The United States' position on nuclear weapons

[Arrjay]

Let me just start by saying that I love the American people & I love the freedoms in the United States.

There's defintiely room to grow. Gay rights, environmental issues etc.

But the thing on my mind right now is this:

Where the hell does the U.S. get off telling other countries that they can't have nuclear weapons?

The U.S.A has the biggest stockpile of weapons of mass destruction. Very few other countries can compare to the military force of the United States.

That, combined with the use of quasi-international economic oppression, clearly shows the United States is basically an international dictatorship.

The U.S.A wants to rule the world.

If they can't do it economically they'll do it with military force.

That's totally not okay.

Thoughts?

[howyadoin]

Where the hell does the U.S. get off telling other countries that they can't have nuclear weapons?

The U.S.A has the biggest stockpile of weapons of mass destruction. Very few other countries can compare to the military force of the United States.The part you're not getting here is that Americans are good, and other people are bad.

[HomerJay]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v655/HomerJay64/0000f24f-1.jpg

[cactusmaac]

..........

You think nutjob countries like Iran and NK having nuclear weapons is a good thing?

The USA wants a world where it can continue to "economically oppress" other countries.

That precludes letting nutjobs getting nukes.

[macul]

and other people are bad.

Just Canadians. The rest are just misunderstood, but them Canadians are EVIL.

[howyadoin]

Just Canadians. The rest are just misunderstood, but them Canadians are EVIL.Man's got a point.

[Dreadstar]

Just Canadians. The rest are just misunderstood, but them Canadians are EVIL.

Watch out, I hear that Canada has a navy.

[Lord of Denial]

I think the answer is in your post!

USA has biggest stockpile of weapons of mass destruction. Some would say we got the firepower we make the rules.

Not me of course.

[Lord of Denial]

Just Canadians. The rest are just misunderstood, but them Canadians are EVIL.


No country where they put gravy and cheese on fries can be all bad.

[howyadoin]

Watch out, I hear that Canada has a navy.What was that joke about the Jamaican Air Force?

3 or more pelicans...?

[drwho]

Why would any country want Iran and North Korea to get nuclear power? Many of them still live there and have the attitudes of people that lived 500 centuries ago. Whenever I hear this it reminds me of the Battle of the Planet of the apes where the underground people and the apes hadnt a clue what they had at thier disposal and destroyed the world due to thier ignorance and savagery. Also in Iran dont they hang you for being gay?

[Haunt]

Why would any country want Iran and North Korea to get nuclear power? Many of them still live there and have the attitudes of people that lived 500 centuries ago. Whenever I hear this it reminds me of the Battle of the Planet of the apes where the underground people and the apes hadnt a clue what they had at thier disposal and destroyed the world due to thier ignorance and savagery.


it might make North Korea less insecure if it did have some nukes.

[Kevin Vetter]

I don't know whats so hard to figure out. It's okay for us to have the weapons because we are us. If we think you could be a threat to us then you can't have them. It's as simple as that. It's hypocritical but I really don't care as long as it works out for us in the end.

[Charles RB]

Where the hell does the U.S. get off telling other countries that they can't have nuclear weapons?

If it's countries like North Korea, they got off from the fact that the country is a dictatorship run by a scary looney.

And it's not just America saying this - all the other nuclear powers are big on non-proliferation too (because who wants to lose their strategic edge?).

[Ed Cunard]

I don't know whats so hard to figure out. It's okay for us to have the weapons because we are us. If we think you could be a threat to us then you can't have them. It's as simple as that. It's hypocritical but I really don't care as long as it works out for us in the end.

I can't tell if this is supporting Arrjay's point or arguing against it.

[Lord of Denial]

I don't know whats so hard to figure out. It's okay for us to have the weapons because we are us. If we think you could be a threat to us then you can't have them. It's as simple as that. It's hypocritical but I really don't care as long as it works out for us in the end.


Quoted for truth!

[Arrjay]

Many of them still live there and have the attitudes of people that lived 500 centuries ago.

That is simply wrong.

Do you really know anything about North Korea?

[Samurai]

Let me just start by saying that I love the American people & I love the freedoms in the United States.

There's defintiely room to grow. Gay rights, environmental issues etc.

But the thing on my mind right now is this:

Where the hell does the U.S. get off telling other countries that they can't have nuclear weapons?

The U.S.A has the biggest stockpile of weapons of mass destruction. Very few other countries can compare to the military force of the United States.

That, combined with the use of quasi-international economic oppression, clearly shows the United States is basically an international dictatorship.

The U.S.A wants to rule the world.

If they can't do it economically they'll do it with military force.

That's totally not okay.

Thoughts?
I suppose since police, the army, and law-abiding folks are allowed to buy guns, we should also allow mass murdering criminals on death row to have them too? It's only fair, after all...

While ridiculously simplistic, "they are bad and would do bad things with them" is one way to put it...

[howyadoin]

I don't know whats so hard to figure out. It's okay for us to have the weapons because we are us.But you aren't us to a large part of the world. You're them.

[drwho]

That is simply wrong.

Do you really know anything about North Korea.

Since you seem to like the countries so much why not go on vacation there? You can give us a report on how it really is over there.

[Dreadstar]

I now refer you to post #3...

[Ed Cunard]

But you aren't us to a large part of the world. You're them.

To paraphrase Busta Rhymes, "they hate us 'cause they ain't us."

Silly Canadian.

[Arrjay]

The USA wants a world where it can continue to "economically oppress" other countries.

Precisely.

[howyadoin]

To paraphrase Busta Rhymes, "they hate us 'cause they ain't us."

Silly Canadian.Hey, I don't hate America.

I do find it pretty amusing sometimes, though.

[Samurai]

Precisely.
Knowing maac, the parenthesis was to show sarcasm...

[Bradley]

Whenever I hear this it reminds me of the Battle of the Planet of the apes where the underground people and the apes hadnt a clue what they had at thier disposal and destroyed the world due to thier ignorance and savagery.

Wow... that's more than a little racist. People in Third World countries are like apes? I'm sure that's not what you meant, but come on.

I'd rather not live in a world where countries like Iran and North Korea have the bomb. I'd also prefer to not live in a world where America and Russia have the bomb. The fact is, I don't really think we (I'm speaking as an American here) have the moral authority to say that we can have these weapons, but other countries can't-- remember, we're the only country that's used these weapons against an enemy before, and apparently (if The New Yorker is to be believed) have at least considered plans to use them again. And even if I did think we have the moral authority, I don't think we'd ever have the ability to prevent nuclear proliferation. Once these weapons were developed, I think we knew that everyone was going to want them. Proliferation was, has been, and is inevitable.

[Ed Cunard]

Hey, I don't hate America.

I do find it pretty amusing sometimes, though.

Lies.

Wow, Im surprised anyone would actually come on here talk crap about one country and not to expect to hear it about others.

So, you expect to hear people talk shit on the US when you talk shit on other countries too, right?

[Sean Walsh]

That is simply wrong.

Do you really know anything about North Korea?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Korea

Amnesty International and other human rights organizations accuse North Korea of having one of the worst human rights records of any nation, severely restricting most freedoms, including freedom of speech and freedom of movement, both inside the country and abroad.

North Korean exiles have testified as to the existence of detention camps with an estimated 150,000 to 200,000 inmates, and have reported torture, starvation, rape, murder and forced labour. [16] [17] Japanese television aired what it said was footage of a prison camp [18]. In some of the camps, US officials and former inmates say the annual mortality rate approaches 20% to 25% [19]. The present regime has been compared to a Stalinist approach, where an estimated two million civilians have been killed by the government[4] A former prison guard and army intelligence officer said that in one camp, chemical weapons were tested on prisoners in a gas chamber [20]. According to a former prisoner, pregnant women inside the camps are often forced to have abortions or the newborn child is killed [21]. A recent TIME magazine article documents a young woman's forced abortion in a prison camp and subsequent escape from North Korea. The government of North Korea refuses to admit independent human rights observers to the state.

The government of North Korea has also been implicated in terrorist attacks in South Korea [22] (Wahn Kihl 1983: 106) as well as assassinations of dissidents in nearby states [23]

I'm sure that's just the tip of the iceberg...

[drwho]

Wow... that's more than a little racist. People in Third World countries are like apes? I'm sure that's not what you meant, but come on.

I'd rather not live in a world where countries like Iran and North Korea have the bomb. I'd also prefer to not live in a world where America and Russia have the bomb. The fact is, I don't really think we (I'm speaking as an American here) have the moral authority to say that we can have these weapons, but other countries can't-- remember, we're the only country that's used these weapons against an enemy before, and apparently (if The New Yorker is to be believed) have at least considered plans to use them again. And even if I did think we have the moral authority, I don't think we'd ever have the ability to prevent nuclear proliferation. Once these weapons were developed, I think we knew that everyone was going to want them. Proliferation was, has been, and is inevitable.

I didnt say that just what it reminds me of plus the underground people were white:D

[Haunt]

and this is why we need a president who is strong on defense. we're (the United States) a bunch of a-holish bullies. like with any bullying, sooner or later the bullied get tired of this treatment and retaliate. so, as long as we are going to be a-holes, we should do our damnedest to stop other countries from developing nukes (heck, any weapons). :)

[Sean Walsh]

Lies.

I think he means amusing "boo hoo" than amusing "tee hee" or "bwa ha"

[Lord of Denial]

The world on a whole is a shitty place. And every country on earth has a hand in making it so.

