iSideWith

[GhostWriter16]

Do you know what rhetoric is?

And which Kim do you refer to? The current one has made very few public statements, and none of them have threatened the use of nuclear weapons. For that matter, neither have Ahmedinijad's.

Do you honestly think that the DPRK would use nuclear weapons if 'they were the only ones'? What does that even mean?

If their goal is reunification, then why on earth would they spoil their own future territory by using nukes?

It seems to me you haven't given much thought at all to nuclear policy.

I suggest you spend a few months reading the archives of ArmsControlWonk. You'll learn a [mega]ton.

Kim Jong IL has, IIRC. I need to look them up. And honestly, the leaders of NK have demonstrated nothing short of insanity to me. Honestly, between the percentage of their population they've killed, and their pure stupidity in global politics, Kim Jong IL has reminded me much of Adolf Hitler.

 

[peter grimes]

You don't give either Kim nearly enough credit, then. Hitler was a flash in the pan. The Kim dynasty is the longest surviving communist cult-of-personality the world has ever seen. They are not insane at all - they are shrewd, wise, pragmatic, and - above all else - interested primarily in self-preservation. When you look at their actions both domestically and internationally in this light, you will see that they are rational and predictable.

Your failure to understand this does not imply that they are irrational. It only speaks to your limits, not theirs.

And exactly how are they stupid in global politics? Please explain. Because from my point of view, they have masterfully driven wedges into every coalition that's been raised against them. They have succeeded in keeping their most important allies' interests aligned with their own, while preventing their adversaries from diminishing thier power. If this is your definition of stupidity, then I'm very curious to hear what you'd think success looks like...

 

[GhostWriter16]

You don't give either Kim nearly enough credit, then. Hitler was a flash in the pan. The Kim dynasty is the longest surviving communist cult-of-personality the world has ever seen. They are not insane at all - they are shrewd, wise, pragmatic, and - above all else - interested primarily in self-preservation. When you look at their actions both domestically and internationally in this light, you will see that they are rational and predictable.

Why should I care about these things? Are you saying that's a good thing?

Your failure to understand this does not imply that they are irrational. It only speaks to your limits, not theirs.

I am fairly intellectually capable. Young, but plenty capable.

And exactly how are they stupid in global politics? Please explain. Because from my point of view, they have masterfully driven wedges into every coalition that's been raised against them. They have succeeded in keeping their most important allies' interests aligned with their own, while preventing their adversaries from diminishing thier power. If this is your definition of stupidity, then I'm very curious to hear what you'd think success looks like...

http://www.usnews.com/news/world/ar...nuclear-fire-shower-against-the-united-states

That's the kind of stuff I'm saying. That and their threats towards the South.

The problem is, we aren't willing to totally cut them off of aid. China doesn't even like them, they just don't want a western-style democracy on their border. If we were to make a deal with China to help us prevent any supplies from going in or out, eventually they would have no choice but to surrender. Instead, we give them foreign aid, which the "Dear Leaders" use for themselves and give no help to its starving people.

 

[Joecoolyo]

I mean the US is the only country that has ever used one.

Blech, that's a bad argument. That's like saying we shouldn't trust Germany with guns because the last time they used guns, they took over half of Europe, even though a majority of the people alive at that time and who helped perpetrate that are no longer alive.

 

[gangleri2001]

 

[Leoreth]

Why should I care about these things? Are you saying that's a good thing?

You said they were insane, which they are not. And again, to describe the global politics as failed is ridiculous. Global politics is the only area where North Korea is actually successful, as opposed to domestic. Didn't you notice that every time they need more money they just have to test another nuclear weapon and everyone agrees to give them aid just because it wouldn't be worth it to go down the other route?

On a side note, I think this "foreign leadership X is totally insane and could do anything" you have going on in a typical right-wing hawk fashion is really dangerous, because it shows you are incapable of seeing the rational reasons and benefits "rogue" states get from acting apparently irrationally or erratically. If you really think North Korea is ever going to use its nukes other than in a desperate situation, you don't understand foreign politics. It would be throwing the only good hand they will ever be dealt for no benefit.

And one more thing. It's very dangerous to imply that Hitler was insane as in incapable of making rational judgments. His goals were obviously horrible enough to be described as "insane", but he wouldn't have gotten that far with them if he was just a raving madman.

I am fairly intellectually capable. Young, but plenty capable.

Show, don't tell, as they say in creative writing.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

I am fairly intellectually capable. Young, but plenty capable.

Just think, beyond the general perception from what you gleamed on the news and internet articles, how much do you know about NK? How much time have you invested into active researching?

I'm asking since I don't consider myself to be intellectually capable to comment on NK, and I suspect you've done as much research as I have .... which is very little. So I think our definitions of intellectually capable might differ.

Added to that, Peter pointed out why he thought your judgement of insanity was missing the mark, and explained why. Your reply to his explanation was rather odd. "Why should I care about these things?". Because it was a direct rebuttal of your claim of insanity. And "Are you saying that's a good thing?". I reread Peter's post and nowhere do I see an ethical judgement in there, so I can answer that one for him, "No, he never even came close".

The problem is, we aren't willing to totally cut them off of aid. China doesn't even like them, they just don't want a western-style democracy on their border. If we were to make a deal with China to help us prevent any supplies from going in or out, eventually they would have no choice but to surrender. Instead, we give them foreign aid, which the "Dear Leaders" use for themselves and give no help to its starving people.

