what would you think of a plan to establish an international peace center ["The P.A.X.* Center, Tinian"] on the island of tinian, from whence was launched the only nuclear weapons ever used by humans against their own kind? i'm currently putting such a plan together [will be glad to forward by email, on request], intending to announce it to the world at this year's 65th anniversary ceremonies in hiroshima and nagasaki... i'd be grateful for any serious input, but please do not turn my appeal for same into a debate of any kind, ok? many thanks! love and hugs, maia maia3maia@hotmail.com [*Peace Activists X-change]
here's an excerpt from the proposal i tested out on h-n-goers a couple of years back, that was unanimously applauded as needed and appropriately situated: currently [and historically], the thousands of peace organizations are scattered all over the planet, each doing their own thing... and, as has been proven time and again, there is strength in unity, so i and those who support the plan believe it is time we brought them all together, in order to seek a solution to the problem of mankind's predispostion to wage war...
What sort of input are you looking for exactly. I say this is a great idea, but how can I get in on it? Is there a way to donate, volunteer, write my congressman?
I'm sure most people would be supportive of an organization whose goal is to end wars and other horrors, but I dont quite understand how this organization you're proposing would be any different from other major peacekeeping establishments like the United Nations, especially if your goal is worldwide cooporation. I suppose I'm just cynical, but even as a pacifist I dont know how much I would support a new peacekeeping organization when one as large, reputable, and capable as the UN isnt working either. A great idea, I say, but so are communism and the world food bank, in theory. Still, many great ideas bring great change. I would like to hear more about your proposal, even though I'm totally baffled at the moment. Could you send me a link via PM or visitor message where I can read more about this? Or better yet just copy and paste a more comprehensible description or even a link to where we all can read more.
I'm in that weird spot where I support it and believe in the cause, but don't have hopes for it. I think mankind needs to solve its lust for war, but it's my belief that wars can only get worse from here. Anyway, that said, it's a good and just cause that I'd support. Blessed are the peacemakers and such. And really, the more peace-mongering organizations, nations, groups, and individuals that hold fast to their principles there are, the fewer warmongers there will be to wage the wars. And THAT said, I will pick up the sword to defend my home and my family. It takes two to make war, even if only one actually wages it. In summary: Good idea. Do it.
I think it's a nice idea, but ... Call me a cynic, but isn't aggression and a quickness to action innate in us all? And was actually beneficial to our evolution as a species? I don’t think these impulses can be very easily overcome. Maybe that's why the UN had problems stopping the mass genocide in the former Yugoslavia. I'm not saying it's a bad idea, I just think it's a bigger problem than most people realise. And please don't think this is me wanting a debate; I'm not on this forum for that. I'm just saying.
I know folks are itching to have a discussion or a debate here but Mammamaia said not to... so i won't, . But i'll support this cause. I'm a positive thinking person but i don't think it will work no matter how much we mean good though (look at the UN for example). We are insane as a species, constantly justifying killing wether it be war, survival, defence, justice... it's in our nature to be cruel to each other and not give a damn . But the only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to stand by and do nothing i read that somewhere, haha. So, i'm all for it
Aside from all the morality discussions, I do wonder whether Tinian (as good a symbolic home as it would be) is not a bit remote and out of the way, for a real exchange for peace organisations.
I actually see that as an advantage. Being out of the mainstream reduces the temptation to bring local government concers into the mix. It's neutral soil, well removed from the conflicts that can spill over borders. I see it almost as a think tank for peace, but with no competing agendas.