[HomerJay]

Wow... that's more than a little racist. People in Third World countries are like apes?
I knew someone was going to dust off the chip on their shoulder when I read that.
I'm sure that's not what you meant, but come on.
Then why be trollish and bring it up?

The rest of your points I agree with.

I'd rather not live in a world where countries like Iran and North Korea have the bomb. I'd also prefer to not live in a world where America and Russia have the bomb. The fact is, I don't really think we (I'm speaking as an American here) have the moral authority to say that we can have these weapons, but other countries can't-- remember, we're the only country that's used these weapons against an enemy before, and apparently (if The New Yorker is to be believed) have at least considered plans to use them again. And even if I did think we have the moral authority, I don't think we'd ever have the ability to prevent nuclear proliferation. Once these weapons were developed, I think we knew that everyone was going to want them. Proliferation was, has been, and is inevitable.

[Arrjay]

And every other country in the world is perfect?

Of course not.

But the point of the matter is most others don't stick their nose in the business of countries who haven't asked for it.

What does Iran, Iraq and North Korea have to do with the oxymoronic 'War On Terror'?

Nothing.

What is the United States reason for the starting the 'War On Terror'?

To pursue those responsible for what happened on Septemeber 11th 2001.

Right?

If the United States wanted to truly pursue those who perpetrated 9/11 they'd be in Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan.

They're not.

Instead they're in Iraq. They're looking at Iran. They're talking about economic sanctions for North Korea.

[Ed Cunard]

I think he means amusing "boo hoo" than amusing "tee hee" or "bwa ha"

There is no way in which we are amusing! We are deadly serious! We are not trivial! We are awesometastic, dammit!

Howy lies like someone who smoked so much weed that it made him not tell the truth.

[macul]

Of course not.

But the point of the matter is most others don't stick their nose in the business of countries who haven't asked for it.

errr, yes they do. United Nations ring a bell?

[HomerJay]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Korea

You and your "facts" have no place here, Mister.

[Valmore]

I love post #3.

Can we get an instant replay of it right now?

[Haunt]

errr, yes they do. United Nations ring a bell?


eff them! they should all be dehydrated into individual piles of colorful dust. Waack Waack!

[Ed Cunard]

I love post #3.

Can we get an instant replay of it right now?

That's why everyone hates us. We invented the instant replay. Nothing will ever top the instant replay. Not even instant rice, instant karma, or instant coffee.

[Bradley]

I knew someone was going to dust off the chip on their shoulder when I read that.

Then why be trollish and bring it up?


Because unintentional racism is still racism, I suppose, and I don't think it should be ignored. I don't want to trade insults with anyone, but I do want to make it clear that I wasn't trying to be "trollish" by pointing out the xenophobic assumptions that were informing the post I was trying to respond to.

[HomerJay]

I love post #3.
Can we get an instant replay of it right now?
I feel like Jor-El as Krypton crumbles around him.

[Ed Cunard]

I feel like Jor-El as Krypton crumbles around him.

Jor-El wishes he was American.

[Arrjay]

The part I take issue with the most is the fact that the U.S is so freaking powerful.

Of course other countries want to have nuclear weapons. The U.S has them and on top of that the U.S has proven in recent years that they're completley okay with pre-emptive strikes.

In my opinion that seems like a damn good reason for other countries to want to pursue nuclear weapons. They're scared and they have every right to be.

If the U.S wants other countries to disarm it should be under the agreement that we all will.

If every country disavowed themselves of nuclear weapons and the abiility to make them we wouldn't be having this conversation.

[Kevin Vetter]

I really don't care if we are them to most of the world. None of you should either. Nothing america does will ever win over anyone that doesn't like us. You live in fantasy land if you think otherwise.

This will sound horrible but to me I matter 1000 times more to me than any of you do. I don't personally know anyone that lives in another country so I really don't care what goes on. If there is something terrible going on like whats happeningin sudan or what was going on in the balkans a few years ago then I care because it is something really bad. Other than that I really couldn't care less what some other country is doing unless it will have a negative effect on us.

I don't know any of you so your opinion of me really doesn't matter at all. We will always be hated no matter what we do so why waste time trying to get people to like us that never will. America is like the rich relative you hate. If we can do something for you then we are your favorite for as long as we can do something for you. The second you don't need whatever help you needed anymore you go back to cursing and saying how horrible we are until the next time you need something. Thats how the world will always be and when we are no longer the rich relative we will be replaced by the next country that rises up.

[Valmore]

That's why everyone hates us. We invented the instant replay. Nothing will ever top the instant replay. Not even instant rice, instant karma, or instant coffee.

Even better - we added those spiffy pens that draw on the screens during instant replay!

How can we even top that?

[cactusmaac]

Once these weapons were developed, I think we knew that everyone was going to want them. Proliferation was, has been, and is inevitable.

Well, not entirely. Brazil, South Africa, Taiwan, Argentina, Japan and others were considered very likely to develop nuclear weapons programs in the 60s. They abolished those programs as their governments changed or came under the sway of alliances which guaranteed their protection.

[hoffmandu]

I think Stan Lee said it best, "With great power........." well, I'm sure you guys know the rest.

[Bradley]

This will sound horrible but to me I matter 1000 times more to me than any of you do.


You see, that type of attitude bothers me. Because I don't think I'm any more important than you. Frankly, if a person believes he matters "1000 times" more than I do, what's to stop him from stealing from me, or hurting me in some other way if it entertains him?

[Dreadstar]

I'm still having trouble seeing what's wrong with economic sanctions against NK.

Ed, stop me before I get involved!

[Michael P]

Val, I think you just got your wish.

[Lord of Denial]

The part I take issue with the most is the fact that the U.S is so freaking powerful.

Of course other countries want to have nuclear weapons. The U.S has them and on top of that the U.S has proven in recent years that they're completley okay with pre-emptive strikes.

In my opinion that seems like a damn good reason for other countries to want to pursue nuclear weapons. They're scared and they have every right to be.

If the U.S wants other countries to disarm it should be under the agreement that we all will.

If every country disavowed themselves of nuclear weapons and the abiility to make them we wouldn't be having this conversation.

The fact is those with the most power tend to make the rules. I don't like it but that is the way things work.

[Ed Cunard]

Even better - we added those spiffy pens that draw on the screens during instant replay!

How can we even top that?

Shit. Forget the US--no human or alien-human hybrid will ever top the spiffy pen. I don't even watch sports, and I do acts of contrition in the name of the spiffy pen.

I'm still having trouble seeing what's wrong with economic sanctions against NK.

Ed, stop me before I get involved!

I can't stop you. Not even with the magic of the instant replay and the spiffy pen, because you just done got yourself involved.

[Grazzt]

Even better - we added those spiffy pens that draw on the screens during instant replay!

How can we even top that?

Lighting up hockey pucks?

[hoffmandu]

The fact is those with the most power tend to make the rules. I don't like it but that is the way things work.

Plus, we have John Rambo. Watchoo got fool!

[Bradley]

Well, not entirely. Brazil, South Africa, Taiwan, Argentina, Japan and others were considered very likely to develop nuclear weapons programs in the 60s. They abolished those programs as their governments changed or came under the sway of alliances which guaranteed their protection.


Good point. But I guess my point is, we can't really stop everyone from getting them. We just don't have the diplomacy or the firepower. I know I'm a cynic, but I just can't imagine every government in the world going for a plan that would allow others to have weapons that can destroy them without having the same weapons themselves.

[Kevin Vetter]

If every country disavowed themselves of nuclear weapons and the abiility to make them we wouldn't be having this conversation.

Do you actually think anything close to that could ever happen?

[Sanagi]

Nuclear weapons are insane from the get-go. The only thing we can hope for is a relatively stable framework of insanity.

[Grazzt]

Do you actually think anything close to that could ever happen?

Well, maybe once we start developing weapons that make nuclear weapons obsolete.

I mean, who cares about an atomic explosion when you're creating mini-black holes to wipe out cities? :D

[HomerJay]

I think Stan Lee said it best, "With great power........." well, I'm sure you guys know the rest.
Exactly.
Does anyone have ANY confidence in the "responsibility" of the governments of Iran or North Korea?

[drwho]

Nuclear weapons are insane from the get-go. The only thing we can hope for is a relatively stable framework of insanity.

Exactly and what country would you want in control of that? One that murders people for stuff like being gay or a country that is somewhat tolerable of it.

[Ed Cunard]

Lighting up hockey pucks?

Sorry, Canadian, but no.

I didn't even have to look to see that you were Canadian, Canadian! Your inherent Canadianness gave it away.

[cactusmaac]

The part I take issue with the most is the fact that the U.S is so freaking powerful.

Considering how chaotic the world was in the 30s and 70s when the US had an immensely weakened global position, I do not consider that a negative.


Of course other countries want to have nuclear weapons. The U.S has them and on top of that the U.S has proven in recent years that they're completley okay with pre-emptive strikes.

In my opinion that seems like a damn good reason for other countries to want to pursue nuclear weapons. They're scared and they have every right to be.

If the U.S wants other countries to disarm it should be under the agreement that we all will.

If every country disavowed themselves of nuclear weapons and the abiility to make them we wouldn't be having this conversation.

Does North Korea seriously expect an invasion? Or do they realise the only money-making industry they have is nuclear blackmail?

