone from a radically different background, drink muddy water, and die by the thousands together, if necessary. Just my thoughts on this.
631857
no. and i hope not. \n\nits not a pretty sight having wars. and its not just the headlines every country is affected.lets cross our fingers itll not happen.\n\n"WARS doesn't decide who is RIGHT, ONLY whose LEFT."
1140806
If you know anything other than what the media depicts about the two wars, you will know that there are very few similarities between the two conflicts. Any similarities would required stretching the truth in each conflict. \n\nOne unfortunate similarity in both conflicts is that people died. Some died in combat fighting for a cause while others died needlessly because they were in the wrong place at the wrong time. Hopefully, one day the leaders of this world will understand that no one really wins in a war and will find better ways to resolve their differences.
110789
No, war is only the solution when one side refuses to comply and negotiate in a major problem and even resorts to violent tactics.
680593
well, if america backs out now, it'd make it look like we're weak. i guess we can't give other countries any reason to wage war on us.
242623
i have a short answer for you : they did not !!!\nthe war was not "supported", as you say, by the majority ... just as no war would be supported by any populace.
484518
Not many times will you find me agreeing with you over something like this. \nBut some thing like this seems to have been put out before. Only thing i can see wrong with it. \nIs that you will always find that one side will never agree. \nno matter how good any solution is. \nMy idea would be to get all the coalition forces out of there. \nArm all sides Equally let them sort it out once and for all with NO outside help from ANY other country. \nLast group standing gets the Country. \nAnd the rest of the world accepts them no matter who has won.
1136195
Two years.  First, war it would only be in the Middle East and Sub-saharan Africa.  The apathetic world leaders would sit on the sidelines while the world struggles, but soon after those areas are completely devoid of any decent human beings to murder and terrorize, violence would spread thoughout the world, eventually comsuming everything.