h a l f b a k e r yInexact change.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Please log in.
Before you can vote, you need to register.
Please log in or create an account.
|
The laeders of opposing countries would duel. Each countries would set demands, and if they won, the losing country would have to meet the demands. Leaders would be less likely to attack other countries being that they would be the casualty if they lose.
[link]
|
| |
It's nice to see that some ideas have power even after 4 thousand years |
|
| |
if this was instituted Bush would have been killed by someone by now |
|
| |
This isn't a new idea, [Alex]. |
|
| |
I think that when countries go to war it is
because reason has already broken down.
If the countries involved were capable of
sticking to an arrangement like this then
they would still be around the negotiating
table. [-] |
|
| |
In assuming this would work you are assuming honour and chivalry also still exist. You are living in the past sir. |
|
| |
Plus, it's already in effect. The only difference is that the duelling parties are the 'champions' of their leaders, and that the duels are not limited to one person at a time. |
|
| |
When this was done in ancient times, it worked because people believed that fate and the gods had already decided the winner - so the winning side would be the winning side, whether it was a single combat between champions or the whole bloody all-comers melee. So if your champion lost, you might as well go home. Nobody grumbled 'we was robbed'. Nowadays, you'd have a hard time getting people to believe that. Therefore, bone. It's not original, has already been tried, used to work, but sadly wouldn't work any more. |
|
| |
This would just encourage military leaders to rule countries, as they are most likely to win the duel. |
|
| |
It would certaintly attract a new bread of politician. And for that matter make going to war a far less likely proposition. |
|
| |
If I were in a country duel, I would choose Chile. It is long and pointy, good for jabbing and whacking things. |
|
| |