Iran's had a nuclear program in place since 1959 and has been trying to keep it going throughout the Revolutionary period. It's not about fear of the US, it's about boosting their geostrategic profile.

[Lord of Denial]

I miss the Cold War!

[Haunt]

I think Stan Lee said it best, "With great power........." well, I'm sure you guys know the rest.

problem is that Peter Parker is an unbelievably nice guy. many U.S. politicians aren't.

[Lord of Denial]

problem is that Peter Parker is an unbelievably nice guy. U.S. politicians aren't.


Fixed that for you.

[Bradley]

problem is that Peter Parker is an unbelievably nice guy. many U.S. politicians aren't.

Wait... this conversation is moving too fast for me. Does Spider-Man have the bomb now too?

I guess I'm down with that...

[Grazzt]

Your inherent Canadianness gave it away.

Oh, you mean my inherent physical, mental, and spiritual superiority? Thanks for noticing, it's usually hard to tell on web forums.

[HomerJay]

Does Spider-Man have the bomb now?
Yes, but we don't want someone like Eddie Brock to have it too.

Not a bad analogy actually.

[Gene M.]

Why would any country want Iran and North Korea to get nuclear power? Many of them still live there and have the attitudes of people that lived 500 centuries ago. Whenever I hear this it reminds me of the Battle of the Planet of the apes where the underground people and the apes hadnt a clue what they had at thier disposal and destroyed the world due to thier ignorance and savagery. Also in Iran dont they hang you for being gay?

Dude, get your facts straight before you say anything.

Everybody knows that happened in Beneath the Planet of the Apes. :rolleyes:

[Ed Cunard]

Oh, you mean my inherent physical, mental, and spiritual superiority over lesser creatures, like snails, but inherent physical, mental, and spiritual inferiority over Americans? Thanks for noticing, it's usually hard to tell on web forums.

Fixed it for you.

There's a reason why, when young nerds lie to their friends about their significant other, they say they have a girlfriend in Canada. No one wants to castigate his friend for dating something so far beneath him that they let it drop.

USA! USA!

[Ed Cunard]

It also amazes me that someone actually thinks something positive will come from a title called The freakin United States. ooops wrong title you are right.

Oh, I've had a great deal of fun with it. That's positive, right? Well, it is for me, and I care about myself, like, a thousand times more than I care for everyone else, so even if everyone else is having a thousand times less fun with it than I am then, at worst, it's a wash.

[Lord of Denial]

Oh, I've had a great deal of fun with it. That's positive, right? Well, it is for me, and I care about myself, like, a thousand times more than I care for everyone else, so even if everyone else is having a thousand times less fun with it than I am then, at worst, it's a wash.

That's just good stuff.

[Slam_Bradley]

But you aren't us to a large part of the world. You're them.


Since when does that part of the world matter?

[Winslow]

Not gonna read the whole thread, just answer a question.

Where the hell does the U.S. get off telling other countries that they can't have nuclear weapons?

Thoughts?

Well there's this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_Non-Proliferation_Treaty

Seems like everybody agreed nukes were a bad idea, and signed a treaty saying they wouldn't build em.

[Magneto_X]

Fixed it for you.

There's a reason why, when young nerds lie to their friends about their significant other, they say they have a girlfriend in Canada. No one wants to castigate his friend for dating something so far beneath him that they let it drop.

USA! USA!

I'm sure you'd really turn down a date from Elisha Cuthbert, Jewel Staite or Evangeline Lilly.

[Grazzt]

There's a reason why, when young nerds lie to their friends about their significant other, they say they have a girlfriend in Canada. Everyone is so awestruck by the glorious prospect of dating a Canadian that they forget to check to see that he actually is dating one.

And I fixed your post, too. Isn't it great that citizens of two neighbouring countries can help each other whenover one errs? That is the spirit that makes North America great.

[HomerJay]

Well there's this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_Non-Proliferation_Treaty

Seems like everybody agreed nukes were a bad idea, and signed a treaty saying they wouldn't build em.

Sigh.
There you people go again with your "facts". Why can't you just accept the fact that the U.S. is an oppressive shithole?

[Ed Cunard]

I'm sure you'd really turn down a date from Elisha Cuthbert, Jewel Staite or Evangeline Lilly.

As attractive as they may be, they've still got the taint of themness on them that a girl from the US of A does not have. But you're right, I would not turn it down, because as an American, the world is my oyster!

No, wait, oysters are probably foreign cuisine, and tainted with themness. The world is now my hot dog--a hot dog with mustard and onions, purchased in a baseball park with a plastic bottle of beer.

[Dennis K]

Let me just start by saying that I love the American people & I love the freedoms in the United States.

There's defintiely room to grow. Gay rights, environmental issues etc.

But the thing on my mind right now is this:

Where the hell does the U.S. get off telling other countries that they can't have nuclear weapons?

The U.S.A has the biggest stockpile of weapons of mass destruction. Very few other countries can compare to the military force of the United States.

That, combined with the use of quasi-international economic oppression, clearly shows the United States is basically an international dictatorship.

The U.S.A wants to rule the world.

If they can't do it economically they'll do it with military force.

That's totally not okay.

Thoughts?


My first thought is that there's no way I'm reading every post in this thread before I post my own thought. My second thought is that you don't seem able to seperate some American politicians with the majority of the American population.

[HomerJay]

As attractive as they may be, they've still got the taint of themness on them that a girl from the US of A does not have.
Well then they're just "exotic".

[Ed Cunard]

Sigh.
There you people go again with your "facts". Why can't you just accept the fact that the U.S. is an oppressive shithole?


If I can actually post something serious here for a change, it actually can be argued that the US is oppressive in certain ways, just as any major world power that has previously tried to imprint it's particular ideology on another part of the world.

That wouldn't make the US an oppressive shithole, though. Even if it did, we'd have to decide if the United States is its administration, its foreign policy, its people, its land, its cultural heritage, its ideology... it'd take a lot of thinking and, as this thread demonstrates, thinking is really, really hard.

[Adam Crocker]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Korea

I'm sure that's just the tip of the iceberg...

Granted, he didn't argue that North Korea AND Iran did have human rights abuses, so much as against drwho's claim that the people there basically have the same attitudes as 500 years ago. (Of course I could be wrong since it was confusingly phrased as "many of them still live there.") That's one of those claims I have a hard time accepting with evidence to back it up.

Of course the main problem with North Korea having nukes isn't it's human rights abuses, otherwise we'd be in a tiff over China having nukes. The problem is, as Ian has pointed out, is that its dictator Kim Il-Jong has demonstrated that he's more reckless than most dictators in the world. He's done things like kidnap Japanese tourists off beaches and a South Korean movie director. Worst yet, North Korea's political elite did not lift a finger to stop him. Without that kind of check on his actions it really begs the question as to what NK will do with nukes.

[Sean Walsh]

I think Stan Lee said it best, "With great power........." well, I'm sure you guys know the rest.

"....comes cake. With sprinkles."

See, people diss RAVAGE 2099 but that was SO totally in there.

;) :p

[Ed Cunard]

Now that would be a good thread. Good luck keeping things civil though without the "internet tough guys" making an appearance.

I'll kick your ass for invoking their names. Now they'll come and OH NOES I AM INFECTED SHIT.

Honestly, though? While Arrjay phrased that, er, phrase really, really poorly (like, third-world-flies-buzzing-around-rotten-food poorly), people like the person he directed it to who state things like "Dude, we're the US, and we're automatically right and to hell with what anyone else thinks" are part of the reason that the United States gets a bad rap both domestically and abroad. I mean, no one likes an ethnocentrist from another area, because the ethnocentrist has already set themselves up over the other person.

And I say that as a person who generally does think that I'm automatically right and the hell to what anyone else thinks.

[Stellar]

the man has a point, i agree that america is some kind of dictatorship. wasn't it Lennon who compared the US to the Roman empire?

i have no problem with american citizens. it's the government that bothers me

edit: mr. Cunard pretty much explained what's wrong with the world today. hell, what's been wrong with it for one hell of a time

[Arrjay]

Do you actually think anything close to that could ever happen?

It's not impossible.

Unlikely, yes.

But not impossible.

[Slam_Bradley]

It appears to me that we can place the blame squarely on the shoulders of those 188 nations that show they hate freedom by signing the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

It's very clear that Guinea-Bissau wants to keep North Korea down.

[Puma]

Exactly.
Does anyone have ANY confidence in the "responsibility" of the governments of Iran or North Korea?

I have confidence problems that the current US administration understands the concept of 'responsibility'

[howyadoin]

I really don't care if we are them to most of the world. None of you should either. Nothing america does will ever win over anyone that doesn't like us. You live in fantasy land if you think otherwise.

This will sound horrible but to me I matter 1000 times more to me than any of you do. I don't personally know anyone that lives in another country so I really don't care what goes on. If there is something terrible going on like whats happeningin sudan or what was going on in the balkans a few years ago then I care because it is something really bad. Other than that I really couldn't care less what some other country is doing unless it will have a negative effect on us.

I don't know any of you so your opinion of me really doesn't matter at all. We will always be hated no matter what we do so why waste time trying to get people to like us that never will. America is like the rich relative you hate. If we can do something for you then we are your favorite for as long as we can do something for you. The second you don't need whatever help you needed anymore you go back to cursing and saying how horrible we are until the next time you need something. Thats how the world will always be and when we are no longer the rich relative we will be replaced by the next country that rises up.Sorry, all I heard there was "me, me, me, enough about me, let's talk about me."

