My prediction for the first nuclear war: Pakistan Vs. India

[Anathema]

Well yeah...they're not terrorists though.

[VigilVirus]

Yeah they are. They terrorized all harkonnen spice operations and stuff.

[Acriku]

But they didn't do it to instill terror, they did it to disrupt operations.

[Edric O]

One country's terrorist is another country's freedom fighter...

[TMA_1]

"now that says something. Worm & Vigil in agreement. wow. cool. Seriously, that is really cool, not sure if I'd see the day. well heck, what do I argue over now?"

Majority of the opinion somehow equals being correct? ignorant statement.lol read history. No I dont have a vendeta against you. Remember the IM I sent you? I think your a cool guy. I just think it is very ignorant to state third world countries are too backward to hold weapons of destruction like any large nation.

[VigilVirus]

In the majority of the cases, majority opinion is correct.

You think that 3rd world countries are qualified to hold nukes? I mean, you truly think you would feel safe, if Iraq built a nuclear arsenal and then sold it to the Al Qaeda? I mean, you should have no doubt that Saddam would do that or even NK for that matter. They think - ah, nukes, another kind of weaponry we can sell and then use the money to build more and sell again, so that we can get very rich (only the few individuals in power of course).

They wouldn't care if those nukes were used to kill millions of people, you can take my word for it. And the worst thing - no one would know that it was them who sold the nukes to a terrorist organization, so no one would know where to strike back.

You are gravely wrong, TMA.

[Anathema]

In the majority of the cases, majority opinion is correct.

You think that 3rd world countries are qualified to hold nukes? I mean, you truly think you would feel safe, if Iraq built a nuclear arsenal and then sold it to the Al Qaeda? I mean, you should have no doubt that Saddam would do that or even NK for that matter. They think - ah, nukes, another kind of weaponry we can sell and then use the money to build more and sell again, so that we can get very rich (only the few individuals in power of course).

They wouldn't care if those nukes were used to kill millions of people, you can take my word for it. And the worst thing - no one would know that it was them who sold the nukes to a terrorist organization, so no one would know where to strike back.

You are gravely wrong, TMA.

Bleeh. The majority isn't always on the right end. Otherwise Hitler was right, because he was supported by the majority of the people.

I don't think Iraq is qualified to be called a third world country (it has a reasonably developed infrastructure) and even so, it is not representative for the entire third world.

[VigilVirus]

Hitler was supported by the majority of Germny but NOT by the majority of the world.

[TMA_1]

heh, you would be surprised how large the nazi party was. it didnt just flow through europe. read your history.

[VigilVirus]

I know. Still, it was not the majority of the World.

[Acriku]

Majority does not make one right, just sometimes the majority was found in the correct stand. And please tell me how you find that "most of the time the majority is correct"?

[emprworm]

TMA why dont you tell us: which under-developed, non-sceintific third world nation is responsible enough to hold an arsenal of 21st century high tech nukes? I would like to know this.

And before you accuse me of inserting the words "under-developed", keep in mind that obviosly it wouldnt be a third world nation if it wasn't underdeveloped, now would it? Third world having nukes is practically an oxymoron. It just should not be. Any country that spends millions - even BILLIONS of dollars making nukes while their own country is starving, underdeveloped, and unemployed by DEFAULT makes them irresponsible.

That is a very sound argument. One that I would like you to refute.

How can any impoverished third world nation justify the spending of billions of dollars on high-tech weaponry over their own desperately needed infrastructure, economy, and starving people- money that would greatly improve their impoverished position instead going to high tech weaponry? Putting costly weaponry above infrastructure, famine, unemployment.

Is such an act responsible?

I postulate that it is not. Therefore, any third world country posessing nukes is not responsible enough to have them.

Since you are being so adamant about the underdeveloped impoverished third world being responsible enough for 21st century highly scientific nuclear weaponry, why don't you inform us your reasoning as to which nations you feel are responsible enough to have these arsenals? Nigeria? Chad? How about a Trident Submarine loaded with nuclear warheads for Yemen?

