a noticeable limitation on the use of weapons in war, and its just a thought

First off, I would like to state that I agree that it would be "cool" for the whole world to just become all peaceful stop killing people and have debates instead of war. I am not happy about the amount of people that have died in wars, and I don't enjoy death. I just think that stopping wars is a nearly impossible task that would have cons as well as pros. "basically I guess for this to work we would have to dispose of all military forces in the world" I would like to say that if all military forces were to be shut down, all people in the armed forces would just lose their jobs. In America alone, that's over 2.7 million more jobless fellows. We already have around 9 million, and adding more wouldn't be good at all. Also, even if we could get EVERY single country to dispose of their military, there could still be terrorist groups like ISIS or AQ who could build, steal, or find some weapons and put everyone else in more danger than before. "everyone would have to agree, that when things get messy between countries we debate and the winner gets the freakin country or something, do your homework bitch =)" I'm sorry to say this, but this is probably the worst statement ever said on this site. Debates are cool, but war is effective. If one country is for gay marriage, and the other isn't, they will debate about it. Let's say it's Obama vs. Putin. Let's also say that Obama has better arguments and more convincing statements. In some peoples opinions, Vladimir Putin would still be the winner because they are also against homosexual marriage. It would be extremely difficult to find a fair way to determine a winner, and even if they could do that, Vladimir couldn't be forced to change his mind or any laws. Also, Obama probably wouldn't want to take and rule Russia! Why would the winner of a debate about homosexuality want a whole country? I don't know the reason you needed to use profanity for. It could be to seem older than you really are or something, but just please don't randomly call people b*tches. "so for the evolving human to get anywhere unless killing humans is usefull, limiting the use of weapons to for eksample, words, the only casualties would be bad ideas, ignorance, where as the outcome of a war is we are progressing our intelligence rather then killing human beings, ourselves, by not limiting the use of weapons" I think you mean exchange weapons for words, right? Anyways, you said that the only casualties would be bad ideas and ignorance. However, this is not the case, for there are many possibilities as to what could happen. I'm going to use the Obama-Putin thing again. Obama takes over the whole country of Russia. That's a pretty awful thing to do--throwing Putin away and putting all of Russia's problems on Obama. Also, many people may non-peacefully protest and murder Obama-accepters. Russia would be in anarchy, and all of the other countries would blame America. Obama would have to primarily focus on Russia because of all of the stuff happening, and treat America with little care. The country would fall apart without a leader. Two countries could be completely destroyed by one debate about homosexuality. That would not be good. http://www.cbpp.org... http://www.deptofnumbers.com... http://www.bls.gov...