what are you doing in my head, cog!? you've nailed it exactly!!! sorry i've been so late getting back to all you good folks who've replied here, but i've been buried in the work and only now got back here... soon's i mop up the tears your caring interest brought on, i'll get to you one at a time, so i don't miss anything: you can do any/all of the above!... plus put the word out in any way you can, get people who'd be willing to help make it a reality contact me at my email address below... as for input, i'm open to all suggestions... right now, i'm doing this pretty much alone, so could sure use some help... any help... gigi... i'll be happy to send you the promo pc and rough draft of the plan... and i'd love for you to get more involved!... drop me a line whenever you're ready... mercurial... the un are, as you say, 'peacekeepers'... the pax center will be a gathering of non-governmental groups and individuals devoted to peace-planning... the un tries to fix things 'after the fact'... the pax center will work toward finding a way to change how things are done in the world, so there will eventually be no 'fact' to need fixing... i applaud your being open to the idea, despite serious doubts, merc... it's doing what the hopi [who i was privileged to live among] say they were told by the 'real kachinas': to “Always keep the door on top of your head open.” i don't think i can put a link here and i don't have the website up and running yet, anyway, but i'm happy to send the material to anyone who's interested, if they email me... ska... thanks for the good wishes... lemex... sorry to say, that's pretty much true... at least in the male of our species... aggression is no longer necessary for species survival in re humankind... and we do have the added trait of free will, so can choose not to be aggressive, unlike lower rungs on the evolutionary ladder... which is the very reason what i'm proposing is needed... instead of each of the countless groups wanting peace doing their own little thing here and there all over the planet, the only way to accomplish anything and make any progress in changing things is for them to have a central location where they can put their heads, hearts, money and energy together and figure out how to make change possible... buddy... bravo for quoting edmund burke's brilliant bottom line!... and for your support, regardless of how hopelessly violent our species may be... if we're as smart as we like to think we are, we just may be able to come up with something... but if we don't try, we never will... as one of my own 'greatest lines' goes: "Nothing is impossible until you quit and nothing is possible unless you start." banzai... see cog's riposte and my following comments... and thanks for giving this some thought... bless you all for doing so and for caring enough about our world and each other to show your interest and offer your support... if nothing else, you've all just proven that i'm not just a nutcase and this has a chance to work... please email me for the material and pass it/me on to all you know who're sick and tired of our species being the most deliberately cruel and vicious one ever created/evolved... infinite love and endless hugs, maia maia3maia@hotmail.com soon to come: www.paxtinian.org and www.womenaretheanswer.org
It sounds nice, but it simply is not based in reality. What would your response to the current conflict between Israel and Palestine be? Certainly we cannot force the Israelis to simply move, such an action would have dire effects. At the very least you would have one of the most powerful military's disarmed and sent on their way. Would they not just find new leadership, perhaps in the ideals of a radical, and do more damage than before? You will still have rockets being shot into the new "Palestine", but it would be from a different enemy. On the other hand, if you believe that the Israelis should keep their state and that Palestine is out of luck, how will that create a peace? We can see now that it does nothing but create hatred and swell the threat of war. Iran has stated that it wishes to see all Jews eradicated from the face of the Earth, are they then to be ignored? They want genocide, certainly that is against peace. Yet, if you refuse them the dignity of being recognized, then nothing changes. Oh, perhaps you can bargain with them. That's right, they murder innocent civilians, THEIR innocent civilians, in the middle of the street for simply having an opinion. Nothing quite says civility like public executions. Oh yes, then there is the topic of government. What sort do you prefer? Theocracy? Democracy? Monarchism? Republicanism? Communistic? Socialistic? Do you believe in the free market or one controlled by the hand of the politicians? If you support Big Business, then you do nothing but alienate nations like Venezuela and Bolivia, as well as a plethora of other leftist countries. On the other hand, if you refuse the free market, you lose America. I don't mean to be confrontational, but humans are destined to be violent and filled with hatred. We are ALL bigots, whether you want to admit to it or not. I don't suspect anything that I say will ever quite be heard as I meant it to be, so I won't argue anymore. I just want to know how it is you will preform this miracle.
Is it not a good start to establish a center where the world's best minds can work on the problem? Irish, she isn't promising world peace within a year. It may be a venture doomed to failure. That's better than a guaranteed failure if no one tries. As for the confrointational tone, don't become part of the problem.
