Approximately 525,000,000 people have died in all wars in history,

>>3250911
only when there's nothing left to fight over

yes

and then it will end, but it will be nice for a while

>>3250911
>Will we ever reach a time where humans stop warring?

Yes, when we enter an era of post-scarcity and global communism, tovarisch)))))))))))

>>3250911
No pain, no gain.

File: 84895058.jpg (11KB, 320x220px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 320x220px

>>3250933
then why did Sino-Russian war happen?

>>3250911
Let me ask some simple questions: Will you want to argue with someone when you disagree their opinions? Will you fight back when you're offended or insulted? Will you defend yourself when someone want to harm or kill you? Will you want to defeat your opponents when you're competing with them?

Now imaging these feelings and intentions extend from purely personal to societies and countries. Will you ever reach a time where you stop these natural human reactions?

>10% of total war casualties over 5,000 years occured in the past 100
>Steven Pinker can make the preposterous claim that wars are becoming less deadly, and humans generally less violent

>>3250911
>Is violence, and war, an innate part of being human?
Violence probably is, though that isn't to say it isn't tamable, war is probably not.

humans are the least aggressive species around

we have a way to deal with stress (sex, verbal abuse)
we have a built in "dont kill human" instinct

since we are so many ofcourse there will be conflicts, over resources, just like in any animal
but the majority of conflicts are solved non violently, sure that 525million ppl is alot, but if you consider how many conflicts we have, in just a day, youll see we are extremely efficient at solving them without killing eachother

when do we stop completely? when theres no competition for resources, will that ever happen? doubtful
will it become better? probably

>>3250911
I think things will get more peacefull eventually, maybe a decent UN will kickstart. But probably not soon, the state of the world right now is very...people think a big war couldnt happen, it definetly could. People think it is inevitable, and to an extent it is, but a better question would be "How will war change in the future?"
In a few years it could mean a few protests are a war, or it could be all missile shit from drones.
More cold wars I think, more scaremongering definetly, but wars will becoming more "worldly". As in wars involve more countries, unfortunately the idea of a world war has become synoymous with apocalypse. Fucking idiots.
>Korea civil war re-ignites
>APOCALYPSE GUYS COME ONE
>Nothing happens outside the penninsuela~
I hope this meme ends soon.

>>3250987
Lol no it's simply false

>>3250957
I ask because these simple things are often the very roots of conflicts and wars.

Look at those leftists, libercucks, SJW with full of peace, love, justice and equality...in their mouths, how do they deal with people they dislike or disapprove?? Not really more peaceful than anyone else.

>>3251002
>I have to shoehorn my political beliefs and insult my political opposition in a thread about human nature and war because I literally have no identity outside of how redpilled and woke I think I am
/pol/fags really are the new furries.
>>3250911
Probably not, OP. It really is horrific when you stop and think about it, but take solace in the fact that we'll most likely never see war and desolation on par with either World War again, and that most wars remain fairly contained. We're also getting better at killing each other with precision, so that's good too. And by that I mean we're more likely to kill only who we aim at, rather than just blanket bombarding an entire area.

>>3250998
lol yes retarded uneducated edgy shitstain, sadly id feel remorse gutting you

>>3250998
>>3251040
Excellent arguments lads, really contributing to the quality of the board.

>>3250987
>human exceptionalism
kek

>humans are the least aggressive species around
There are plenty of less aggressive species around. Take most herbivores for example or even scavengers.

>we have a way to deal with stress (sex, verbal abuse)
Don't forget violence. Violence is often used for stress. Also this way of dealing with stress is normal for animals all around in general.

>we have a built in "dont kill human" instinct
We don't actually. We don't have a "don't kill human" instinct. We also don't have a "kill humans instinct". We have self-preservation instincts. If causing to kill has potential to cause harm to ourselves, then we avoid that route. This is normal for most species out there in the world.


Human exceptionalism, given your example, is a myth.

If humanity can cast aside empathy and emotion and focus on pragmatism, we might come to a point where killing people out of a necessity to sustain our race is no longer immoral or unethical but logical. If such a situation were to occur then it would also be illogical to needlessly kill, if killing becomes detrimental to our survival.

>>3251002
>how do they deal with people they dislike or disapprove??
Certainly not by bombing them.

But that's just me. I was educated for a reason.