The Official Religious/Political Debate Thread (lyric, country, rock, American)

[right-track]

Originally Posted by swimintheundertow

Well we shouldn't try to go solve everybody else's problems. It isn't our place. Doesn't anyone in the government read comic books? Usually by trying to help someone who wasn't looking for it creates an enemy you didn't plan on.

I don't think the U.S. or the U.K./allies, have much of a choice really.
After all, if we don't control things for our own benefit, (forget all the other bullshit they tell you) then someone else will.
Which isn't good for our future economy, or security.

And forget about Korea, it's just another smokescreen. Same as WMD was for Iraq.
Iran will be next and for the same nuclear excuse as Korea, only difference is, Iran have oil and Korea have nothing we need.

Make a fuss about Korea, then whack Iran. Classic.

Don't get me wrong, I actually think it's the right thing to do.
Like I said, if we don't someone else will. I just can't stand all the usual bullshit reasons they wheel out everytime.

[tdoc210]

lets play toss the nuclear warhead lol

[right-track]

^

To you...to me...to you...to me...

Dear God you scare me.

[[MERIT]]

Originally Posted by right-track

I don't think the U.S. or the U.K./allies, have much of a choice really.
After all, if we don't control things for our own benefit, (forget all the other bullshit they tell you) then someone else will.
Which isn't good for our future economy, or security.

And forget about Korea, it's just another smokescreen. Same as WMD was for Iraq.
Iran will be next and for the same nuclear excuse as Korea, only difference is, Iran have oil and Korea have nothing we need.

Make a fuss about Korea, then whack Iran. Classic.

Don't get me wrong, I actually think it's the right thing to do.
Like I said, if we don't someone else will. I just can't stand all the usual bullshit reasons they wheel out everytime.

since when did this become US vs North Korea? ths US is just part of the UN, along with alot of other countries (including the UK), who are trying to do whats best for the world. and Iran funds and sponsors terrorism. is that good for the world?......nope. is it good for that dick-weed kim jong-il to hav enuclear capabilities....nope. so dont write this off as the US trying to run the world, lets not be so neive.

[DontRunMeOver]

Originally Posted by right-track

I don't think the U.S. or the U.K./allies, have much of a choice really.
After all, if we don't control things for our own benefit, (forget all the other bullshit they tell you) then someone else will.
Which isn't good for our future economy, or security.

Now that reasoning I agree with completely. There will always end up being a bigger, more powerful nation that has a huge political sway and can bully other countries into getting what it wants. At the moment, that's the US and if it wasn't them it would be somebody else.

Interesting fact I just found:

1. There have been roughly 3,000 terrorism-related deaths AROUND THE WORLD since Sept 11 2001. (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5889435/)

2. Meanwhile, Iraq has enjoyed "100,000 extra deaths" since they were invaded. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/mid...st/3962969.stm) - admittedly, this looks like its a high estimate.

Again, whose benefit are western forces acting for? We're acting for ourselves and that's fine by me, so why pretend we're looking out for the whole world all of the time? Do people really buy it?

[Merkaba]

Originally Posted by right-track

I don't think the U.S. or the U.K./allies, have much of a choice really.
After all, if we don't control things for our own benefit, (forget all the other bullshit they tell you) then someone else will.
Which isn't good for our future economy, or security.

You're on the right-track, right-track

But for sure, it's usually always better to respond than react.

[right-track]

Originally Posted by oojay

since when did this become US vs North Korea? ths US is just part of the UN, along with alot of other countries (including the UK), who are trying to do whats best for the world. and Iran funds and sponsors terrorism. is that good for the world?......nope. is it good for that dick-weed kim jong-il to hav enuclear capabilities....nope. so dont write this off as the US trying to run the world, lets not be so neive.

*naïve

You live…you learn.
And if there's one thing I've learnt, it's that governments only do things when there's something in it for them.

For "what’s doing best for the world", read...what’s doing best to maintain the status quo.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not criticising the U.S or my own government here. I believe they have little choice.
What I do criticise however, is the "we do it for world peace" routine.

Yes, we are a part of the U.N. but since when did the U.S./U.K. take any notice of the U.N.?
Certainly not concerning Iraq, or Israel for that matter.

I'm a cynical person when it comes to politics. I believe, as I stated in an earlier post, that if we don't…someone else will.
I believe that Iraq, Iran and Korea (Korea to a lesser and more indirect way) are not so much a military threat, but are more an economical threat, to the future of the western world.
In Iraq and Iran's case, it's for oil. As for Korea, they pose a threat to the stability of South East Asia.
And there lurking in the background...China.