An arsenal of long range (8000 miles) high yield nuclear ICBM's for Algeria? Bet that sounds good eh? Heck while were at it, lets give a nuclear arsenal to Dagestan too. I'm sure they would use them very responsibly.

[TMA_1]

"keep in mind that obviosly it wouldnt be a third world nation if it wasn't underdeveloped, now would it?"

and who's fault is it that these nations are kept back? Why its the good "new" western nations. They like to build themselves up while talking of nice things like global welfare of nations and the like. They like to say wonderful things but they dont really get what globalism is all about. As a matter of fact, globalism, even though it is looked upon as a way to save nations from the destitution they are in, is the reason they are in the poverty state they are in! These nations began by imperialising and then giving these nations they took, back to the people who inhabit them. They did not think of building up their culture, instead promoting to them the ideals of westernism. Now they have to advance or be destroyed. They cannot depend on the good old "primitive" ways that kept them alive for millenia. They are in a stalemate between their old ways and the new western ways. Now that we have promoted to them western ideals, including western warfare, now you want to take back what they learned from us? our fault, not theirs.

[emprworm]

and who's fault is it that these nations are kept back? Why its the good "new" western nations. They like to build themselves up while talking of nice things like global welfare of nations and the like. They like to say wonderful things but they dont really get what globalism is all about.

TMA if you want to blame the US for third world governments run by gangs, warlords, and factions go ahead. Of course, the US could go in there and interferre with their government and take out the gangs, warlords, and factions, and I'm sure you would only have nice things to say about that right....?

We tried that once...Mogudishu. Most of you in here would condemn what the US did. Are you an American, TMA? Why do you set up an impossible standard for your nation?

On one hand you blame the US for these corrupt governments, yet if we try to interferre, you criticize. So what exactly you want us to do then?

So assuming that the US is to blame for a government run by corrupt warlords and factions, that makes your argument even weaker, does it not?

Your original argument was that third world nations are responsible enough for nukes. In fact, you were so adamant over this, you went so far as to accuse me of following a mini-antichrist.

Since these third world nations are fragmented into gangs and saturated with lawlessness, factions, clans, warlords, do you still want to maintain such a position? Giving third world nukes = giving a warlord nukes.

Is that responsible?

I maintain my original position. Third world nations are not responsible enough for nuclear arsenals and possession of such is a dangerous situtation indeed.

[ordos45]

Actually yes, TMA is an American citizen...as for the impossible standard, I believe it is called "Hope". ;D

[TMA_1]

of course they are responsible for it. They take the plutonium and purify it for weapon capability. Where did the weapon originally come from though? A healthy understanding of past and present wrongs are needed in dealing with things in this life. You are also misinterpriting everything I said. I point out that Western culture is to blame. America is just one of the people's involved in this. We leave them with nothing, so obviously they will scatter and group into factions. Take america for example in many towns and cities. Gang activity is large. it encompases all races and monitary levels. People feel abandoned so they form their own groups, and if they cant aquire things in a moral and just way, well they will just take it and make money illegally. our past colonialism and interferance in many of these now third world nations is the problem. We got involved, spreading democratic ideals and the like. Now we blame them for aquiring the same power we have? right or wrong, they are building up. They have no help from us anymore and we have abandoned them. "Bowling for Columbine" showed an amazing portion. We have helped in dozens of revolutions in the middle east and south america. We fed many revolutions and wars. Including helping Saddam and Bin Laden. We then turned away from them and let them do how they saw best. Now you and others want to overlook your mistakes before acting upon the situation? Arguing that they have no right to have those weapons helps nothing.

