Originally posted by ivanhoeWell, seeing as Ahmadinejad is yet another provocative idiot in a
How do you think the US, the EU, Russia, China, India and the UN as a whole should handle the Iran situation ?
dangerously powerful position, I say take it gently. It's not like they're in
a immediate position to start manufacturing WMD's. All they've got so far
is the means to build Nuclear Power Plants. Believe it or not, but the step
from that to useful (?) bombs (not dirty bombs which can be made from
the waste by-products of a plant) is large.
Slowly convince the Iranian people that democracy must come from them.
And then, if they decide to try and overthrow their government, give them
the support and backup they need without asking for anything other than
that a democratic constitution be written and followed, if they succeed.
Then they can join the UN and we can all live happily ever after.
If I may be so unrealistic.
1 edit
Originally posted by torch71Ouch! Ouch! Ouch!
Or .... Maybe they don't want to have a conversation with a bunch of smug idiots that only point out flaws and never REALLY offer any constuctive criticism. These idiots never really post problems with thier own country, they prefer to just point fingers and never offer any kind of solution.
And it is really bad when they have a fixation on a drugged out has been pop star thats drunk all the time, and try to liken her to ALL Americans.
Problem is plenty of what I say and believe should be done has already been openly debated and put on the agenda by many proud Americans but in an era where having a liberal viewpoint almost gets you shot or seems to carry with it a stigma of being out of touch or irrelevant ( or is it just on this forum) that there hardly seems any point sometimes.
As to my comment on recycled rehab celebrity, don't let my earlier thread on a certain pop prncess take all the credit. There is a constant parade that assaults the eye in the form of gossip mags at the checkout of grocery and convenience stores that present a tableaux of a lot more than just one particular pop princess. BTW.
Edit: And I live in Australia. I can't begin to imagine how much more of it I would be inundated with should I be living state side.
Originally posted by stockenYou speak out of both sides of your mouth, Stocky.
Well, seeing as Ahmadinejad is yet another provocative idiot in a
dangerously powerful position, I say take it gently. It's not like they're in
a immediate position to start manufacturing WMD's. All they've got so far
is the means to build Nuclear Power Plants. Believe it or not, but the step
from that to useful (?) bombs (not dirty bombs which can b ...[text shortened]... they can join the UN and we can all live happily ever after.
If I may be so unrealistic.
G.
1 edit
Originally posted by ivanhoeIt's already been dealt with. Russia announced a few days ago that they will defend Iran if the US tries anything. Russia obviously made a economic deal with Iran.
How do you think the US, the EU, Russia, China, India and the UN as a whole should handle the Iran situation ?
This speaks directly to the point of the article, which not many in this thread have even read more than 2 paragraphs, that this is just another sign of the loss of influence the US can exert on the world.
I, personally, do not think this a good thing on the whole. While US foreign policy is a joke, it has an excellent side benefit in that a degree of world peace is kept in check. One may argue a more consistent US foreign policy would keep it in check even more, but partially in check is better than not in check at all.
If the US does lose control then the world is a much more dangerous place than it is today.
THAT is the point of the article.
Originally posted by kmax87Tableaux? Why, i think i'm getting the vapors with such naughty language. Please continue!
Ouch! Ouch! Ouch!
Problem is plenty of what I say and believe should be done has already been openly debated and put on the agenda by many proud Americans but in an era where having a liberal viewpoint almost gets you shot or seems to carry with it a stigma of being out of touch or irrelevant ( or is it just on this forum) that there hardly seems any point ...[text shortened]... begin to imagine how much more of it I would be inundated with should I be living state side.
G.
Originally posted by uzlessOr, like always, they don't want the US that close to their own territory in
It's already been dealt with. Russia announced a few days ago that they will defend Iran if the US tries anything. Russia obviously made a economic deal with Iran.
charge of all that black gold. It's all about power. Can't escape that fact.