But I hope you never complain about people stereotyping Americans, then.

[Magneto_X]

I have confidence problems that the current US administration understands the concept of 'responsibility'

I don't think Dubya can even spell "responsibility". :D

[hoffmandu]

Yes, but we don't want someone like Eddie Brock to have it too.

Not a bad analogy actually.

Indeed is is! Bravo!

[Black Atom]

Thoughts?

Lucky for you, we're pretty lax on immigration.

Do not resist us.

[Arrjay]

i agree that america is some kind of dictatorship. wasn't it Lennon who compared the US to the Roman empire?

i have no problem with american citizens. it's the government that bothers me


Amen to that.

Thank you.

[Arrjay]

I have confidence problems that the current US administration understands the concept of 'responsibility'

Yeah. I agree.

[Iangould]

I don't know whats so hard to figure out. It's okay for us to have the weapons because we are us. If we think you could be a threat to us then you can't have them. It's as simple as that. It's hypocritical but I really don't care as long as it works out for us in the end.

Of course, it'll only work out for you as long as you're the most powerful country on the planet and by this reasoning the second India or China get the capability to deliver an overwhelming attack on the US (say by sticking nukes in shipping containers or diplomatic bags) they should do so "as long as it works out for them in the end".

[hoffmandu]

I believe the American Gov is oppressive. All Gov's are in some way, shape or form. But it always seems like they act in America's best interest when doing so. Is that okay? Not to the rest of the world, but it is to me. In fact, I kind of expect it from them. However, to compare the US Gov to that of NK or Iraq is retarded. Those 2 regimes looked out for themselves, not their people. And even went as far as acting in ways that hurt/killed/opressed their own people in order to retain/grow that power. Not the same thing IMHO.

[Stellar]

just wait till China becomes the most powerful country. then we're really screwed

[Valmore]

I say we need a treaty to make sure Instant Replay never gets shared in North Korea. EVER! Or the spiffy pens, either!

[Kevin Vetter]

howyadoin, I never complain about anyone being stereotyped. I really couldn't care less about what anyone thinks of me or america. If someone is ignorant enough to believe every sterotype you hear then why should I care about their opinions on anything?

Iangould, that has been happening since the beginning of time and will continue to happen until the end of time. When you are bigger,stronger, smarter than someone/something else then you are the top of the food chain and do as you please. Eventually someone will become bigger, smarter, or stronger than us and there is nothing anyone can do to prevent that from happening. America trying to prevent other nations from getting nukes is just us trying delay someone elses eventual rise to the top.

Any other country that was in our position would do no different. The only difference between america and other countries is that right now we are the top of the food chain. Things won't be that way forever but america will try to keep it like that aslong as possible and prevent people that could be our enemies from getting the means to destroy us is a way of doing that. No matter what bs someone feeds you everyone looks out for their own best interest. If you believe othewise you are a fool.

[DonC]

Where the hell does the U.S. get off telling other countries that they can't have nuclear weapons?


Thoughts?


You're talking about a man who claims to have invented the hambuger as if he's sane.

[Stellar]

If everyone would just recognize that it's Guinea-Bissau's fault we could start talking about something important.

so what are your views on the subject, Slam

[curefreak]

You're talking about a man who claims to have invented the hambuger as if he's sane.
kim jon ill claims he invented the hamburger?

[hoffmandu]

howyadoin, I never complain about anyone being stereotyped. I really couldn't care less about what anyone thinks of me or america. If someone is ignorant enough to believe every sterotype you hear then why should I care about their opinions on anything?

Iangould, that has been happening since the beginning of time and will continue to happen until the end of time. When you are bigger,stronger, smarter than someone/something else then you are the top of the food chain and do as you please. Eventually someone will become bigger, smarter, or stronger than us and there is nothing anyone can do to prevent that from happening. America trying to prevent other nations from getting nukes is just us trying delay someone elses eventual rise to the top.

Any other country that was in our position would do no different. The only difference between america and other countries is that right now we are the top of the food chain. Things won't be that way forever but america will try to keep it like that aslong as possible and prevent people that could be our enemies from getting the means to destroy us is a way of doing that. No matter what bs someone feeds you everyone looks out for their own best interest. If you believe othewise you are a fool.

I disagree with this. I don't think America is doing what it's doing because we believe we're smarter or better or to keep NK down. It's being done because iL has proven time and time again that he's an unreasonable, militaristic, opressive bastard that is only in the game to suit himself, not his people. In other words, he's a complete psycho. A nuke in the hands of such a person is unacceptable IMHO.

[Kevin Vetter]

That is no different than what I said. We don't want him to have nukes, why? Becuase like you said, "he's an unreasonable, militaristic, opressive bastard that is only in the game to suit himself, not his people. In other words, he's a complete psycho." A person like that could be a threat to us and we want to stop him before he becomes one.

[Captain Murphy]

kim jon ill claims he invented the hamburger?

rofl


anyway, I dont know why America does tell people they cant have nukes, really its non of their business plus I think Japan owes America one for Hiroshima. Seriously TEAM AMERICA: world Police. says it all. Cause more damamge than prevent, if they just stay the fuck out of it, it wouldnt be so bad.

[hoffmandu]

That is no different than what I said. We don't want him to have nukes, why? Becuase like you said, "he's an unreasonable, militaristic, opressive bastard that is only in the game to suit himself, not his people. In other words, he's a complete psycho." A person like that could be a threat to us and we want to stop him before he becomes one.

This doesn't have anything to do with NK's eventual rise to the top. Nor does having a Nuke in your military arsenal increase the chance of such.

[Slam_Bradley]

anyway, I dont know why America does tell people they cant have nukes, really its non of their business plus I think Japan owes America one for Hiroshima. Seriously TEAM AMERICA: world Police. says it all. Cause more damamge than prevent, if they just stay the fuck out of it, it wouldnt be so bad.


The reason is because there is this little thing called the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. In the absence of anyone else willing to do it, the U.S. as the closest thing there is to a hegemonic power is called upon to attempt to enforce said treaty.

Given that 188 nations have signed said treaty, I really fail to see where the controversy comes from.

[howyadoin]

howyadoin, I never complain about anyone being stereotyped. I really couldn't care less about what anyone thinks of me or america. If someone is ignorant enough to believe every sterotype you hear then why should I care about their opinions on anything?Fair enough. I just figured that since you're trying to hard to exemplify the stereotype, you wouldn't have a leg to stand on if you then turned around and complained about it.

[Kevin Vetter]

They don't have to be capable of rising to the top. They are a hostile nation that is trying to gain the ability to badly damage us or allies. Whether or not they are able to now or soon doesn't matter as much as them trying to gain the ability to does.

I'm not trying hard to exemplify anything. If I was trying to push the stereotype I'd be saying you all suck and we rule. Everything we do is right and perfect and just and for the good of humanity. That clearly isn't the case. I know that things we do aren't forthe best of everyone and were never meant to be no matter what anyone says. America does what it believes is right for america and if it helps some other people then so be it and if it doesn't then thats to bad. Every other country is the same way. We are just able to do more now than others are.

[Calybos]

When the U.S. makes its hypocrisy this blatant--by saying that rules are for OTHER nations to follow, but we're above them--then it reinforces the primitive attitude that "might makes right."

Which inevitably leads to "if you want to make your own decisions, you'd better stock up on munitions pronto."

Any talk of rationality or peaceful negotiations is rightly received as obvious, self-serving lies from that point on. By taking an aggressive stance, we encourage--indeed require--more aggression in response.

Which boils down to "Bush is a moron," but I figured that was obvious.

[hoffmandu]

When the U.S. makes its hypocrisy this blatant--by saying that rules are for OTHER nations to follow, but we're above them--then it reinforces the primitive attitude that "might makes right."

Which inevitably leads to "if you want to make your own decisions, you'd better stock up on munitions pronto."

Any talk of rationality or peaceful negotiations is rightly received as obvious, self-serving lies from that point on. By taking an aggressive stance, we encourage--indeed require--more aggression in response.

Which boils down to "Bush is a moron," but I figured that was obvious.

Iran and NK have been violent and opressive long before Bush took office. Do you honestly think that if the UN put sanctions on America we would use military force to overcome?

[Paul McEnery]

I believe the American Gov is oppressive. All Gov's are in some way, shape or form. But it always seems like they act in America's best interest when doing so.
In whose best interest? Because it sure as hell ain't for the majority of the country.

[hoffmandu]

In whose best interest? Because it sure as hell ain't for the majority of the country.

That's debatable. The majority voted him in. His actions are a direct reflection of what the people want.

[Calybos]

When you are bigger,stronger, smarter than someone/something else then you are the top of the food chain and do as you please. Eventually someone will become bigger, smarter, or stronger than us and there is nothing anyone can do to prevent that from happening. America trying to prevent other nations from getting nukes is just us trying delay someone elses eventual rise to the top.
...No matter what bs someone feeds you everyone looks out for their own best interest. If you believe othewise you are a fool.

Tell me something dkpunk: Where did concepts like heroism and justice come from, then? How about "compassion" and "equality"? Are these just symptoms of a mental disorder? In your dog-eat-dog Ayn-Rand nightmare universe, how could concepts like "the strong protecting the weak" and "all men are created equal" ever arise in the first place?

