Do You Think It Is Possible To Take Control of the World
0
[size=12] [/h] I would Like to know Whether you think it is possible to have complete control over the world and if you do think so what would your plan be.
0
vknight wrote...
[size=12] [/h] I would Like to know Whether you think it is possible to have complete control over the world and if you do think so what would your plan be.I think controlling the weather on earth is a bad idea. Other weather is a regulatory system just like the warming and cooling of the earth. We hardly know anything about the weather as a whole and I doubt that with our fraction of knowledge of the subject that it would be a wise idea to put someone (or worse a politician) in control of such a thing)
0
Fiery_penguin_of_doom wrote...
vknight wrote...
[size=12] [/h] I would Like to know Whether you think it is possible to have complete control over the world and if you do think so what would your plan be.I think controlling the weather on earth is a bad idea. Other weather is a regulatory system just like the warming and cooling of the earth. We hardly know anything about the weather as a whole and I doubt that with our fraction of knowledge of the subject that it would be a wise idea to put someone (or worse a politician) in control of such a thing)
you miss his question lol.....
its "whether" not weather....
or did you do that on purpose?
anyways,anything is possible in my book,although human taking control of such power is always a bad thing.
it's not like i feel the need/urge to take control of the world,because i know that the world would just be worse with me at its helm.
and i'm happy i don't have to.to much hassle.
0
Fiery_penguin_of_doom wrote...
vknight wrote...
[size=12] [/h] I would Like to know Whether you think it is possible to have complete control over the world and if you do think so what would your plan be.I think controlling the weather on earth is a bad idea. Other weather is a regulatory system just like the warming and cooling of the earth. We hardly know anything about the weather as a whole and I doubt that with our fraction of knowledge of the subject that it would be a wise idea to put someone (or worse a politician) in control of such a thing)
LOL !
If you mean take control the world as world domination
then I would say its more near impossible than possible because in order to have world domination you're going to need allies and a strong army. It would be really hard to have allies because of differences such as what religion will the world follow once it is dominated? I'm gonna stop from there....
0
mnx wrote...
Fiery_penguin_of_doom wrote...
vknight wrote...
[size=12] [/h] I would Like to know Whether you think it is possible to have complete control over the world and if you do think so what would your plan be.I think controlling the weather on earth is a bad idea. Other weather is a regulatory system just like the warming and cooling of the earth. We hardly know anything about the weather as a whole and I doubt that with our fraction of knowledge of the subject that it would be a wise idea to put someone (or worse a politician) in control of such a thing)
fail.you miss his question lol.....
its "whether" not weather...
Lol, I was about to put the same thing although I think he did that on purpose. XD
I don't think it's possible. If it is, it would be short lived because controlling such a huge area is impossible trying to spread the "Loyal" followers to have control over the area...
0
Hey, give me some slack. Lack of sleep and such.
To correct my fail:
Complete control over the world is possible but, impractical. Everyone from Alexander the Great, Julius Caesar, Napoleon, Hitler, etc have all tried and have failed with Napoleon and Alexander being the closest to ever succeeding in their individual times. Nowadays it would be impossible to militarily take over the world. No single country could manufacture the arms and supply the manpower to put on such an effort.
The only way I see that happening is something like the U.N. convincing the leaders of every nation to turn over its sovereignty to it. One of the "Goals" of the U.N. is to have every member nation disarm and only allow the U.N. to have a standing army (thus removing the ability of a country to resist taxes or whatever). So only giving more power to the U.N. will there ever be a possibility for one man to control the whole world.
There. I think I made up for my fail.
To correct my fail:
Complete control over the world is possible but, impractical. Everyone from Alexander the Great, Julius Caesar, Napoleon, Hitler, etc have all tried and have failed with Napoleon and Alexander being the closest to ever succeeding in their individual times. Nowadays it would be impossible to militarily take over the world. No single country could manufacture the arms and supply the manpower to put on such an effort.
The only way I see that happening is something like the U.N. convincing the leaders of every nation to turn over its sovereignty to it. One of the "Goals" of the U.N. is to have every member nation disarm and only allow the U.N. to have a standing army (thus removing the ability of a country to resist taxes or whatever). So only giving more power to the U.N. will there ever be a possibility for one man to control the whole world.
There. I think I made up for my fail.
0
if PINKY and THE BRAIN couldnt do it no one can
so i dont think its possible unless you kill off every person in the world or go to another world where nobody is and claim it
so i dont think its possible unless you kill off every person in the world or go to another world where nobody is and claim it
0
I think it's possible to take control of the world.
But to have any of your orders do anything, it's like a giant game of telephone line. Which is no surprise that dropping a nuke or sending a bombing raid functions with little flaw. Think about it, there's so few people between the execution and the top. You and one other high end official set up the remote launch or for the bombing direction through military chain of command with very little interpretation change after the military adviser.