Me being an american doesnt mean I dont have the right to express to you the ignorance you are proclaiming. To make sure you dont take that as an insult, remember that I saidthat strictly because it is the truth of the matter. They are sovergn nations and right or wrong they have every right to procure weapons of mass destruction. Just because they commit crimes of evil to their own people, doesnt give us the right to barge in and take their weapons away. I seem to recall almost every western nation )maybe excluding nations like Holland) that have committed evil crimes against humanity. America killed millions through their belief that they, by divine intervention, should control the whole of the Americas, finally stopped to just north america. I wont even go into the long history europe had of killing people that were not "normal, or of chrisian influence. Stop looking over the basis of my debate and answer the questions. You sound like a recording of CNN.

[emprworm]

Hope for what? You want the US interferring with third world corrupt governments? Or you want the US to stay out of other countries politics and continue to donate BILLIONS (Non-loan goods & money) per year to these countries, where nearly all of it is intercepted by corrupt government people and factions, never reaches the needy, and the politicians, who get rich off the hundreds off billions of dollars, buy Chalets in France and switzerland and mega million dollar estates (yes, this is true!)

" The Office reportedly found that as much as $1 billion of the $5 billion in international foreign assistance given to Bosnia since 1995 may have been stolen or funneled to politically connected individuals"

1 billion dollars syphoned by corrupt officials! Wow. That is just one country.

"Over $200 million is missing from the Muslim city of Tuzla's budget, in addition to the $300 million reported missing from the previous two years" (prior to 1999)

Well now the US is at fault for this? We are talking BILLIONS of dollars here the US is giving away. Where o where does the money go? It goes in the hands of corrupt politicians of the corrupt third world who dont give a flying #$#$ about their own people. And we have people here in this forum blaming the US for it??!! LOL :D

So what should we do then? Station hundreds of batallions of US soldiers around the world to make sure our donated money gets to the right people? LOL. Like I'm sure you people would approve of that.

The double standard that you people in here set up against the US is truly bizzarre. Heck even some US citizens like TMA do it. Blame the US for all the worlds problems. Please guys. I know you can do better than that.

And don't give me this "western culture" crap. THere is practically no such thing anymore. ITs a violent word lusting after power. Always was. This has nothing to do with "western culture". How many people would call the Middle East western culture? NO one living there, that is for sure. Yet they are full of factions, warlords, poverty, violence, guns, etc. Blame the US for that too? Good grief. Grow up people. Hey I know! Lets blame the US for you getting dumped by your last girlfriend too. LOL

;D

[TMA_1]

how many damn times do I have to tell you its not just america.lol Your debate style still exists at a highschool level man. We give them money but we do not send any real substantial help. We didnt help build up these naitons. Instead we let them go with the currupt leaders we have already. some of thse nations are lost causes because of letting them go without further aid. Now we just give money to those currupt nations because we never helped them further enough in the first place. Its not an emotional thing. Its just plain common sense. Many western nations have aided in the growth of crime in the third world. sometimes bluntly behind the scenes, or helping revolutionaries that looked good at the time, but turned out to be horrible rulers. Sometimes we would even support two nations in fighting against eachother such as the war between Iraq and Iran.

It is pretty simple.

[emprworm]

Just because they commit crimes of evil to their own people, doesnt give us the right to barge in and take their weapons away. I seem to recall almost every western nation )maybe excluding nations like Holland) that have committed evil crimes against humanity.

wow, what a fine argument you have there. Since one man brutally murders, we should empower the other to brutally murder as well. It would be so unfair if one guy gets to kill millions and the other guy cant. We must be fair and just! NUclear weapons for all!!!

maybe your dream of a holocaust will come true in your lifetime.

Furthermore since we have no right to barge in and do anything, you have no right to blame us for all the crap that goes on there. Poverty, sickness, famine, disease....NONE of it is our fault. or do you want us to interferre now?

What do you want us to do? Just tossing around blame does nothing. What ACTION should we take?

[TMA_1]

no action. you are no god or police man of any other nation. Your emotions take control of you and that leads to your demise.

[emprworm]

TMA you are the most ad-hominem debator I have ever seen on these forums. That is to your discredit (to other debators here, do a google search for "ad-hominem". CLick the first page it lists and read the fallacy and the example to learn what it is)

We give them money but we do not send any real substantial help.

what might that "real substantial help" be? More general accusations without specifics TMA? Not surprised. What exactly, you want us to do? And don't say anything that would be "interferrence" because I know you wouldnt want to contradict yourself.