This reaffirms Peter's post.

 

[GhostWriter16]

You said they were insane, which they are not. And again, to describe the global politics as failed is ridiculous. Global politics is the only area where North Korea is actually successful, as opposed to domestic. Didn't you notice that every time they need more money they just have to test another nuclear weapon and everyone agrees to give them aid just because it wouldn't be worth it to go down the other route?

Maybe we're the stupid ones then

On a side note, I think this "foreign leadership X is totally insane and could do anything" you have going on in a typical right-wing hawk fashion is really dangerous, because it shows you are incapable of seeing the rational reasons and benefits "rogue" states get from acting apparently irrationally or erratically. If you really think North Korea is ever going to use its nukes other than in a desperate situation, you don't understand foreign politics. It would be throwing the only good hand they will ever be dealt for no benefit.

I think that's a fair explanation and I stand corrected.

And one more thing. It's very dangerous to imply that Hitler was insane as in incapable of making rational judgments. His goals were obviously horrible enough to be described as "insane", but he wouldn't have gotten that far with them if he was just a raving madman.

Hitler attacked Russia for literally no reason, and declared war on the USA when he easily could have not done so. Had he done neither of those things, all of Europe would be German today.

THAT is what I was addressing. The DOWs on Russia and the USA, although mostly the one in Russia. Not the Holocaust, which was more just plain EVIL than it was "Insane" though I suppose the latter descriptor would be accurate in a different context.

 

[CELTICEMPIRE]

Hitler attacked Russia for literally no reason, and declared war on the USA when he easily could have not done so. Had he done neither of those things, all of Europe would be German today.

Hitler actually thought that he could defeat the USSR. The Russians weren't really looking to strong in 1940. The reason the invasion failed was because the Germans were not equipped to fight in the cold Russian winter. Plus, the only other thing standing in his way at the time was Britain (being bombed constantly) and her colonies in Africa.

The declaration of war on the United States wasn't really insane because Hitler believed (with good reason), that the Japanese would hold down the Americans.

 

[W|M]

Hitler also was able to secure power in 1933 with a 40% share of the vote (with his popularity quickly falling by the time he rose to power) and quickly (and unexpectedly) destroy all opposition to his régime.

 

[Oruc]

Nope!

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

Hitler attacked Russia for literally no reason

Conquering Communist, Slavic Russia was central to Hitler's plan and his rhetoric. A failure to deliver on either of those would put his hold on power at serious risk.

 

[Catharsis]

I'm no good at tests like these, my answers are always all over the place.

 

[JohnRM]

 

[~Corsair#01~]

Got an 86% for Jill Stein. It seems like the US Greens are quite similar to Greens elsewhere on the issues.

I'll also be voting for the Greens next time I get a chance here in the NI/UK/EU elections. Last time I didn't bother voting because I figured "they're all the same" but I'm really coming round to the Greens as a decent left-wing option.

Also, I got this message at the bottom that said "Because of you, 0 people have taken this quiz." which I guess means that I ruined their website. Thousands of people were about to take the quiz and then they saw that I had taken it and were like "nah, I'm not going there".

 

[WindFish]

 

[Leoreth]

Maybe we're the stupid ones then

Maybe it's the wrong thing to do, but it's definitely not irrational.

Hitler attacked Russia for literally no reason, and declared war on the USA when he easily could have not done so. Had he done neither of those things, all of Europe would be German today.

Sorry to be so blunt but you don't seem to understand WW2 at all. Hitler didn't attack Russia for no reason. Simply put, attacking Russia was the whole reason to start the war in the first place. Lebensraum im Osten was formulated as his goal before he took power in Mein Kampf; it may not be a sensible goal, but attacking Russia was definitely a step in pursuing it. Remember that Hitler didn't care about the Western powers; he tried to avoid war with them after all. And declaring war on the US was literally just acknowledging what was going to happen anyway.

 

[Lone Wolf]

91%
Jill Stein

on foreign policy, domestic policy, economic, healthcare, social, science, immigration, and environmental issues

83%
Gary Johnson

on foreign policy, domestic policy, social, healthcare, science, and immigration issues

76%
Barack Obama

on social, science, environmental, and immigration issues

18%
Mitt Romney

no major issues

57%
American Voters

on foreign policy, domestic policy, social, science, environmental, and immigration issues.

 

[squadbroken]

Hitler attacked Russia for literally no reason, and declared war on the USA when he easily could have not done so. Had he done neither of those things, all of Europe would be German today.

You say things like this and then claim to be "intellectually capable"?

 

[GhostWriter16]

Maybe it's the wrong thing to do, but it's definitely not irrational.


Sorry to be so blunt but you don't seem to understand WW2 at all. Hitler didn't attack Russia for no reason. Simply put, attacking Russia was the whole reason to start the war in the first place. Lebensraum im Osten was formulated as his goal before he took power in Mein Kampf; it may not be a sensible goal, but attacking Russia was definitely a step in pursuing it. Remember that Hitler didn't care about the Western powers; he tried to avoid war with them after all. And declaring war on the US was literally just acknowledging what was going to happen anyway.

Yeah, I'll admit in error here. Maybe his biggest issue then was provoking England?