Heck, why do we have governments and treaties at all? According to your system, we should all be living in a brutal, savage jungle where violence is the only measure of power. So where'd all these roads and computers and cartoons come from? Are people just dumb enough to waste their time on non-Machiavellian pursuits occasionally, and the rest of us should see that as a sign of weakness and pounce on 'em?

You first. I hear that sissy Warren Ellis writes for a living instead of clawing and shooting for food and sex. Let's go get him!

[Calybos]

That's debatable. The majority voted him in. His actions are a direct reflection of what the people want.
Actually they didn't... and they aren't. Check the poll numbers.

[Adam Crocker]

That's debatable. The majority voted him in. His actions are a direct reflection of what the people want.

When an elected government has to resort to lying and dissembling, as well as certain degree on negligence on the part of the press (which they certainly did for the lead-up to the Iraq war), it's debatable how much its actions reflect what people want. And that's leaving aside Bush's currently poll numbers.

[Ontir]

How does the only nation on Earth to ever have nuked a civilian population - twice - pontificate to others?

I wonder what Iran would be like today, if we hadn't derailed democracy in order to empower the Shah? When you really look at our history, we have absolutely no moral authority on any subject, and any shred of the pretense is being rapidly undone by the Dubya Show.

[Pól Rua]

The reason is because there is this little thing called the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty...
Given that 188 nations have signed said treaty, I really fail to see where the controversy comes from.

188 Nations.
Not just the U.S.

So yeah. I'm with Slam on this one.

I really can't see how this is any single nation exerting its will on others.

[Brian Cronin]

Keep it civil, folks.

And on topic.

And Arrjay, in particular, lighten up with the defensive attitude - it goes a long way. When a thread is originally titled "The Freakin' United States," to act surprised that some negative reaction might come with the territory is a bit silly.

-Brian

[i_mmmchocolate]

Thoughts?
Why do you hate freedom?

[Valmore]

Why do you hate freedom?

He doesn't!

He's all about the freedom for North Korea to be capable of nuking Seattle.

[JeffreyWKramer]

I really don't care if we are them to most of the world. None of you should either. Nothing america does will ever win over anyone that doesn't like us. You live in fantasy land if you think otherwise.
By representing things like liberty and opportunity, the US has done much to win over many other peoples and nations. That's one reason so many people have traditionally wanted to move to the US.

Unfortunately, small-minded, self-centered hatemongering like most of what you've posted here has also done its part to make many people hate the US.

[Michael P]

He doesn't!

He's all about the freedom for North Korea to be capable of nuking Seattle.
Well, shit, have you ever *been* to Seattle? Aim that missile at the right neighborhood, and the smoking crater is a measured improvement.

[TheTen-EyedMan]

Well, shit, have you ever *been* to Seattle? Aim that missile at the right neighborhood, and the smoking crater is a measured improvement.

I've always believed that if you dropped a bomb on Seattle then you'd only do about 300 bucks damage.

And that would be because of the Seahawks.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/74/Seattle_Seahawks_helmet_rightface.png

[JeffreyWKramer]

Iangould, that has been happening since the beginning of time and will continue to happen until the end of time. When you are bigger,stronger, smarter than someone/something else then you are the top of the food chain and do as you please. Eventually someone will become bigger, smarter, or stronger than us and there is nothing anyone can do to prevent that from happening. America trying to prevent other nations from getting nukes is just us trying delay someone elses eventual rise to the top.

Any other country that was in our position would do no different. The only difference between america and other countries is that right now we are the top of the food chain. Things won't be that way forever but america will try to keep it like that aslong as possible and prevent people that could be our enemies from getting the means to destroy us is a way of doing that. No matter what bs someone feeds you everyone looks out for their own best interest. If you believe othewise you are a fool.

I'd suspect you were an Ayn Rand follower, but your posts are not articulate enough to suggest you could really follow Rand's writings.

Anyhow, "might makes right" is a pretty primitive moral POV for anyone over about age five.

[Valmore]

Well, shit, have you ever *been* to Seattle? Aim that missile at the right neighborhood, and the smoking crater is a measured improvement.

Sadly, the only time I've been to Seattle is in "Deus Ex: Invisible War."

[JeffreyWKramer]

That is no different than what I said. We don't want him to have nukes, why? Becuase like you said, "he's an unreasonable, militaristic, opressive bastard that is only in the game to suit himself, not his people. In other words, he's a complete psycho." A person like that could be a threat to us and we want to stop him before he becomes one.

That's completely different from what you said. Your rant is about how it's okay for the US to do whatever it wants because it's the biggest kid in the playground.

Also, unlike your "might makes right", the argument that North Korea is too dangerous for nukes is defensible.

[howyadoin]

Unfortunately, small-minded, self-centered hatemongering like most of what you've posted here has also done its part to make many people hate the US. http://www.globalschoolnet.org/about/images/applause.gif

[TheTen-EyedMan]

By representing things like liberty and opportunity, the US has done much to win over many other peoples and nations. That's one reason so many people have traditionally wanted to move to the US.


As long as you're white, middle classed and Christian you mean.

It's mighty white of you to make that comment.

Thanks.

[drwho]

People from other countries may hate the US anyway for a number of issues and not just for getting involved with other countries. You cant please every country so I dont see anything wrong with the wonderful US doing things in the country's best interest to keep those less cooperative countries from getting the technology which could be put to use to destroy the world.:D

[Iangould]

just wait till China becomes the most powerful country. then we're really screwed

Not really, see even if China is the most powerful single country, the US and its allies are probably still going to be more powerful as a group.

Of course, that requires the US not alienate its allies by treating them with contempt on a regular basis.

[JeffreyWKramer]

As long as you're white, middle classed and Christian you mean.

It's mighty white of you to make that comment.

Thanks.

The US hasn't done a perfect job of living up to its ideals, but I can't think of any nation that has done a better job. One shouldn't ignore that there's plenty of room for improvement, and lots of missteps and bad choices, but one shouldn't focus only on those, either.

Just ask non-white, not-particularly-Christian and at-the-time-broke Japan.

[Sean Walsh]

Well, shit, have you ever *been* to Seattle? Aim that missile at the right neighborhood, and the smoking crater is a measured improvement.

But that's where Frasier lived! Tossed salad and scrambled eggs! Blah! :p

[TheTen-EyedMan]

The US hasn't done a perfect job of living up to its ideals, but I can't think of any nation that has done a better job. One shouldn't ignore that there's plenty of room for improvement, and lots of missteps and bad choices, but one shouldn't focus only on those, either.

Just ask non-white, not-particularly-Christian and at-the-time-broke Japan.

Australia kinda gets left behind doesn't it.

Have you ever been there?

The closest thing to a terrorist incident (before their prime minature stuck his nose up Bush's ass over this Texas Oil Cartel sponsored war in Iraq) they had was a fuckwit named Tim Anderson who blew up two garbage men and a cop in 1978 in Sydney. All at the behest of Ananda Marga.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ananda_Marga

[Pól Rua]

Okay, we've got:

- spying on your own citizenry,
- illegally holding suspected criminals indefinitely without trial or legal representation,
- advocating the use of torture,
- embarking on a bogus war for completely spurious reasons,
- whitewashing the murder and torture of innocent noncombatants,
- the use of dick-waving gunboat bullshit in lieu of any sort of actual useful diplomacy,
- setting secular policy based on the crackpot ideas of a series of religious fanatics

and you're going to crack the shits about not letting a psychotic like Kim Jong Il have nukes?
Seriously dude, pick your battles.

[Pól Rua]

Australia kinda gets left behind doesn't it.

Have you ever been there?

The closest thing to a terrorist incident (before their prime minature stuck his nose up Bush's ass over this Texas Oil Cartel sponsored war in Iraq) they had was a fuckwit named Tim Anderson who blew up two garbage men and a cop in 1978 in Sydney. All at the behest of Ananda Marga.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ananda_Marga

We ARE pretty awesome, however, we also did a keen job of wiping out our native population, which we continue to treat worse than animals. We did have that whole crazy 'white Australia' thing in the 50's which our current leader, Mr.Squiggle's evil twin, is trying desperately to re-instate.
We do hold people in desert prison camps without trial and access to legal representation for border violations. Thanks, Ruddock, ya prick.
We did dedicate far, far too much attention to the deranged gibbering of a psychotic fish shop owner a couple of years back.
And of course, inspired by some ignorant fuckstain on the radio, a bunch of our lovely easy-going folks decided to have a day out on the beach where the main attraction was punching the shit out of anyone a little bit browner than tanned.

Aside from that, and there is no sarcasm here, we do pretty freakin' good.

[TheTen-EyedMan]

We ARE pretty awesome, however, we also did a keen job of wiping out our native population, which we continue to treat worse than animals. We did have that whole crazy 'white Australia' thing in the 50's which our current leader, Mr.Squiggle's evil twin, is trying desperately to re-instate.
We do hold people in desert prison camps without trial and access to legal representation for border violations. Thanks, Ruddock, ya prick.
We did dedicate far, far too much attention to the deranged gibbering of a psychotic fish shop owner a couple of years back.
And of course, inspired by some ignorant fuckstain on the radio, a bunch of our lovely easy-going folks decided to have a day out on the beach where the main attraction was punching the shit out of anyone a little bit browner than tanned.