Also, I'd like you to explain why you feel it is even our responsibility whatsoever to "help" anyone? Aren't we supposed to stay out?

We didnt help build up these naitons.

So we are now "building up nations?" What is it TMA. You want us to stay out....you want us to interferre....you want us to stay out....you want us to interferre....? LOL, I'm getting dizzy.

Instead we let them go with the currupt leaders we have already.

Maybe we "let them" because its none of our business how a nation runs itself? Ever consider that?

Secondly, we dont "let" any nation get corrupt, as if we are the rulers of the earth! Nations get corrupt by themselves, it is not our job to pick and choose leaders for them. Or do you think it is?

some of thse nations are lost causes because of letting them go without further aid.

FIrst of all, I didn't think it was our job to interferre.

Second, what Aid are you talking about? We give BILLIONS in food, money, medical supplies, infrastructure per year. FAR MORE than any other nation on earth. What else you want from the US? Why do I get the feeling you wont be specific and instead just hurl more ad-hominem attacks? I predict this with 95% accuracy.

Now we just give money to those currupt nations because we never helped them further enough in the first place.

I didn't know it was our Job to be the world's babysitter. Has it ever dawned on you that if a nation becomes full of corrupted factions and warlords that perhaps...JUST PERHAPS...its their own fault? Since when was it the US's job to check the "integrity" of another nations rulers?

Its not an emotional thing. Its just plain common sense. Many western nations have aided in the growth of crime in the third world.

LOL. And just where do you get this from? Last I checked, humans have been brutal since the dawn of time. Western culture not required. THe most brutal nations this planet has ever seen: Russia and China were not western...unless you are going to say they are. I think its time you define "western culture" What is it, exactly. I keep hearing you toss around the term "western culture" and I do not know what you mean by it. Please define it.

sometimes bluntly behind the scenes, or helping revolutionaries that looked good at the time, but turned out to be horrible rulers.

so if a missionary in Yemen feeds and saves the life of a hungry child who grows up to be a Muhammad Atta and kills 3,000- are you now going to play the blame game and blame the missionary for those murders?

[Anathema]

Any country that spends millions - even BILLIONS of dollars making nukes while their own country is starving, underdeveloped, and unemployed by DEFAULT makes them irresponsible.

True. But the question was wether or not they qualify for the possesion of them, and they could have gotten them as a present, so to speak (lol).

I know. Still, it was not the majority of the World.

Hahahahaha lol. And you and Emprworm are the majority of the world? Lol. Do you think the majority of the world supports Bush? Lol.

Second, what Aid are you talking about? We give BILLIONS in food, money, medical supplies, infrastructure per year. FAR MORE than any other nation on earth. What else you want from the US? Why do I get the feeling you wont be specific and instead just hurl more ad-hominem attacks? I predict this with 95% accuracy.

Well we give development aid as well, but considering our country is 15 times smaller then the US you can't expect us to throw in as much as you do ::)

[TMA_1]

FIrst of all, I didn't think it was our job to interferre.

You contridict yourself then with interfering with other sovergn nations. You wish to take away but not give out freely. And missionary services are civil and of a private nature. the u.s. Military and C.I.A. were the ones that caused hundreds of thousads of people that died in the areas I talked about. okay... if you dont know what "western culture" and the western nations are then you needto beef up on high school social studies. After hellenism spread from the greek penincula to the hindu cush, concepts began to change radically. social, political and economic ideas began to rise. Rome, after conquering the medditerainian and europe began building upon hellenistic principles and after Rome's fall, the gauls, who were the conquerers took the ideas with them through the ages. government broke down though and feudalism replaced strong monarchy. though it stillwas monarchical. After a while, new ideas immerged. Expansion to unknown places for trading gave us books that we forgot completely about like the greek philosophers, physicians, poets and playwrites. A new time of thought came to be and the Roman Catholic Church, which was one of the main reasons roman influence stuck in europe, began to lose its power. I could continue this lesson but it isnt nessicary.

