When Bush hatred makes you a moron...

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Oerdin


And do you think the US giving up it's nuke would encourage North Korea to give up theirs or do you think they would take advantage to once again invade the South knowing they could use the threat of their nukes to prevent US intervention. What do you think South Korea, Japan, and half a dozen other countries will do once the US no longer can shield them. Do you think they will feel more or less safe and do you believe they will feel the need to arm themselves?

Remember you've said the US should unilaterally disarm while China, Russia, North Korea, and every other potential thug and expansionist keeps theirs. Do you realy think this will make the world a safer place?

No. I don't think the US should just destroy it's nukes, but it's hard to believe that they want to. This is because of the bully role that they US plays in the world. It's obvious that nukes are an important weapon for the US to continue this role. First, the US needs to change it's role in the world. That would help create a more peacefull world. And then it might be possible to destroy nukes.

[Mrs. Tuberski]

I didnt take it personal I value your opinion really i do. I was simply stating that the U.S has done alot for other nations and i love the country i live in.

[General Ludd]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker


We don't care about laws. We just don't want them to do it.

There's no hypocrisy. We don't think of them as bad people for wanting to get nukes (ignoring the argument that they'll be more irresponsible than we will, at least from our POV). We just don't want them to get nukes, so we'll do what we can to prevent it.

Exactly, rightwingers like to structure laws and dictate the behaviour of everyone else soley for their own self-centered desires. (Rather than structuring just laws and living by them as you would expect others to - ie, not being a hypocrite.)

[Kidlicious]

It has done good things. The overall vision of the US leaves something to be desired though, that's what scares people. The US, at times, seems to want to impose what it considers good, and obviously for it's own benefit. Then you have people like Sprayber, who just don't care about anything but power and money.

[General Ludd]

Originally posted by Oerdin
China, North Korea, Israel, India, and Pakistan won't get rid of theirs so what good does it do the west & Russia to get rid of theirs? We'd only weaken our position.

That wouldn't weaken your position. You having nukes doesn't make you less succeptable to being nuked, it just means you can nuke someone else. In that sense, geting rid of the capability to nuek another country doesn't weaken you (unless you do intend to nuke somoene else) and can actually strengthen your position because you are saying that you don't intend to use nuclear weapons, and in the eyes of the world you now gain a sort of moral high groundand by extension a basic immunity to nuclear strikes anyways - how would the world react to a country nuking another after agreeing to disarm their nuclear weapons? That would be more MAD than any interaction between two nuclear powers could ever be.

And remember, you can dstroy nuclear weapons but you can never destroy the potential to build more of them...

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by General Ludd
Do you seriously think that any modern country couldn't, if they wanted to, quickly (re)build nuclear weapons in a matter of weeks in response to someone breaking such a treaty?

What about Canada?

Seriously, most likely no. It takes time to build the basic facilities before you can proceed.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Then you have people like Sprayber, who just don't care about anything but power and money.

Like most countries in the world. Though Spray actually admits it.

[Mrs. Tuberski]

I dont have money nor do i have power but i will go were work takes me. If its in a leper colony so be it im a nurse and i will always give what i can. The country I live in has lots of [people jus t as me but i see your point. There are those that dont feel this way

[RGBVideo]

Oerdin: I believe the correct term is "realpolitik" without c, regardless of the language used.

You have to carrot and stick them into realizing we'll moderate if they moderate but if they insist then there will be confrontation. First economic then military.

But if they agree to be good boys and give up the nukes we'll give you X,Y, and Z.

This would be a good method.
However, do you remember how you attacked Iraq after Hussein disarmed? He even agreed to destroy many of his conventional weapons. Your reward?

Look at this situation from Iran's viewpoint. There's no way in hell how disarming would be rational after what happened to two of their neighbours. That's why I'm excepting EU authorities (moran southerners, they're hurting all of our reputations without realising it) who are seeking a peaceful way to get PWNED by Iran.

Iran would be no more dangerous with nukes than Pakistan would be.

Pakistan and Iran might both have Islam as their main religion, but what does that prove? Pakistan is led by a secularist US puppet, Iran by insane group of fundie clerics who regard US as the Great Satan. Yeah, "no more dangerous". Whatever.

[General Ludd]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger


What about Canada?

Seriously, most likely no. It takes time to build the basic facilities before you can proceed.

Canada and 43 other countries in the world have the capability of building nuclear weapons.

Weeks might be an exageration... I don't really know how long it would take. But it probably wouldn't take long, especially if nuclear tensions errupted.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

Then you have people like Sprayber, who just don't care about anything but power and money.

Like most countries in the world. Though Spray actually admits it.

Most countries don't only care about money and power. I wouldn't even put that on the US. Sprayber, however, admits to not giving a damn about morality.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Mrs. Tuberski
I dont have money nor do i have power but i will go were work takes me. If its in a leper colony so be it im a nurse and i will always give what i can. The country I live in has lots of [people jus t as me but i see your point. There are those that dont feel this way

Nurses

[Imran Siddiqui]

Most countries don't only care about money and power.

What world do you live in? Of course they do. They just won't come out and say it. Machiavelli's "The Prince" shouldn't have been so shocking. It was just describing the way things were (that's why it's been called more of a manual than anything else).

Sprayber, however, admits to not giving a damn about morality.

So?

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

Most countries don't only care about money and power.

What world do you live in? Of course they do. They just won't come out and say it. Machiavelli's "The Prince" shouldn't have been so shocking. It was just describing the way things were (that's why it's been called more of a manual than anything else).

It's a manual for rulers to maintian their rule. It has nothing to do with world peace. Therefore, it is of no interest to anyone who cares about other things besides power.

[Imran Siddiqui]

It's a manual for rulers to maintian their rule. It has nothing to do with world peace. Therefore, it is of no interest to anyone who cares about other things besides power.

You mean... like everyone country in the world.

World Peace . Yeah, because countries really would promote that if it went against their interests, right?