Looks like Saddam is worried

[orange]

Originally posted by David Floyd
It's the impression I got from reading what you said.

Since when is the United Nations a direct democracy?

You have legal recourse to change the government, such as voting or leaving. Conversely, if the government is actually infringing on your rights, and legal recourse fails, you have the right to use force.

And who decides what your rights are? Where do you draw the line DF??

[orange]

Originally posted by David Floyd
Sorry, I disagree

Oh c'mon DF, if you see a 16 year old guy beating up a 7 year old neighbor of yours, do you say to yourself "none of my business" or do you run over and help, regardless of motive.

[Ramo]

Ah, but the argument is not over the morality of murder, it's over the morality of sovereign nations interfering with one another.

What's the distinction between people who call themselves a government punishing people who don't call themselves a government for murder and slavery and punishing those who do call themselves a government for the same crimes?

[David Floyd]

orange,

Where exactly did you pull that factoid from?

Common knowledge. Ask around

If the US wants to conquer Central America, we could do it easily. If 15 other, larger countries with strong diplomatic and economic ties to those Central American nations want to protect them, why are you against that? They are not being morally wrong by protecting their allies.

I'm against it because it's none of their business.

I really think your figures are way off.

You "really" think so do you?

The US as it is right now would not, but the US under a dictator or some other country with a dictator and nuclear weapons COULD. Don't you see? This isn't about how the world is, this is about how the world would be if everyone simply minded their own business and let dictators and madmen do what they wanted.

A true dictator in the US is not likely, simply for the basic fact that the American people and military wouldn't allow it, in any hypothetical world

I do know this, which is why I never said that Germany could invade and hold Russia You keep putting words in my mouth.

You certainly did say that when you said that the Axis could have taken the world if we minded our own business.

You say this after you get done saying that the US doesn't have the power to fight New Zealand?

Two different situations. I *really* hope you see that.

I don't see why not, it's none of the husband's business, unless of course you believe that his wife is his property

I hope you understand that US law is different from international relations.

Since when is the United Nations a direct democracy?

Fine. A bloc of African nations, in your apparent argument, could overturn the wishes of the US, or whomever, as they relate to domestic policy. That is wrong.

And who decides what your rights are? Where do you draw the line DF??

THe US Constitution, based upon natural rights, which, generally defined, are life, liberty and property.

Ramo,

What's the distinction between people who call themselves a government punishing people who don't call themselves a government for murder and slavery and punishing those who do call themselves a government for the same crimes?

Simple. One is a nation and the other isn't. But we aren't gonna be able to argue this because you are an anarchist and we have different beliefs on nations and national sovereignty.

[Ramo]

But what makes an organization a state? Is it name only? Should the Mafia start calling itself a Republic?

[orange]

Originally posted by David Floyd
orange,

Common knowledge. Ask around

2+2=4 The capital of France is Paris Helium is less dense than air.

That's common knowledge...I'm not going to simply believe what you said becuase you said it. What proof do you have?

I'm against it because it's none of their business.

It is if they trade with those nations or have cultural and diplomatic ties to them.

You "really" think so do you?

What, now you're going to make fun of the way I write??

I really (yes, really) don't understand you.

A true dictator in the US is not likely, simply for the basic fact that the American people and military wouldn't allow it, in any hypothetical world

Humour aside, my hypothetical scenario was made to show the shortcomings of your hypothetical isolationist foreign policy.

You certainly did say that when you said that the Axis could have taken the world if we minded our own business.

Nevermind if they could take over the world, they'd still be able to take over much of it as long as all nations minded their own business, and, at very least, hold them ransom through threat of war slavery.

Two different situations. I *really* hope you see that.

No, I *really* don't.

I hope you understand that US law is different from international relations.

and immediately following, you have this to say...

THe US Constitution, based upon natural rights, which, generally defined, are life, liberty and property.

So the US Constitution should be a measure for all people's rights, but not for international relations...

Fine. A bloc of African nations, in your apparent argument, could overturn the wishes of the US, or whomever, as they relate to domestic policy. That is wrong.

No, the United Nations does not exist for such a purpose and I'm damn sure you know it. The only 'domestic' thing the UN would act against would be something like legalized slavery or genocide, which it SHOULD aim to prevent.

Simple. One is a nation and the other isn't. But we aren't gonna be able to argue this because you are an anarchist and we have different beliefs on nations and national sovereignty.

Define "nation"! What if I declare myself a nation! Who decides where soveirgnty begins and ends???

[faded glory]

Bah!? Me.....worried?



You bring your interceptors, Heavy Bombers and Space Planes loaded with war walkers.

The Peoples army, while lacking in firepower, more than make up for in determination


I will not yield, Fascist aggressors bent on mindless genocide against the proleteriat, they will dismally fail! As our comrades Unite and fight with whatever means until Fascist aggression has been blunted, and the madmenare sent packing!


Death to the Capitalist Money-Lovers and Fascist Pig-Dogs!