So empr, you take little bits of what I say and then rail things against them with no real retort.

"So we are now "building up nations?" What is it TMA. You want us to stay out....you want us to interferre....you want us to stay out....you want us to interferre....? LOL, I'm getting dizzy."

If we are going to interferre,w ell we better do a damn good job of it. I didnt say I liked the helping progress of nations, I am just saying that now it is a reality we should do a better job of it. You only care about yourself and you fear. fear is what causes many of the problems in the world. We go in and help a nation defeat another, or help one rebel group overthrow it's government. After that we may give them money and material aid. Other than that we dotn help them much at all. The money we give them just feeds into a new government that will probably be opressive. Either we completely commit ourselves to rehabilitating newly born nations that we helped concieve, or we take our business out of another nation's affairs. by the way this has gone off topic. empr is getting hissy.lol ;)

[emprworm]

FIrst of all, I didn't think it was our job to interferre.

then dont blame the US for corrupt third world governments stealing billions of foreign AID and getting rich off it. I propose that the US shouldn't give anything....nothing...so long as nations are stealing it before it gets to the people that need it.

You contridict yourself then with interfering with other sovergn nations. You wish to take away but not give out freely.

I wish to take away nuclear weapons from faction lords, and freely give out food, medicine, money to the people who need it (not the faction lords). How is this a contradiction?

okay... if you dont know what "western culture" and the western nations are then you needto beef up on high school social studies.

Western Culture has more definitions than the word love. It could mean anything, including a topping on my pizza.

After hellenism spread from the greek penincula to the hindu cush, concepts began to change radically. social, political and economic ideas began to rise.

You speak as if concepts were not alreay changing radically. Cultures have always changed...since the dawn of time. Hellenism offered nothing new to humanity in the way of poverty, slavery, violence, and immorality. All of this existed in abudence. Long before Alexander the Great ever swept through Mesopotamia before finally dying of (poisoning or illness I believe) in Babylon, the world was already saturated with immorality, violence, revolt, barbarism. You speak as if Hellinism somehow 'corrupted' the already corrupted world. You speak as if all these cultures except Hellinism were somehow 'pure'?? Sorry, but Western Culture is simply the progress of human civilization. It is not the fault of anyone. How can you blame the US for something that ancient Rome did? Good grief mate.

after Rome's fall, the gauls, who were the conquerers took the ideas with them through the ages.

all civilizations did this. Thats called the "human race". People take ideas with them. How does this make the US responsible for corrupt third world factions again?

we forgot completely about like the greek philosophers, physicians, poets and playwrites.

You mean the greek philosophers like Aristotle and Socrates who sat around eating Pomegranates and figs, having incestual and homosexual orgies in bath houses while 90% of their population was enslaved and working in mines? I think it would be wise to forget such barbarism.

A new time of thought came to be and the Roman Catholic Church, which was one of the main reasons roman influence stuck in europe, began to lose its power. I could continue this lesson but it isnt nessicary.

ok fine. But I still fail to see how the progress of human civilization makes the US to blame for warlords and factions stealing billions of dollars of US Aid to third world nations. I still fail to see how that makes the US at fault.

So empr, you take little bits of what I say and then rail things against them with no real retort.

ad-hominem.

After that we may give them money and material aid. Other than that we dotn help them much at all.

again, (third time I asked)...what exactly are we supposed to do then? You keep accusing the US of not helping much. What should we do?

Either we completely commit ourselves to rehabilitating newly born nations that we helped concieve,

Compeltely commit? What is that? Stationing troops there on their soil? Choosing their leaders for them? Making them a 52nd state of the US? Just what exactly is "completely commit"? How much interferring would that be?

by the way this has gone off topic. empr is getting hissy.lol

ad-hominem

[Dunenewt]

I thought there were only 50 states?