Think about every other command you give. Person after person after person reinterpreting your command to delegate it farther down the line because it's not a cut and dry action. So other than blowing something up you're stuck with a big affect on anything you stick your finger in but without anything close to the result you wanted from it.
But to have any of your orders do anything, it's like a giant game of telephone line. Which is no surprise that dropping a nuke or sending a bombing raid functions with little flaw. Think about it, there's so few people between the execution and the top. You and one other high end official set up the remote launch or for the bombing direction through military chain of command with very little interpretation change after the military adviser.
Think about every other command you give. Person after person after person reinterpreting your command to delegate it farther down the line because it's not a cut and dry action. So other than blowing something up you're stuck with a big affect on anything you stick your finger in but without anything close to the result you wanted from it.
0
Fiery_penguin_of_doom wrote...
Hey, give me some slack. Lack of sleep and such.To correct my fail:
Complete control over the world is possible but, impractical. Everyone from Alexander the Great, Julius Caesar, Napoleon, Hitler, etc have all tried and have failed with Napoleon and Alexander being the closest to ever succeeding in their individual times. Nowadays it would be impossible to militarily take over the world. No single country could manufacture the arms and supply the manpower to put on such an effort.
The only way I see that happening is something like the U.N. convincing the leaders of every nation to turn over its sovereignty to it. One of the "Goals" of the U.N. is to have every member nation disarm and only allow the U.N. to have a standing army (thus removing the ability of a country to resist taxes or whatever). So only giving more power to the U.N. will there ever be a possibility for one man to control the whole world.
There. I think I made up for my fail.
Lol, I think you have too ^^ But still it wasn't anything too bad. Obviously you were a bit sleepy as you said and/or may have misread it. Not too bad of an error ^^ The second you mentioned "weather" i had a feeling you read his "Whether" wrong. But anyway... yeah taking over the world may be possible but sounds pretty lame and stupid... why would someoen really want all of that power and responsibility?
0
The only way that you could totally control the world would be if you could somehow increase the global population's quality of life while they are under your rule. Very similar to what the Roman empire attempted, and they also collapsed,
0
I believe that it is possible to control the world, though you never said "rule". In either instance, there would be a need for some high end Chaos Theory Mechanics, though if someone existed who could execute such a feat I think one of two things would end up happening:
Instance A-
Said person gains "control" over the planet, theoretically merging them with all of existence, after which they would probably lose sense of self and fade into the Everything.
Instance B-
Said person would enslave the world with superior power, possibly demonic. My personal belief is that strict enslavement would be the only way to go, as a lenient government or structure does not actually procure true "rule".
I'm sure there are other possibilities, these are just two of them XD
Instance A-
Said person gains "control" over the planet, theoretically merging them with all of existence, after which they would probably lose sense of self and fade into the Everything.
Instance B-
Said person would enslave the world with superior power, possibly demonic. My personal belief is that strict enslavement would be the only way to go, as a lenient government or structure does not actually procure true "rule".
I'm sure there are other possibilities, these are just two of them XD
0
Even if it was possible to take over the whole world, there will always be a form of revolution or a single radical out of thousands.
You take out of radical... more people join his or her cause... or if you take out a revolting sect.. another one will pop up somewhere with the same belief.
Its the same concept when it comes to crime, its just something human nature will continue to do to.
-
My friend also mentions that the world has been taken over by various groups.. example.. Japan has pretty much taken over the technological aspect of the world, the US has the strongest military power (so its said) and thus taken over the world in that aspect.
When you think about it though, its nigh impossible to take over all aspects and hold it for very long.
You take out of radical... more people join his or her cause... or if you take out a revolting sect.. another one will pop up somewhere with the same belief.
Its the same concept when it comes to crime, its just something human nature will continue to do to.
-
My friend also mentions that the world has been taken over by various groups.. example.. Japan has pretty much taken over the technological aspect of the world, the US has the strongest military power (so its said) and thus taken over the world in that aspect.
When you think about it though, its nigh impossible to take over all aspects and hold it for very long.
0
Lulu's plan is good, I'd probably do something akin to that. Provoke the rise of an evil empire, then rally the rest of the world to conquer it.
0
technically its possible to unite mankinda under a single government (if thats what you meant) but due to our primal tribe drives it would probably require nothing short of an extra terrestrial threat that thwarts all of humanity...
maybe stage it as shown in watchmen...
maybe stage it as shown in watchmen...
0
The idea of taking over the world just doesn't work. As people have mentioned, there will always be that one person or group who does not agree with the leader/government, and leads a revolt for their own freedom. I don't see a need for someone to rule the world, it would just be too much work and lead to problems.
World peace may be possible, and so may be eliminating world hunger. But I don't see it being done under one government.
Also, did anyone hear that the Watchmen movie is being fought by Fox because they claim they still have exclusive movie rights?
World peace may be possible, and so may be eliminating world hunger. But I don't see it being done under one government.
Also, did anyone hear that the Watchmen movie is being fought by Fox because they claim they still have exclusive movie rights?