05-13-2024, 01:43 PM
(05-09-2024, 05:42 PM)Dill Wrote: Kudos for a great thought experiment, which I'd like to explore,
including the question of whether that is the right question,
and how "end this conflict" is to be defined--no more violence, a general peace with a few disrupters on each side,
a reduction of violence over time (a decade, two decades?) to almost none?
I'd say the general peace option.
Quote:It forces me to look at all sides from a different angle.
Do I FORCE people to move first, or to sit at the table together first?
Remember, we're taking godlike power here. you blink and they're wherever you want them to be. If you want to convince them first then go ahead, take as much time as you need. But remember, all the while the current situation continues.
Quote: Give me a day or so to work something up.
In the interim: How long does my authority last? The answer to that will determine a lot.
You can redraw the map, essentially create a nation if you choose, Establish a border and move populations as you will. You cannot change hearts and minds. Essentially, you have the ability to magically create the "two state solution" that so many claim to have wanted for decades. Once this is done you're done. You won't be able to stop people from immediately fighting each other again.
Quote:And if I can "move people freely without violence"--that means my authority is such they won't fight back?
If this is like magic, people's minds are blanked and then suddenly they wake up in a new place, like
Israel West Bank settlers suddenly Scotty-beamed into new homes in Tel Aviv, then I foresee an impossible test.
No, to the first. No to the second. and yes to the third. I think you're already onto the ultimate ending, and point, of this thought experiment with your last sentence, but again I am intrigued to read to answer.