Aside from that, and there is no sarcasm here, we do pretty freakin' good.

In order you mentioned John Howard, Phillip Ruddock (who went to school with Mike Carlton apparently), Pauline Hanson and Alan Jones, not the race car guy (RIP Brock, right), who was accused of seeking sexual favors in a Paddington public toilet while on the Wallabie tour of 1984.

Am I right?

Before you ask, I have an Australian girlfriend, who is even more political than I am.

[Pól Rua]

In order you mentioned John Howard, Phillip Ruddock (who went to school with Mike Carlton apparently), Pauline Hanson and Alan Jones, not the race car guy (RIP Brock, right), who was accused of seeking sexual favors in a Paddington public toilet while on the Wallabie tour of 1984.


Four out of four.
http://www.companycatalog.com/kenberma/images/shaped%20gold%20star%20pin%20sm.jpg

[JeffreyWKramer]

Australia kinda gets left behind doesn't it.


Australia is probably the next on the list. Good call, though as Pol pointed out, Australia's record isn't flawless either.

Beats the hell out of most, though.

Canada's not too awful, either.

[Iangould]

We ARE pretty awesome, however, we also did a keen job of wiping out our native population, which we continue to treat worse than animals.

Hey we are making progress though.

I mean now it only takes three years to decide that a policeman who kicks an Aboriginal man to death should be stood down from active duty.

On full pay, of course, and only after he requests it.

[TheTen-EyedMan]

Four out of four.
http://www.companycatalog.com/kenberma/images/shaped%20gold%20star%20pin%20sm.jpg


Woot.

If either North Korea or the fictional organisation known as Al Qaeda comes a knocking with weapons of mass destruction that actually exist then have a plan in place to evacuate the U.S. post haste and live with Liv's parents on the Gold Coast.

That's below the Brisbane line so if the Indonesians come down then we'll hold them off there.

[Pól Rua]

Woot.

If either North Korea or the fictional organisation known as Al Qaeda comes a knocking with weapons of mass destruction that actually exist then have a plan in place to evacuate the U.S. post haste and live with Liv's parents on the Gold Coast.

That's below the Brisbane line so if the Indonesians come down then we'll hold them off there.

Hrm. Well, I'm in Brisbane, so if I'm any indication, I wouldn't hold a lot of hope of that line holding.
Still, on the plus side, they will have to get through about 1,200 k's of pot-growing survivalist nutjobs and outback headcases who think Mad Max was a documentary, so I think we're pretty safe.

[Tages]

Well, not entirely. Brazil, South Africa, Taiwan, Argentina, Japan and others were considered very likely to develop nuclear weapons programs in the 60s. They abolished those programs as their governments changed or came under the sway of alliances which guaranteed their protection.
There's some disagreement (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vela_Incident) on that one.

[TheTen-EyedMan]

Hrm. Well, I'm in Brisbane, so if I'm any indication, I wouldn't hold a lot of hope of that line holding.
Still, on the plus side, they will have to get through about 1,200 k's of pot-growing survivalist nutjobs and outback headcases who think Mad Max was a documentary, so I think we're pretty safe.


Funny shit.

You don't trust Peter Beattie to hold the line like John Curtin then.

[Pól Rua]

They've gotta get through the crazy 'Hills Have Eyes' Bob Katter territory before they get to Beattie.
Frankly, I'm thinking any attempt to invade from the North's gonna end up looking like 'Wolf Creek' on a larger scale.

[Iangould]

They've gotta get through the crazy 'Hills Have Eyes' Bob Katter territory before they get to Beattie.
Frankly, I'm thinking any attempt to invade from the North's gonna end up looking like 'Wolf Creek' on a larger scale.

A friend of mine used to run motobike outback holiday groups for Japanese tourists.

Pretty much every trip they had someone suffer agoraphobia fro mthe shheer size of the place. A cople of times a year they had a case severe enough to be medivaced back home.

Invading northern Australia would be comparable to invading Russia.

[Kevin Vetter]

It's not right for the us to do whatever it wants because they are the biggest kid on the playground. I'm not condoning killing and destroying just because we can. I'm not a comic book supervillian. I don't think we should have gone into iraq. I don't think the solution to countries like iran and north korea is to go in and turn them into toxic waste lands. I really do think that most of the time there are things you can do other than pounding someone into submission. Then there are some people that need to get their ass kicked before they are willing to listen to other possible solutions. I think norh korea and iran represent both of those.

For north korea it's like the cliche, things are going to get worse before they get better.It's not a nice thing but you completely isolate them, prevent anything from going in and going out and make the conditions bad enough where the people there have had enough. No country has a military capable of keeping control of everything if everyone else wants a change but the people have to be willing to actually do something about it. You can't rely on others to fix all of your problems for you.

I really think with iran some kind of military action would have to happen but I really don't know what that would be. I really don't have a solution for dealing with them and even if we weren't wasting resources in iraq I don't know if we would have enough to do anything to iran. If you think that iran shouldn't have nukes and think you have a solution then please say so, I'd like to hear it. Just don't say noone should have nukes and we should get everyone to agree to get rid of them. That will never happen and you're naive if you think anyone will give up what they have just because you say you will do it to. Nuclear weapons exist now and they always will. Saying everyone should get rid of them would be the best solution but it's not realistic at all.

I really don't have a problem if a nation wants to go nuclear. The problem comes when the heads of the nations say they want to wipe countries off the map or to help in fulfilling their religions prophecies by causing worldwide destruction on an unimaginable scale so their messiah returns or when they say you are going to have a meeting with us or we're going to shoot a nuke at someone.

Hatemongering? There is a difference between hate and not caring. I don't hate anyone just because they aren't like me. It's not like I celebrate when something bad happens to people. Something bad happens to you then thats a shame but I'm not going to lose any sleep over it.

Humans are no different than any other wild animal. We like to think that and call ourselves civilized but thats not the case. We became the dominant species on the planet because we are stronger than every other species. Nations become the dominant power because they are stronger than other nations. That will never change. (Strength doesn't only mean military might though.) Trying to change that is a noble endeavor but it will never happen. Your fantasy utopia where there are no weapons capable of killing millions in the blink of an eye, no wars and where everyone is treated equally and holds hands and sings songs will never come about. If you want to make that happen then kill every living thing on the planet except for yourself. That's the only way everyone on earth will get along and be treated fairly.

It would be great if we just sat here minding our own business but that still wouldn't change the attitude other nations have towards us. If we get involved in something then its "why do you have to stick yoyur knows in everyones business, you aren't the police fo the world". When we do nothing it's "why aren't you doing anything, you are the only super power you need to be policing the world". I know that sounds like the martyrs excuse but thats how things are.

For the record I've never heard of Ayn Rand until you mentioned his name and I haven't gone to look and find out who he is yet.

I'm hoping this doesn't jump all over the place. I kept going back and forth adding things to different parts and hope it makes atleast some sense and I didn't waste all that time. It's probally to long for many to read though. I know I probally wouldn't read a post this long.

[Pól Rua]

A friend of mine used to run motobike outback holiday groups for Japanese tourists.

Pretty much every trip they had someone suffer agoraphobia fro mthe shheer size of the place. A cople of times a year they had a case severe enough to be medivaced back home.

Invading northern Australia would be comparable to invading Russia.

Only with fewer decomissioned cold-war era robots and more cannibalistic mutant hillbillies.

[Iangould]

Only with fewer decomissioned cold-war era robots and more cannibalistic mutant hillbillies.

Don't forget the heavily-armed dope growers and a massive supply of mining explosives.

[TheTen-EyedMan]

They've gotta get through the crazy 'Hills Have Eyes' Bob Katter territory before they get to Beattie.
Frankly, I'm thinking any attempt to invade from the North's gonna end up looking like 'Wolf Creek' on a larger scale.

And this dude should be the leader of their army.


http://www.webwombat.com.au/entertainment/dvds/images/jarrat.jpg

Bad, bad puddy tat.

Wolf Creek was his biography.

[Iangould]

Nah, turn Les Harris loose on them.

Len's a rerally nice guy for a One Nation member but you wouldn;t want ot be on his bad side.

[Pól Rua]

I <3 Thread Drift. :)

[Iangould]

So do the peopelvwho think US military action is justified to destroy noth Korea's nuclear capacity think China woudld be justified in taking similar action against Japan or Taiwan if they developed nuclear weapons?

[Tages]

So do the peopelvwho think US military action is justified to destroy noth Korea's nuclear capacity think China woudld be justified in taking similar action against Japan or Taiwan if they developed nuclear weapons?
Oh, I can only imagine just how much more...interesting that region of the world would get if Taiwan announced they were developing the bomb.

[TheTen-EyedMan]

Nah, turn Les Harris loose on them.

Len's a rerally nice guy for a One Nation member but you wouldn't want ot be on his bad side.

So John Pasquerelli is a nonstarter then?

[Iangould]

So John Pasquerelli is a nonstarter then?

Pasquerelli is a just a skinhead poseur.

Len Harris, while I disagree with him about almost everything political, is a good bloke who believes every word he says and who's as tough as an old boot and extremely smart.

[TheTen-EyedMan]

Pasquerelli is a just a skinhead poseur.

Len Harris, while I disagree with him about almost everything political, is a good bloke who believes every word he says and who's as tough as an old boot and extremely smart.


Unlike Bob Katter. Liv says that he's just a rednecked farmer with a grudge.

