-3

In the year 2000 I seem to remember that the world seemed mostly at peace (in the Western World at least). The worst thing was the fear of the millennial bug or that some unknown cult might try something weird - which they didn't.

In the UK, there seemed to be peace in Northern Ireland after many decades.

The Balkan conflicts had settled down.

Islamic Terrorism hadn't yet had a proven it was a direct threat to western countries. It was pre-9/11.

Social media hadn't really got going. This was before YouTube/Twitter/Facebook. I mention this only that social media has enabled many uprisings, some of which were violently countered, as well as allowing many terrorists, and insurgents to gain recruits from all over the world in recent years. As well as pumping out propaganda to inspire lone wolf attacks.

So was the dawn of this century really a peaceful time?

  • 4
    What research have you done? what does social media have to do with peace?What research have you done. I think that unless revised, this question is likely to be closed as either unclear what you're asking or opinion based. Before you assert that Islamic Terrorism hadn't started, check the attack on the Marine barracks, or the first attempted bombing of the towers, or.... – Mark C. Wallace Aug 20 '18 at 14:09
  • 10
    The question is obviously too subjective to be answered here, but I love the mention of social media on a par with wars and terrorism. – Evargalo Aug 20 '18 at 14:09
  • 3
    Putting aside my snark, I would advise you to either remove mention of social media and make some effort to document how you measure "peaceful". The world has been growing more peaceful over time, and that trend has accelerated in the recent era (? Piinker? Can't remember the name of that hypothesis). And please edit to remove offense. It is kind of hurtful to compare a tweetwar with the attacks on the Marine barracks. – Mark C. Wallace Aug 20 '18 at 14:20
  • 2
    Jokes aside, a carefully written question about the consequences of social medias on peace might be interesting, but there were revolutions, refugees, gang rapes, arson and terrorism propaganda long before them. I don't agree with your claim about the Arab spring but that's not the place to debate it. – Evargalo Aug 20 '18 at 16:02
  • 4
    I've undeleted my comments - I realize that my attitude is less pleasant than I want to be, but I find it difficult to remain silent when people erase the Marine barracks from history equate mean tweets with dying people. Please read help center and consult Wikipedia and google before you ask here. – Mark C. Wallace Aug 20 '18 at 16:35
6

As near as I can tell, the only western country (for some definitions of "western") that was directly involved in a war in early 2001 was Russia in the Second Chechen War.

Israel, if you count them, was dealing with the Second Intifada. Roughly on that level there was an ethnic Albanian insurgency in Macedonia.

That is certainly a low ebb. The number of conflicts per year has been more or less on the rise since, with a particular spike up in 2012.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.