Re-Shaping the landscape in the wake of the Cold War

[Ned]

I say we reform the UN first. If the UN puts countries like Libya in charge of Human Rights and Iraq in charge of Disarmament, then we should suspend all payments and support.

I agree we should lead the UN much the way Bush has been leading the UN on Iraq. I have been highly critical of the UN my entire life. But finally with the vote in November I see that the UN can do some good. But, it never would have done so without Bush virtually holding a gun to its head.

[Velociryx]

I don't think we'll be able to do that though, much as I'd like to agree.

In this case, I think we must first demonstrate a willingness to play by the established rules before anyone will take us seriously with regards to changing them.

So, if we first do what we're "supposed to do" as far as current UN rules go, and show we're willing to play the game, I think that, coupled with our economic and diplomatic clout, can net us some real, tangible gains as far as strengthening the UN towards its eventual new mission.

-=Vel=-

[Capt Dizle]

Oh my God.

[Velociryx]

And just for JT, we'll officially change the name to the Confederate Nations of the World....

-=Vel=-

[Capt Dizle]

I skimmed the entire thread and I am agast. This is the single most out of touch thread I have ever read on Poly, and that is saying something. Please tell me that this is a satire contest. Please.

[Velociryx]

Not a satire contest, and not designed to be meshed with the current state of affairs....just an excercise in alternate possibilities.



-=Vel=-

[Capt Dizle]

Possible what? Look, let me state some facts to get you all back on track. America is a capitalist democracy and it is not going to become communist, anarchist, socialist, libitarian, green or any of this other far out wacko stuff. Ever, short of the destruction of conquest of the country.

There is never going to be a one world government short of military conquest and then there will never be total control.

The UN as a concept related to world security was is valid under only one scenario, the existance of two oposing superpowers giving the UN a role of mediation. With the implosion of the Soviet Union the UN ceased to matter.

NATO also died with the Soviet Union as we are seeing now that the Germans and French are welching on their responsibilitites now.

And the EU, not specifically mentioned above but lurking in the background is going to crumble like a cookie at the first hint of danger.

Now, given those parameters which is REALITY why don't you folks discuss some alternatives that might come to pass in this plane of existence.

[Capt Dizle]

cut dp

[Velociryx]

Awwww, c'mon JT....never say never....every good Southerner knows that!

While it is true that, given the current geopolitical climate, the stuff we're talking about here won't happen, that's not the point of the exercise. This is rather akin to those "Moderated Scenarios" only without the moderator, and with no specific scenario in mind.

It's simply thinking about possibilities that extend outside the neat (well, not so neat, in the case of our planet Earth) box.

Does it matter that many (and perhaps most) of the ideas presented here are unlikely to occur? None of us talking about it hold positions of power to press these ideas through anyway. And if we're going to speculate, why speculate inside the lines? Much more adventuresome to just go where the Muse takes you....

-=Vel=-

[Capt Dizle]

Okay, in that case I want to promote dental assistants as world leaders. I love to have my teeth cleaned cause they all have big breasts, sweet breath, white teeth and, in the south, wonderful accents.

[Capt Dizle]

My dentist has limited my teeth cleaning sessions so I am getting another dentist.

[Velociryx]

JT, you rock!



-=Vel=-
PS: and I'm gonna start using YOUR dentist!

[Arrian]

Originally posted by DuncanK
btw, your only verifiable example was Bill Gates, and I blew that one out of the water

Wow, you really are obstinate, aren't you?

Vel and I each provided examples from our own experience, and you respond by assuming we're LYING? What's the point of debating something if you're gonna lie? Frankly, I'm insulted (hence my dredging up a threadjack).

I could do some research and give you "verifiable" examples of social mobility but I'm not going to waste my time on something that 1) is readily apparent in everyday life and 2) will not convince you you're wrong anyway. You are wedded to your ideology and that's that.

But you're in for a lifetime of dissappointment if you think the revolution is coming, comrade...

"...but if you go carryin' pictures of Chairman Mao, you ain't gonna make it with anyone anyhow! You know it's gonna be, alright. Alright..."

-Arrian

[DuncanK]

A) I don't carry pictures of mao.

B) I could give you 100 examples where there is either little or no social mobility for each example that you could give me where there is.

I'm not talking about people increasing their income as they get older. That's a common known fact. I'm talking about very significant gains in income. The kind that allows you to live significantly better than your parents did.

[DinoDoc]

Why are you supporting the exploitation of the workers by indulging in the crass consumerism of both buying an internet connection and a computer, DuncanK?