Here's how, in my opinion, it will pan out.
Put diplomatic pressure on Iran and Korea over their nuclear policy.
Using the U.N. initially, with the U.K. and Japan providing political support, respectively.
Which ultimately fails.
Invade Iran (if Israel don't bomb Iran's nuclear plants first, which they have in the past) under the usual "terrorist/freedom for it's people" excuse. Yes they are a threat, but that's a side line.
Install a Democratic government…do business.
Non of which, incidentally will reduce the threat of terror. Quite the reverse!
This achieves many objectives;

1. Control of middle eastern oil for the west.
2. Send a clear and serious message to Korea, of how we deal with rogue nuclear wannabe states, in the hope that they buy the bluff.
3. Puts pressure on China to find a solution. And here's the end game. China becomes a democracy.

Like I said oojay…I'm a cynic.
Maybe the U.S. really are the 7th Cavalry and Bush is General Custer…and I'm the Pope.

[DontRunMeOver]

Originally Posted by oojay

ths US is just part of the UN, along with alot of other countries (including the UK), who are trying to do whats best for the world. and Iran funds and sponsors terrorism. is that good for the world?......nope. is it good for that dick-weed kim jong-il to hav enuclear capabilities....nope.

A bit slow to notice this, but just to point out, whether or not its relevant to your argument, that North Korea and Iran are also part of the UN. As far as I know, every country apart from Vatican City, Western Sahara and Palestine or something like that (and maybe some other random African country) are members of the UN. So your idea that a country being part of the UN means it must be acting in the benefit of 'the world' wouldn't be consistent with your idea that Iran sponsoring terrorism and North Korea having nuclear capabilites were not benefitting the world.

[[MERIT]]

Originally Posted by DontRunMeOver

A bit slow to notice this, but just to point out, whether or not its relevant to your argument, that North Korea and Iran are also part of the UN. As far as I know, every country apart from Vatican City, Western Sahara and Palestine or something like that (and maybe some other random African country) are members of the UN. So your idea that a country being part of the UN means it must be acting in the benefit of 'the world' wouldn't be consistent with your idea that Iran sponsoring terrorism and North Korea having nuclear capabilites were not benefitting the world.

ok nobody denied that iran and north korea are part of the UN, but being part of the UN, and following its rules and sanctions are two completely different things

[[MERIT]]

Originally Posted by right-track

*naïve

You live…you learn.
And if there's one thing I've learnt, it's that governments only do things when there's something in it for them.

For "what’s doing best for the world", read...what’s doing best to maintain the status quo.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not criticising the U.S or my own government here. I believe they have little choice.
What I do criticise however, is the "we do it for world peace" routine.

Yes, we are a part of the U.N. but since when did the U.S./U.K. take any notice of the U.N.?
Certainly not concerning Iraq, or Israel for that matter.

I'm a cynical person when it comes to politics. I believe, as I stated in an earlier post, that if we don't…someone else will.
I believe that Iraq, Iran and Korea (Korea to a lesser and more indirect way) are not so much a military threat, but are more an economical threat, to the future of the western world.
In Iraq and Iran's case, it's for oil. As for Korea, they pose a threat to the stability of South East Asia.
And there lurking in the background...China.

Here's how, in my opinion, it will pan out.
Put diplomatic pressure on Iran and Korea over their nuclear policy.
Using the U.N. initially, with the U.K. and Japan providing political support, respectively.
Which ultimately fails.
Invade Iran (if Israel don't bomb Iran's nuclear plants first, which they have in the past) under the usual "terrorist/freedom for it's people" excuse. Yes they are a threat, but that's a side line.
Install a Democratic government…do business.
Non of which, incidentally will reduce the threat of terror. Quite the reverse!
This achieves many objectives;

1. Control of middle eastern oil for the west.
2. Send a clear and serious message to Korea, of how we deal with rogue nuclear wannabe states, in the hope that they buy the bluff.
3. Puts pressure on China to find a solution. And here's the end game. China becomes a democracy.

Like I said oojay…I'm a cynic.
Maybe the U.S. really are the 7th Cavalry and Bush is General Custer…and I'm the Pope.

fisrt off please dont blow smoke up my ass and treat me like im stupid, ok Benedict XVI? i do agree with you that governments only do things when there's "something" in it for them. in the case of north korea that "something" for the US government would be......NOT GETTING NUKED?! a worthy goal in my eyes. and i guess youre right on maintaing the staus quo, b/c we havent been nuked yet, so i guess technically that is the status quo. but thinking that the US wants to bully north korea just to send a mesage to iran, whom we will then invade for their oil is completely absurd. if you knew what you were talking about you would realize that the US imports more oil each from brazil, argentina, and canada than iran. and people said that we invaded iraq for oil, but last time i checked gas was about $3.00/gallon. it just doesnt add up now does it? now i realize youre a cynic, but i know youre not stupid. try viewing this from a wider perspective before rushing to liberal left-wing judgments about things.