[Iangould]

Unlike Bob Katter. Liv says that he's just a rednecked farmer with a grudge.

Katter's a self-appointed champion of the little guy who somehow forgets to mention his dad was a multi-millionaire and a self-proclaimed political outsider who's spent the last 32 years as an MP including six years a Minister.

[Kid Omega]

I <3 Thread Drift. :)

Isn't it great?

But mention X-Cresence in passing and get deleted immediately....

[Michael P]

Isn't it great?

But mention X-Cresence in passing and get deleted immediately....
We have always been at war with X-Cresence.

[Kid Omega]

We have always been at war with X-Cresence.

Are they responsible for the shortage of razor blades?

[Iangould]

Are they responsible for the shortage of razor blades?

There is no shortage of razor blades.

Why do you hate freedom?

[TheTen-EyedMan]

There is no shortage of razor blades.

Why do you hate freedom?

Imagine a lace bootie stamping on the face of freedom, forever. And we do mean forever.

[Arrjay]

Arrjay, in particular, lighten up with the defensive attitude - it goes a long way. When a thread is originally titled "The Freakin' United States," to act surprised that some negative reaction might come with the territory is a bit silly.

Fair enough.

Guilty as charged Captain.

How does the only nation on Earth to ever have nuked a civilian population - twice - pontificate to others?

I wonder what Iran would be like today, if we hadn't derailed democracy in order to empower the Shah? When you really look at our history, we have absolutely no moral authority on any subject, and any shred of the pretense is being rapidly undone by the Dubya Show.

Wow. I think I love this guy.

[Arrjay]

But mention X-Cresence in passing and get deleted immediately....

When has this happened?

For the record I've never heard of Ayn Rand until you mentioned his name and I haven't gone to look and find out who he is yet.

Well, reading is a good thing. Get into it.

Just remember that Ayn Rand is a woman.

[cactusmaac]

So do the peopelvwho think US military action is justified to destroy noth Korea's nuclear capacity think China woudld be justified in taking similar action against Japan or Taiwan if they developed nuclear weapons?

From a fairly narrow viewpoint of national security, I suppose it would. The situations aren't analagous though. Neither of those countries has a history of nuclear blackmail or are currently run by a nutjob totalitarian dictatorship.

[Winslow]

How does the only nation on Earth to ever have nuked a civilian population - twice - pontificate to others?

I wonder what Iran would be like today, if we hadn't derailed democracy in order to empower the Shah? When you really look at our history, we have absolutely no moral authority on any subject, and any shred of the pretense is being rapidly undone by the Dubya Show.

Isn't this kind of like saying, "because the police in my township comitted brutality crimes in the 70's, they have absolutely no moral right to protect me."

[cactusmaac]

How does the only nation on Earth to ever have nuked a civilian population - twice - pontificate to others?

.

Perhaps because it's the nation primarily responsible for the demise of Imperial Japan, Nazi Germany and Communist Russia, three of the most brutal regimes in human history?

[Ontir]

Japan attacked us, so we responded. The Nazis attacked England and France, and were allied with Japan, who attacked us, so we responded. The Soviet Union's greatest threat, was that socialism would prove viable, and topple TPTB in Western Europe and the United States. It was finance that brought us into conflict with the Soviet Union, not their human rights issues. The latter was merely a convenient club to swing and deflect attention from the real issue. The federal government of the United States has absolutely no history of undermining tyranny, unless it serves the interest of those in power. Ask Allende, and those who suffered under Pinochet, as the deposed President of Iran and the son of Ayatollah Komeni, and those who suffered under the Shah of Iran, Ask any of the number of puppets - including Castro - whom we propped up in Cuba. There's also the Philippines, and Iraq. We don't export the ideals of the Constitution, as should be our mandate, we repeatedly prop up dictators to do our short-term bidding, and then replace them when they become inconvenient.

[Winslow]

Japan attacked us, so we responded. The Nazis attacked England and France, and were allied with Japan, who attacked us, so we responded. The Soviet Union's greatest threat, was that socialism would prove viable, and topple TPTB in Western Europe and the United States. It was finance that brought us into conflict with the Soviet Union, not their human rights issues. The latter was merely a convenient club to swing and deflect attention from the real issue. The federal government of the United States has absolutely no history of undermining tyranny, unless it serves the interest of those in power. Ask Allende, and those who suffered under Pinochet, as the deposed President of Iran and the son of Ayatollah Komeni, and those who suffered under the Shah of Iran, Ask any of the number of puppets - including Castro - whom we propped up in Cuba. There's also the Philippines, and Iraq. We don't export the ideals of the Constitution, as should be our mandate, we repeatedly prop up dictators to do our short-term bidding, and then replace them when they become inconvenient.

What do you suggest the United States government do about North Korea?

[cactusmaac]

Japan attacked us, so we responded. The Nazis attacked England and France, and were allied with Japan, who attacked us, so we responded.

Whatever the motivation for going in, it doesn't change the US's credit in ending them.


The Soviet Union's greatest threat, was that socialism would prove viable, and topple TPTB in Western Europe and the United States. It was finance that brought us into conflict with the Soviet Union, not their human rights issues. The latter was merely a convenient club to swing and deflect attention from the real issue.

That shows profound historical ignorance. Entry into the Cold War started when Stalin installed his puppet government in Poland and shot anyone who might have opposed Soviet takeover. It was the same old imperialism masquerading as socialism. If socialism was the real threat, how come the US has maintained friendly relations with Sweden for decades?


The federal government of the United States has absolutely no history of undermining tyranny, unless it serves the interest of those in power. Ask Allende, and those who suffered under Pinochet, as the deposed President of Iran and the son of Ayatollah Komeni, and those who suffered under the Shah of Iran, Ask any of the number of puppets - including Castro - whom we propped up in Cuba. There's also the Philippines, and Iraq. We don't export the ideals of the Constitution, as should be our mandate, we repeatedly prop up dictators to do our short-term bidding, and then replace them when they become inconvenient.

Since when did the US prop up Castro? The government was incredibly lackadaisical in supporting Batista but Castro turned to the communists very early on.

edit -as for Allende, from bartl's post at Permanent Damage:

was very close to the situation in Chile during Allende's and Pinochet's administrations (about half my family lives in Chile, and we had regular reports. I also worked for a PR company in 1978, one of whose major clients was a consortium of Chilean businesses trying to distance themselves from Pinochet's government), and I can tell you that the coup would have come with or without Kissinger. The major aspect of Kissinger's involvement that can be proven was the economic hostility of the United States towards Allende's Chile, which was certainly no greater than the hostility towards Cuba.

[(A)//(E)]

let china have 'em. they're closer.

[TheTen-EyedMan]

Fair enough.

Guilty as charged Captain.



Wow. I think I love this guy.

http://blogs.mediavillage.com/bloom/archives/www/vhosts/blogs/htdocs/bloom/cassidy-david-photo-david-cassidy-6234947.jpg

Ba, ba, ba, ba.
Ba, ba, ba, ba, ba.
Ba, ba, ba, ba, ba.

I'm sleeping
And right in the middle of a good dream
Like all at once I wake up
From something that keeps knockin' at my brain.
Before I go insane
I hold my pillow to my head
And spring up in my bed
Screaming out the words I dread:
"I think I love you!"

This morning
I woke up with this feeling
I didn't know how to deal with
And so I just decided to myself
I'd hide it to myself and never talk about it
And didn't I go and shout it
When you walked into my room.
"I think I love you!"

I think I love you.
So what am I so afraid of?
I'm afraid that I'm not sure of
A love there is no cure for.

I think I love you.
Isn't that what life is made of?
Though it worries me to say
I've never felt this way.

I don't know what I'm up against.
I don't know what it's all about.
I got so much to think about.

Hey, I think I love you.
So what am I so afraid of?
I'm afraid that I'm not sure of
A love there is no cure for.

I think I love you.
Isn't that what life is made of?
Though it worries me to say
I've never felt this way.

Believe me,
You really don't have to worry.
I only want to make you happy
And if you say,
"Hey, go away," I will
But I think better still,
I'd better stay around and love you.
Do you think I have a case?
Let me ask you to your face:
Do you think you love me?

I think I love you.
Oh, I think I love you.
Oh, I think I love you.
Oh, I think I love you.
Oh, I think I love you.
Oh, I think I love you.
Oh, I think I love you.
Oh, I think I love you.
Oh, I think I love you.

[Motormouse]

Japan attacked us, so we responded. The Nazis attacked England and France.

Actually, Britain declared war on Germany after Germany invaded Poland, but i agree with most of what you're saying.

[Hoss]

I'll put this out there more for discussion and less because I have a strong feeling about it.

Should the US have left Korea and allowed the people to resolve the conflict? I point to a Vietnam, a somewhat similar situation. The US left Vietnam, a defintive conclusion was reached and now 3 decades later American GIs who fought in Vietnam vacation there and the country is not a threat to anyone.

On one hand, there is the issue of the Korean people and the cold war concern about communism spreading through out the region. On the other hand there is the argument that the Korean conflict did not involve American interest and that the American pressence in South Korea over the past half century has helped to radicalize the north.

Again, this isn't something I have strong feelings about. But it was a question that came up as I read this thread.

[cactusmaac]

I'll put this out there more for discussion and less because I have a strong feeling about it.

