War isn't about gender. It's about resources and land. Women are just as smart as men and just as ambitious. War and retaliation would still be a thing if not more so with women in power.
Wars are a result of politics and geopolitics and has nothing really to do with gender. Countries would still have the same reasons to go to war with eachother.
I think we have it better ones start wars are men the government ran mostly on man and ones sent people of to war are men. Cheney his company benefited from that war.
No. Female leaders are just like male leaders. There are fewer women than men with the aggressive drive and desire to rule a country but picking from those women wouldn’t need make much difference.
There'd be less organized warfare but more catfights. Instead of dropping bombs on an enemy, they would drop harmful rumours, false accusations, and gossip.
By speculation there would be a lot more peace. But that can't really be defined as an achievement as there has not been a year going by in about 10000 years where war was not a possibility and men were the dominant rulers during that time period. We can talk on of a hypothetical possibility but the best way to actually see is to put women in the ruling spots
Our world problems are not borne out of gender fears or management.. Besides if you ever meet my four sisters you would live in fear of one of those fiery women to be in-charge. Plus think of all the grudges that would be held.
No offense to y'all females bht y'all be trippin some be going off for no reason and you females hold grugdes a lot longer then us males do seen someone walking slow in school one time and oh boy there was a girl next to me we mad i contact and she was like if this bitch dont hurry the fuck up i moved cause i didn't wann a get caught in the crossfire
Ever seen girls bitch at each other? Like hell would there be no war. Anyone who says that has lived in a bubble away from any normal female behaviour.
What Girls & Guys Said
Opinion
227Opinion
War isn't about gender. It's about resources and land. Women are just as smart as men and just as ambitious. War and retaliation would still be a thing if not more so with women in power.
Wars are a result of politics and geopolitics and has nothing really to do with gender. Countries would still have the same reasons to go to war with eachother.
I don't think is make a difference. I have bad experience with woman in the past. I only hang out with guy's and only on good woman.
Apparently throughout history from 1400 to 1900 Queens were more likely to engage in warfare compared to kings.
Why?
I dunno i'm not a Queen from the 1400-1900s
Going by the example of Margaret Thatcher, Indira Ghandi, and a few other women. No, there would not be less war.
Leadership that is based on gender is bound to fail. We need to start electing leaders based on capability
I think we have it better ones start wars are men the government ran mostly on man and ones sent people of to war are men. Cheney his company benefited from that war.
Hillary Clinton supported war with Iraq. Women are just as dangerous as men.
Hillary Clinton is John McCain with a vagina. She's supported every intervention in the past 30 years.
Very true
That was after 9/11 I mean look “we were gonna be treated like liberators”.
She had financial interests, like everyone else who voted for it.
Still doesn't explain Libya
No it was before even in 1998 when bill bombed Iraq.
No. Female leaders are just like male leaders. There are fewer women than men with the aggressive drive and desire to rule a country but picking from those women wouldn’t need make much difference.
There'd be less organized warfare but more catfights. Instead of dropping bombs on an enemy, they would drop harmful rumours, false accusations, and gossip.
By speculation there would be a lot more peace. But that can't really be defined as an achievement as there has not been a year going by in about 10000 years where war was not a possibility and men were the dominant rulers during that time period.
We can talk on of a hypothetical possibility but the best way to actually see is to put women in the ruling spots
Our world problems are not borne out of gender fears or management.. Besides if you ever meet my four sisters you would live in fear of one of those fiery women to be in-charge. Plus think of all the grudges that would be held.
Nope, there would be still war, but for different reasons than the ones that exist now...
No offense to y'all females bht y'all be trippin some be going off for no reason and you females hold grugdes a lot longer then us males do seen someone walking slow in school one time and oh boy there was a girl next to me we mad i contact and she was like if this bitch dont hurry the fuck up i moved cause i didn't wann a get caught in the crossfire
Ever seen girls bitch at each other? Like hell would there be no war. Anyone who says that has lived in a bubble away from any normal female behaviour.
I'm fairly certain the answer is 'yes'...
I can't say how - because I don't see it ever happening... call me grim... but yeah...
"We came, we saw, he died!" - Hillary Clinton
Women are no different... a war pig is still just a war pig despite their gender.
If women will ruin the world there wouldn't me war anymore.
Just some countries not talking with each other.
That would save lives
Do u understand jokes?
If women ruled the world we'd be living as slaves. Not to mention the monthly bloodbath we would have to go trough. Almost like the movie "Purge"
No, it would just make the wars quieter and more savage. And surrender probably wouldn't be very prudent. No offense, ladies.
There will be more fights BUT these fights Would BN be more in the form of speech debates, discussions, etc
The use of power in the war Would be less