I found this image in my files as I was looking for some writing prompts, and this came to me. Instead of troops fighting to the death on the fields, leaders who want to take over the world, or start a war with another country, play war games. IE, the strategy games of Risk and Axis and Allies are what come to mind first. (on a side note, I have never played these, but I know of them, and I know there is a Civil War game of the same ilk)
Each side, for instance, Ukraine and Russia, play their game to determine who gets Crimea. Can you just see Putin and Poroshenko at a table with all their soldiers spread out, playing hours on end until one wins?
Granted, these tend to have risk (haha no pun intended) with the roll of the dice, but there is chance even in real war. Maybe chess would be better. And if you say, “Oh, well I don’t know how to play chess well”… well, that’s the point. I mean, some people just do not do war well, which is why they lose… No offense Germany… Okay, what the heck, I’m going to say there is offense because I have my own issues about Germany even though I have a fair amount in me… but you lost two wars! Two. You don’t fight too well. Same with the British and our two wars….. *crickets chirping*
It’s also like I read in All Quiet on the Western Front. What if instead of all the men dying in wars, you had the two leaders get out there and box until one is defeated? Wouldn’t that save a whole heck of a lot of lives? Granted, I’m not sure Roosevelt would have been able to defeat Hitler, but well, we will never know? But it is a rather interesting subject.
Heck, if you really want to get down to basics, let the two leaders play several games of Battleship. Whoever wins declares victory and we all go home happy (except for the losing side and country) and there is no bloodshed.
It’s just a thought.