Should the US have left Korea and allowed the people to resolve the conflict? I point to a Vietnam, a somewhat similar situation. The US left Vietnam, a defintive conclusion was reached and now 3 decades later American GIs who fought in Vietnam vacation there and the country is not a threat to anyone.

On one hand, there is the issue of the Korean people and the cold war concern about communism spreading through out the region. On the other hand there is the argument that the Korean conflict did not involve American interest and that the American pressence in South Korea over the past half century has helped to radicalize the north.

Again, this isn't something I have strong feelings about. But it was a question that came up as I read this thread.

North Korea and South Korea at night.

http://www.rotten.com/library/history/countries/north-korea/north_korea_nighttime_shrunk.jpg

[Hoss]

North Korea and South Korea at night.

http://www.rotten.com/library/history/countries/north-korea/north_korea_nighttime_shrunk.jpg


I understand the current situation. That is why I made the Vietnam analogy. What would Vietnam look like now had the country been partitioned in 1973 and the US put 40-50,000 troops on the border? How stable would the relationship be? What kind of leadership would they have?

[Ontir]

Actually, Britain declared war on Germany after Germany invaded Poland, but i agree with most of what you're saying.

Granted, what I was going for, is the ties to England and France, as opposed to any of the other countries the Nazis had invaded first.

[cactusmaac]

I understand the current situation. That is why I made the Vietnam analogy. What would Vietnam look like now had the country been partitioned in 1973 and the US put 40-50,000 troops on the border? How stable would the relationship be? What kind of leadership would they have?

I thought you were asking what South Korea would be like if the US pulled out while the war was ongoing as it did in Vietnam.

[Hoss]

I thought you were asking what South Korea would be like if the US pulled out while the war was ongoing as it did in Vietnam.


Got you. The situation for South Korea would more than likely be worse - though that can't be completely assumed.

No, my concern is more from the level of US interest and current political dynamics.

[Pól Rua]

We have always been at war with X-Cresence.

Jesus.
There should be some sort of medal.
Seriously. That's gold.

[Pól Rua]

Isn't this kind of like saying, "because the police in my township comitted brutality crimes in the 70's, they have absolutely no moral right to protect me."

Ha.
*thinks about Richard Carlton for a bit*

[Ontir]

I thought you were asking what South Korea would be like if the US pulled out while the war was ongoing as it did in Vietnam.

Technically, the war in Korea IS on-going, as there's never been an armistice or peace-treaty, only a cease-fire, which is part of the problem. With nothing like that in place, and American Troops and the DMZ, North Korea has, and does consider themselves at war with the United States.

I remember seeing a man who had been advisor to several presidents (sadly his name escapes) being interviewed, IIRC, at the end of Reagan's 2nd term. He was saying that North Korea is the flash-point of the world, because all the world has a stake, and some sort of presence in the divided nation. All it takes, is one shot, and the world is at war. He strongly advised that the next president take an active stand on resolving this issue. None of them have, and here we are.

[Kevin Vetter]

Technically there was never a korean war. It was called a police action and not officially a real war like ww2 and all the others.

[curefreak]

this thread is like being in history class all over again.:(

[Jeff Brady]

How does the only nation on Earth to ever have nuked a civilian population - twice - pontificate to others?

Because it knows just what kind of atrocity it committed and doesn't want anyone else to deal with the guilt.

(Not a real answer, just an idea.)

[Ontir]

That's the first real answer I've heard. Thanks.

DK,

A "Police Action" is when Congress doesn't approve or prevent the extensive use of military power. It's semantics and nothing more; but for the sake of argument, the Police Action has been active since 1950, which is part of the reason for North Korea's open hostility to us. They consider us at war, right now, without stop, since that time.

Cure,

Why is history class a bad thing? It was the most fascinating class going!

[Kevin Vetter]

What I said is no different than what you said about the ceasefire. Captain Insane over in north korea considering us at war doesn't mean a whole lot when nothing has really happened. If you go over there and look at him funny he'll probally declare they are at war with you.

[TheTen-EyedMan]

Ha.
*thinks about Richard Carlton for a bit*

Mining the depths aren't Pol?

Sheer Heart Attack.

[Pól Rua]

Mining the depths aren't Pol?

Sheer Heart Attack.

Did you ever hear about his shenanigans after the Fitzgerald inquiry into Police Corruption in Queensland?
Basically, he cruised around with a film crew and when he got pulled over by the cops, basically yelled, "After the Fitzgerald Inquiry, you have no legitimate authority over me!"

Which was really the beginning of the end for him, because up until then, he'd been quite well-regarded as a journalist.

[TheTen-EyedMan]

Did you ever hear about his shenanigans after the Fitzgerald inquiry into Police Corruption in Queensland?
Basically, he cruised around with a film crew and when he got pulled over by the cops, basically yelled, "After the Fitzgerald Inquiry, you have no legitimate authority over me!"

Which was really the beginning of the end for him, because up until then, he'd been quite well-regarded as a journalist.

Then he went where all good journalistic careers go to die. Channel 9.

I noticed that Ellen Fanning (late of channel 2) has sold her soul to Eddie McGuire as of late.

So what's your take on the new media laws?

I had to read the Australian ABC news to get away from the new Whitey Ford.

[moebius]

I remember seeing a man who had been advisor to several presidents (sadly his name escapes) being interviewed, IIRC, at the end of Reagan's 2nd term. He was saying that North Korea is the flash-point of the world, because all the world has a stake, and some sort of presence in the divided nation. All it takes, is one shot, and the world is at war. He strongly advised that the next president take an active stand on resolving this issue. None of them have, and here we are.

Actually...capitalism has won out on here, to an extent. We no longer have to fear a world war over Korea, becaue China has become so economically invested in 1) the US and 2) the NK infrastructure that a war is no longer in China's best interest. To say nothing of Russia, which isn't even Communist. Basically, if NK started something the only question is: how many could they kill before they get their asses kicked from 4 directions (the US, SK and Japan, with a possible assist from China and Russia)?

In addition, the Chinese are very worried about the effects of several million Korean refugees going north.

IMO, Reunification is still a ways off, since none of the parties actually want it. But you never know what could happen if world events get in the way.

[FBHthelizardmage]

Let me just start by saying that I love the American people & I love the freedoms in the United States.

There's defintiely room to grow. Gay rights, environmental issues etc.

But the thing on my mind right now is this:

Where the hell does the U.S. get off telling other countries that they can't have nuclear weapons?

The U.S.A has the biggest stockpile of weapons of mass destruction. Very few other countries can compare to the military force of the United States.

That, combined with the use of quasi-international economic oppression, clearly shows the United States is basically an international dictatorship.

The U.S.A wants to rule the world.

If they can't do it economically they'll do it with military force.

That's totally not okay.

Thoughts?

It doesn't really.

I mean, you can talk about how the US is more responcible, or how the increasing number of powers with atomic weapons leads us one step closer to either everyone building them or someone setting one off.

But when it comes right down to it, the US knows that it's very unlikely a nation that HAS nukes will then get rid of them, and that nations with nukes become far more powerful. This is not in the US's intrests, at the same time, the nuclear weapons are so fantastically useful in war that the US will not get rid of them.

[Cephus]

If it's countries like North Korea, they got off from the fact that the country is a dictatorship run by a scary looney.

Um, take a look, we're a near-dictatorship run by a scary looney at the moment.

[SOGG]

Um, take a look, we're a near-dictatorship run by a scary looney at the moment.

But most of you are well-fed, content and entertained. Meaning, you've more to lose in a nuclear exchange and are therefore less likely to engage in one.

If my country had nukes, it'd be hard times.

[Cephus]

But most of you are well-fed, content and entertained. Meaning, you've more to lose in a nuclear exchange and are therefore less likely to engage in one.

Except the moron with his finger on the button thinks God is on his side and we can't lose. I have no doubt that if he had half a chance to launch nukes at the godless heathens, he'd do so in a heartbeat. After all, God told him to.

[oddieson]

Allright once you get to a certain point up the chain of command there is no fairness/justice. Like Clinton being impeached for Monica. If every nation had nukes, apocalytic war becomes inevitable. Just like no one takes nations into court and has them arrested. As far as the United States wanting to rule the world, in a sense this is true since the end of WW II the U.S Navy has functioned as a veto on intercontental warfare. nations can fight wars on a neighbors borders but the long history of intercountinental invasions not sanctioned or performed by us ended. In consequence of this fact the world has seen an explosive advancement of technology, living standards and human rights. An unfortunate side affect of us "ruling the world"

[J. Robb]

Putin: U.S. aggression fuels push for nuclear arms (http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/europe/02/10/putin.us.ap/index.html)

To which the rest of the world says, "Well, duh."

[Sean Walsh]

Putin: U.S. aggression fuels push for nuclear arms (http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/europe/02/10/putin.us.ap/index.html)

Putin: A guy who (APPARENTLY) killed a political enemy to death with radioactive poison.

This isn't exactly Jesus talking smack about Satan here...

[Grazzt]

Putin: A guy who (APPARENTLY) killed a political enemy to death with radioactive poison.

This isn't exactly Jesus talking smack about Satan here...

Was it your intent for us to click on the first line like morons? Because if it was, that was just mean.

[Iangould]

He killed him to death?

That's the worst kind.

But yeah, this is mostly projection of what Putin would do himself if he could.

[Phrozen]

Except the moron with his finger on the button