How different would the world be if leaders fought one on one, instead of using armies?

Putin kicks the shite out of all the bloke leaders.
Watching Clinton/Merkel & May in a triple threat match would be all kinds of fun…at first.

@ucme, my first thought when I saw this question was ‘oh Vladimir would love that!’

The outcome would be that we’d go to hell in a handbasket at warp speed. Imagine the leaders we’d end up with. They aren’t great now, but imagine if brawn was the primary driver for leadership success.

It would be a fantasy world impossible to visualize.

You end up with this guy as your President, since the only necessary qualification for international relations would be “able to beat up the other guy”.

How different would the world be if we stopped using violence to settle disputes?

@Seek That guy is Eddie Hall, an english strongman & he’s as gentle as a lamb, so maybe not.

@Earthbound_Misfit Well, if the capski fits :)

Did you see the season premere of the walking dead?

It wouldn’t. It would be just like now. Same shit, different flavor.

That would be awesome, but only if they are limited to boxing gloves, nerf bats, and water pistols.

Rollerball would be more entertaining, and just think of the revenue it would generate.

Using armies is not so bad but modern wars are fought from the air and more often than not it is the poor civilians that cop it.

This reminds me of the FGTH video for Two Tribes where Reagan & Chernenko wrestled in a sand pit.

It’s possible to be smart AND physically capable.