I know that. I was being sarcastic. It's just the mood I was in yesterday, and I'm sorry about that. Like I said, it's a nice idea. I'm not wanting to get into any debate about it. Half due to the fact I just don't want to - I've got enough on my plate right now, I just want to remind you that it is a monumental task, as it is exactly opposite to nature and our own impulses. I'm not one of those guys who will just say 'Good luck! Hope all goes well!' I like being honest with people.
irish... i can only ditto what cog said... lemex... yes, i know it's a monumental task, but not even trying to do it would be like the world's leaders not having decided to establish the UN, because it was too big a thing to tackle and probably wouldn't work, anyway... well, a lot the UN wanted to accomplish never did get done and much it tries doesn't work, but picture the world today if it never existed! all i can do is repeat that 'greatest line' of mine: "Nothing is impossible until you quit and nothing is possible unless you start."
I never put a time limit on it, Cog. Nevertheless, it seems that in our current state of affair yet another world war is looming and an organization which promises to try and find peace and solve issues should have some opinion on it. I just want to know what Maia believes is the right side. Should I be jeering at Iran or at Israel? Maybe I shouldn't side with either, yet my morals compel me to agree with the Israelis. I think the problem I have with ideas like this is that they're not based in the reality of the situation. There is no peaceful answer to many of the conflicts we seek to end. As soon as we agree with one side, we alienate the other and choosing neither side or both does nothing but inflame the radicals and extremists on each side. How can we compromise with those who believe that God sent them to kill a specific group of people or entire nations being starved by their dictatorial governments? I'm sorry if what I said was offensive or confrontational at all. The point remains the same however: peace organizations do not work in the big picture. If this group wants to help impoverished communities and aid those who do not have the wherewithal to do it themselves, then I am in full support and will sign my name in blood to help. On the other hand, if this is just another group who wants to illegalize guns, censor violence from all forms of entertainment, and force people to act a certain way, then they have nothing but my ire. Behavior Control does not work, we know this because we have seen it fail time and again. Maybe I just don't get it. I just can't help but think you guys are living in a world where good intentions always solve the problem.
If you are still pushing Maia (or anyone else) to take sides in specific conflicts, you are missing the point. Please keep such debates out of this thread.
I'll censor myself, Cog. Sorry I have spoken incorrectly. I just wanted to know what an organization I would otherwise ally myself with would do in certain situations.
the idea is not to 'do' anything about specific situations, irish, but to study and foster an exchange of ideas on all such issues to learn A. what causes them, B. ways they can be settled peacefully and C. how such conflict can be avoided in future... do you know what the function of a 'think tank' is?... it's not to take action, but to find answers to problems... and the most major problem facing the world is mankind's habit of using conflict to deal with differences, instead of peaceful means... thus, to survive, we must find a way to break that habit and replace it with a less destructive one... practice a species-based 'behavior modification' if you will... that's what this center's goal will be, by getting the countless scattered and disparate groups that are doing so comparatively little separately, to come together in one place to work in unison toward what is really their common goal--becoming a peace-based species, instead of a warring one...
In the end I think I disagree with the idea of a think tank, but nevertheless I am incredibly thankful that you had the kindness to answer my question. If nothing else, it cleared up my perception. Whatever my views and beliefs are, I still wish you the best of luck, Maia.
I can agree with what you're saying Irish, but I think that warfare is changing and therefore, the way we approach achieving peace in the world needs to change as well. I think the idea is a good one. Wars aren't fought in trenches anymore, and by the same token, peace rallies in the streets are dead. I can't remember the last peaceful protest I've heard of against war or destruction. A lot of the time the public know about it. Surely awareness is another critical factor in achieving peace. As my Dad always says, you have to know to be a hypocrite. I applaud your efforts Maia.
thanks, frost!... as you so wisely noted, the world mankind created has been changed drastically by the technology it has produced and thus, so must mankind itself, if we want to maintain our self-ranked status as the 'superior' species on this planet... and, since nothing of any lasting significance has been accomplished by these many well-intentioned groups working independently, the only smart thing to do is to combine forces and find a way that has some chance to succeed... till now, no one has even suggested such a thing, as far as i can determine, so that's what i'm proposing... and so far, every group that replied to my test run thought it well worth a try...