Of course Im just joking

(*cough* PBEM *cough*)

[David Floyd]

Sorry about the lack of response guys...I'll get that done ASAP...for some reason I'm just not able to think right now, process coherent thought....almost like I'm drunk but I'm not. Feels sorta like this

[orange]

Originally posted by David Floyd
Sorry about the lack of response guys...I'll get that done ASAP...for some reason I'm just not able to think right now, process coherent thought....almost like I'm drunk but I'm not. Feels sorta like this

no worries, I wouldn't have been able to stay up all night debating you, either...first class tomorrow at 8

I feel like too

[mactbone]

I hink DF is having problems seeing these situations as happening with the US, so let's change te agressor to China.

Let's say, China decides to attack, and conquer all of Asia, excluding Russia, one by one. Let's say, 3 years in between conquests. Now, at the end of the line, they decide, they want more, and they take all of Oceania. Now remember, they've been fighting nations one-on-one all through this, and it's been quite awhile since the first conquest, and the people living in the Province of Mongolia are really becoming good Chinese citizens. So, they're able to loosen restrictions in the Province of Mongolia, and use those people to help the war. Now, they've taken Oceania, and, well, they want more. So, they head up into Russia, this time with a huge advantage because the Provinces of Pakistan and India are very Chinese. So, they take Russia, and the process repeats ad nauseum, because every nation only fights for itself.

Oh, and just controlling all the oil in the mid-east would be as close to a monopoply on oil as possible. With that control a nation/person could effectlively control large parts of most modern economies. Oil price goes up, all other prices go up eventually, oil stops being shipped, you got a big mess.

[orange]

Popping in for the last time tonight...

Originally posted by MacTBone
I hink DF is having problems seeing these situations as happening with the US, so let's change te agressor to China.

Let's say, China decides to attack, and conquer all of Asia, excluding Russia, one by one. Let's say, 3 years in between conquests. Now, at the end of the line, they decide, they want more, and they take all of Oceania. Now remember, they've been fighting nations one-on-one all through this, and it's been quite awhile since the first conquest, and the people living in the Province of Mongolia are really becoming good Chinese citizens. So, they're able to loosen restrictions in the Province of Mongolia, and use those people to help the war. Now, they've taken Oceania, and, well, they want more. So, they head up into Russia, this time with a huge advantage because the Provinces of Pakistan and India are very Chinese. So, they take Russia, and the process repeats ad nauseum, because every nation only fights for itself.

Thanks Mac, that was a great example, especially considering how easy it would be for China to conquer many smaller asian countries like Vietnam Laos Cambodia Bhutan Mongolia and North Korea. Especially one by one, and especially with some time in between. Without coallitions, powerful China can't be easily stopped and their access to resources grows exponentially!

[ravagon]

Much as I hate to be another to jump on DF's case (Sorry DF ), a major part of that arguement hasn't really been valid pretty much since about the time of the industrial revolution.
The mindset of a nation in wartime changes - Even more so in the 20th century with the art of war becoming ever more complex and dependent upon logistics moreso than tactics. Economies need time to gear up for rearming. Research/Development is required to counter an opponent at a level and to an extent not possible while not in a state of war - particularly when a nation has the "burden" of a democratic govt and cannot have such decisions based on a single executive.
Nuclear weapons have been mentioned several times.
The US would/could have never developed nuclear devices before Germany if they hadn't entered into a state of war. They wouldn't have needed to beforehand and it would've been too late after the fact.
Without a two-way information exchange with the UK (ie: as nations with a common adversary) radar/sonar wouldn't have come to fruition in time to do the US any good - no radio d/f, navigation, guidance,... the list goes on.
Without the capture of German rocket scientists in the closing phases of the war the US space program could have never kept up with the USSR during the cold war, leaving the US without strategic missile systems to counter the other.
These and a myriad of other, many minor and seemingly inconsequential, benefits that came directly from the US involvement would not have been - any/all of which could have left the US in a compromised position in a wartime situation.

Basically it boils down to just a case of necessity being the mother of invention.
Without US involvement, she wouldn't have "needed", hence wouldn't have "invented", hence wouldn't "have".
The pace of modern warfare has just become too rapid to rely on a call to arms after war has begun.

[Velociryx]

The funny thing about the article tho, is Annan's response to Saddam's sudden change of heart.

"...I'll check my calendar."

I love that guy! The clock's ticking and Saddam knows it, Annan's playing it beautifully, too! Holding out the possibility to Saddam of making the meeting work, while not attacking the US position on the matter.

He's golden.

-=Vel=-

[Jon Miller]

um, David Floyd but America has been close to dictatorshpi before

deffinitely from Long and if we come to such times again we will be ripe again

there is not something special in the US which keeps us away from the problems of democracy

Jon Miller

[Velociryx]

Jon....you're absolutely right. Something none of us should ever forget.

One thing tho....a dictator would have one HELLUVA time rooting all the good ol' boys outta the swampland of the deep south, the Rockies, and the Smokies.

I hope the day never comes all the same ::shiver::

-=Vel=-