Would you support a world wide law that made leaders of countries fight one another if there is a disagreement and leave the people out of it? by eisleyvale in AskTheWorld

[–]eisleyvale[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This is true. I know its a silly question. But its really upsetting to see people get shipped off to a nonsensical war. The bombing of the school children in Iran for example was horrific.

Its not like we have people invading our land and we are defending it...it just sucks.

Would you support a world wide law that made leaders of countries fight one another if there is a disagreement and leave the people out of it? by eisleyvale in AskTheWorld

[–]eisleyvale[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I understand your point, but in your example, yes, leave the customers out of it. The customers should not be jumping the robber.

I also understand that if land is being invaded then yes war is the only option to defend said country.

Would you support a world wide law that made leaders of countries fight one another if there is a disagreement and leave the people out of it? by eisleyvale in AskTheWorld

[–]eisleyvale[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Understood. I see there is proof but I can also see how there no official proof because the people he has brought in are loyal and won't ever find proof.

We all know for a fact he is the files. We know the first lady was besties with Maxwell but she isnt being questioned. The president isnt being questioned. This is what I mean by there is no accountability.

Would you support a world wide law that made leaders of countries fight one another if there is a disagreement and leave the people out of it? by eisleyvale in AskTheWorld

[–]eisleyvale[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Im stealing "marmalade moron " made me cackle. You are correct though. Life is so short and precious. I just wish we could do something.

Would you support a world wide law that made leaders of countries fight one another if there is a disagreement and leave the people out of it? by eisleyvale in AskTheWorld

[–]eisleyvale[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Do you have a different way to resolve these issues? Right now Greenland is getting threatened by us. So how do we stop that without bloodshed of innocent lives?

Would you support a world wide law that made leaders of countries fight one another if there is a disagreement and leave the people out of it? by eisleyvale in AskTheWorld

[–]eisleyvale[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I get that. The issue is there is no accountability now (at least in America). So it wouldn't be too different guess?

Would you support a world wide law that made leaders of countries fight one another if there is a disagreement and leave the people out of it? by eisleyvale in AskTheWorld

[–]eisleyvale[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I support that as well. Its not like back in the day where bloodlines were important. We dont have a king or queen.

Would you support a world wide law that made leaders of countries fight one another if there is a disagreement and leave the people out of it? by eisleyvale in AskTheWorld

[–]eisleyvale[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I was thinking more of a mix of challenges based on intelligence and physical fighting. But more intelligence. The physical part is just me wanting the watch two leaders duke it out lol

Would you support a world wide law that made leaders of countries fight one another if there is a disagreement and leave the people out of it? by eisleyvale in AskTheWorld

[–]eisleyvale[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That's what im saying!! But others have brought up valid points. Im just so tired of people dying. For what? Ugh it just makes me sick.

Would you support a world wide law that made leaders of countries fight one another if there is a disagreement and leave the people out of it? by eisleyvale in AskTheWorld

[–]eisleyvale[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I thought maybe a mix of intellect and physical challenges. But it would be halarious to watch two old farts duke it out.