Originally posted by stockenI agree with you about the UN. Press for elected representatives, no veto power, and a Constitution and Bill of Rights. A World Court that moves slightly faster than molasses in Murmansk in mid-winter wouldn't hurt, either.
Who says I'm not doing anything? Besides giving economical support to
various help organisations I believe in, I also speak highly in favour of a
strong UN (the way it's intended to be - where no country has "more" to say
on a matter than any other). I believe that's the only way to create a
peaceful world, based on actual justice. That's what ...[text shortened]... n't because it wouldn't suit their greed very well. Not just the US gov.,
mind you.
Greed is not stopping the vision from happening. Such a Union has to be formed of peer nations, with similar ideals. Letting North Korea and Zimbabwe in, in their present barbarous states, would NOT work.
But donating does not let you off the hook. Many people feel that getting rid of a few shekels they can well afford "buys" their way out of their moral responsibility. In other words, pay someone else do the dirty work -- and then criticize the way they do it!
Take action (your country; not you personally), and risk something other than the loose change in your pocket.
Originally posted by stockenSo it's ok to go into Iran to help Them form a democracy? Who cares if they want a democracy? Why should we intervene? Are you going to foot the bill? There's oil there also. Could they at least pay us for some of the expense with revenues from their oil sales? Is that asking too much? Oh thank you, for giving the US approval on this scheme. And when the Russians join in against us? Saddle up... don't forget your skirt. Democracy? You know all we want is the OIL.
Well, seeing as Ahmadinejad is yet another provocative idiot in a
dangerously powerful position, I say take it gently. It's not like they're in
a immediate position to start manufacturing WMD's. All they've got so far
is the means to build Nuclear Power Plants. Believe it or not, but the step
from that to useful (?) bombs (not dirty bombs which can b ...[text shortened]... they can join the UN and we can all live happily ever after.
If I may be so unrealistic.
Granny.
Originally posted by kmax87Yes and the tabloids will continue as long as idiots keep reading them. It all seems a little absurd to me, but don't let me stop you, continue following your new American idol.
Ouch! Ouch! Ouch!
Problem is plenty of what I say and believe should be done has already been openly debated and put on the agenda by many proud Americans but in an era where having a liberal viewpoint almost gets you shot or seems to carry with it a stigma of being out of touch or irrelevant ( or is it just on this forum) that there hardly seems any point ...[text shortened]... begin to imagine how much more of it I would be inundated with should I be living state side.
Originally posted by stockenBravo. Really -- this is a very nice post.
[b]Panama - or operation Just Cause as they so americanly* called it,
was more an attempt at stopping illegal drug trafficking and money
laundering. Also the Bush at the time felt that neutrality of the treaties
concerning the panama canal was being threatened as a result of
Noriega's decision to skip elections. This may have been a "just cause", ...[text shortened]... www.archives.gov/education/lessons/korean-conflict/[/b]
One or two points, if I may.
1) You seem to agree that a lot of the causes the US pursues are just, but object that America/Americans should get anything out of it. I never said we were saints. If I have two Just Causes I could pursue, I'll go for the one that benefits me on the side -- sure. Human nature.
2) Socialism is a nice second best for people who care more about not losing than winning. Especially appeals to people over 70.
3) Iraq is a boar's nest of hatred. At least they are now free to kill each other as they have been itching to do for decades.
4) Vietnam could have been like South Korea, only they were too stubborn. Great move, guys.
5) You didn't hear that the US won WWII alone from ME! We played our part, but it was a great joint effort. The minor countries were just liberated (in part) by American troops, is all. That should count for something.
Otherwise, I think you heard more than I actually said. The UN needs to take itself seriously and reform into a democratic organization. When they do, the US can take them more seriously.
I didn't ask you to kiss my feet. I asked to to STEP UP. Do something that makes someone want to kiss YOUR feet. Don't apply the knee-jerk European 'not my problem, mate' to EVERY situation.