1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

So, who's next: Iran or North Korea?

Discussion in 'Off-Topic' started by joespaniel, Mar 9, 2003.

  1. joespaniel

    joespaniel Unescorted Settler

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2001
    Messages:
    5,260
    Location:
    The Old Pueblo
    India and Pakistan are not bound by the NPF treaty, they never signed it. However, I tend to think they currently would NOT sell nuclear bombs to anyone.

    I am not so sure about North Korea.

    Iran may be worth talking to. At least to give them a chance. If there are 300,000 US troops occupying Iraq, I couldnt think of a better time to open a diplomatic dialogue. :D
     
  2. vonork

    vonork Emperor

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2001
    Messages:
    1,173
    Location:
    Sweden
    Good articel
     
  3. Ancient Grudge

    Ancient Grudge Its all in this life

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2002
    Messages:
    2,306
    Location:
    (S)hatfield,England
    still no defention of stable

    Wait no wait oh yes i am mistaken agent orange ohhh wait no that wasnt chemical was it.

    edit: I am not having a go at the U.S but the absolute hypocrisy of foreign policy still amazes and astonishes me
     
  4. Shady

    Shady Why are you reading this?

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2002
    Messages:
    708
    Location:
    Gun Traffic
    Personally I believe it's good that both India and Pakistan have nukes. It will keep them from attacking each other like they came close to recently last year. It's completely analagous to the US-CCCP standoff because neither wants to start something.

    I don't understand why Pakistan receives negative opinions from around the world. Just because they're an islamic state doesn't mean they're going to engage in the crap that saddam and his buddies deal in. In the war on terrorism, Pakistan has been the most effective country in catching top terrorists, most recently KSM. I think respect for their participation is long overdue but I don't see any of it.
     
  5. sween32

    sween32 The Worthless

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2001
    Messages:
    3,460
    Location:
    Cape Cod
    i'm usually not a big fan of doonsbury but lately it's been pretty damn good and has been hitting this issue very hard...
     

    Attached Files:

  6. sween32

    sween32 The Worthless

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2001
    Messages:
    3,460
    Location:
    Cape Cod
    i was cracking up with this one...
     

    Attached Files:

  7. vonork

    vonork Emperor

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2001
    Messages:
    1,173
    Location:
    Sweden
    yeah that's a good one(posted it in humor & jokes) but I guess it is fitting here
     
  8. sween32

    sween32 The Worthless

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2001
    Messages:
    3,460
    Location:
    Cape Cod
    i rarely go into humor and jokes, didn't realize you posted it yesterday. :lol:
     
  9. EdwardTking

    EdwardTking Deity

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2002
    Messages:
    3,794
    Location:
    Norfolk

    "Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) only came into being because:

    1.) USA could not destroy USSR without losing tens of millions and vice-versa.

    2.) USA was not prepared to surrender to USSR and vice-versa.

    3.) USA and USSR did not trust each other.

    MAD was all they had left! We are lucky that it worked. Fortunately neither the US nor the USSR were culturally inclined to use military means to propagate their belief systems.

    Ultimatley 3 then 2 occurred.


    MAD requires:

    1) All parties to be rational normally.

    2) Knowing that they will know it was you if you nuke them.


    The problem with MAD today is that:

    a) Many people such as Osama Bin Liden are not rational.

    b) With so many countries having WMD; you won't necessarily be able to ascertain who has WMD'd you and retaliate accordingly;so they won't be deterred from WMDing you.
     
  10. amadeus

    amadeus As seen on OT

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2001
    Messages:
    34,765
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Osaka (大阪)
    You mean like being as caring and compassionate as the Dutch were in South Africa and the East Indies? Oops.

    EVERYONE acts in their self-interest, I don't care who you are. France does. Mexico does. Cambodia does.
     
  11. sysyphus

    sysyphus So they tell me

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2002
    Messages:
    10,489
    Location:
    Toronto
    And everyone gets critical of them when they do.
     
  12. amadeus

    amadeus As seen on OT

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2001
    Messages:
    34,765
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Osaka (大阪)
    Yes, because countries acting in THEIR interests may conflict with those opposing nations and their interests.

    If the country who is acting in their interest has some sort of positive effect for the otherwise opposing nation, they'll keep quiet.
     
  13. Bose

    Bose Antipodean

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2002
    Messages:
    1,506
    Location:
    Too close to Victoria
    Australia doesn't act in our self-interest, we act in America's self-interest! If we didn't, and they dropped our alliance, we would all be speaking Indonesian...
     
  14. SSG Paul

    SSG Paul Warlord

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2002
    Messages:
    254
    Was it known that agent orange would sicken/injure or kill prior to it's use? It's use was for deforestation, not to kill.
    Also, I don't see the hypocrisy since the perps who used agent orange, are no longer in charge. Bush is in charge now, and I have never heard of him using WMD to kill civilians.
     
  15. Xiahou-Dun

    Xiahou-Dun Retired Super Hero

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2001
    Messages:
    495
    Location:
    Southern Alabama
    So infact, it is in the self interest of Australia, right?
     
  16. Panda

    Panda Metal head

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2001
    Messages:
    2,725
    Location:
    Turku, Finland
    That site has some great posters, Sultan! Thanks for the link! :goodjob:

     
  17. Ancient Grudge

    Ancient Grudge Its all in this life

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2002
    Messages:
    2,306
    Location:
    (S)hatfield,England

    oh wait a chemical agent ofcourse not................

    i wasnt commenting on that hypocrisy just the fact america/britain/russia/china etc are allowed to have WMD but we get mad when other people have them or try to develop them please dont confuse my points next time
     
  18. Cheetah

    Cheetah Deity

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2002
    Messages:
    7,996
    Location:
    the relative oasis of CFC
    Yes it is something to think over...

    Why can some nations - who has used WMD - be allowed to have them, while others aren't allowed.

    (As far as I know, only USA, Britain, Germany and France has used WMD in wars. USA used nuclear weapons against Japan and Britain, Germany and France used gas against each other in the first World War. (I might be wrong about Britain and France using gas, but I know Germany did, and I believe the others did too.))

    I guess its because "we" don't trust the other nations. But then again I'm sure they don't trust us with the weapons either...
     
  19. Ancient Grudge

    Ancient Grudge Its all in this life

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2002
    Messages:
    2,306
    Location:
    (S)hatfield,England
    Britain sure did we even gave iraq the idea for gassing the kurds :D arent we clever!
     
  20. sween32

    sween32 The Worthless

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2001
    Messages:
    3,460
    Location:
    Cape Cod
    I actually BOUGHT the poster of this one....
     

    Attached Files:

Share This Page