View Poll Results: Which is better, a multi polar world or a nuclear war?

Voters
710. You may not vote on this poll
  • Multi-Polar World

    458 64.51%
  • Nuclear War

    252 35.49%
Page 4 of 16 FirstFirst ... 2345614 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 157

Thread: Which is better, a multi polar world or a nuclear war?

  1. #31
    Educator idea_steed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Last Seen
    10-08-16 @ 01:06 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    932

    Re: Which is better, a multi polar world or a nuclear war?

    Quote Originally Posted by joG View Post
    But think of the excitement.
    I can get the "excitement "in the video games. Don't want a real one.
    Passion and Patience

  2. #32
    Sage
    Fenton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:21 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    26,304

    Re: Which is better, a multi polar world or a nuclear war?

    Quote Originally Posted by MildSteel View Post
    If you had the choice between ONLY two things, a multi-polar world in which the US shared power with other countries or a nuclear war, which would you prefer?
    A stupid question Indeed.

  3. #33
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Last Seen
    08-18-15 @ 09:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,974

    Re: Which is better, a multi polar world or a nuclear war?

    Quote Originally Posted by Fenton View Post
    A stupid question Indeed.
    There would be no need to ask such a stupid question if people in the U.S. foreign policy establishment did not do stupid things. People such as you advocate for U.S. military intervention right on the border of a nuclear armed country that has the ability to destroy the U.S. If such stupid policy were not being advocated, there would be no need for such a stupid question in the first place.

  4. #34
    Sage
    Fenton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:21 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    26,304

    Re: Which is better, a multi polar world or a nuclear war?

    Quote Originally Posted by MildSteel View Post
    There would be no need to ask such a stupid question if people in the U.S. foreign policy establishment did not do stupid things. People such as you advocate for U.S. military intervention right on the border of a nuclear armed country that has the ability to destroy the U.S. If such stupid policy were not being advocated, there would be no need for such a stupid question in the first place.

    And people like YOU panic at the thought of confronting oppressive regimes.

    Foreign Policy decisions shouldn't be based on a irrational fear of a exaggerated threat. That leads to appeasement and eventually a far more dangerous World.

    You really think Putin would launch a Nuclear strike on American soil just to keep Ukraine ? Where's the logic in that assessment ?

  5. #35
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Last Seen
    08-18-15 @ 09:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,974

    Re: Which is better, a multi polar world or a nuclear war?

    Quote Originally Posted by Fenton View Post
    And people like YOU panic at the thought of confronting oppressive regimes.

    Foreign Policy decisions shouldn't be based on a irrational fear of a exaggerated threat. That leads to appeasement and eventually a far more dangerous World.

    You really think Putin would launch a Nuclear strike on American soil just to keep Ukraine ? Where's the logic in that assessment ?
    This isn't about confronting a regime because of oppression. If we were really concerned about that we would confront Saudi Arabia. Quite frankly U.S. interests in Ukraine lie in containing Russia. However people like you cannot differentiate between an interest and a vital interest. Although Ukraine is of interest to the U.S. because the U.S. does have an interest in containing Russia, it is not a VITAL interest. However, Crimea is a vital interest of Russia. There is no panic on my part. What I am trying to do is keep people who think like you that actually have power from putting the U.S. in a position in which there would actually be a need to panic.

    If the U.S. launched an assault to take Crimea from Russia, Russia would be in a situation in which their conventional forces would be overwhelmed by U.S. military superiority. In that situation it is highly likely that they would retaliate with nuclear weapons. Why some idiots want to put the U.S. in such a position over Ukraine is mind boggling.

    That said, let me ask you a question. Do you think that the U.S. should take Crimea and eastern Ukraine from Russia by force?

  6. #36
    Sage
    Fenton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:21 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    26,304

    Re: Which is better, a multi polar world or a nuclear war?

    Quote Originally Posted by MildSteel View Post
    This isn't about confronting a regime because of oppression. If we were really concerned about that we would confront Saudi Arabia. Quite frankly U.S. interests in Ukraine lie in containing Russia. However people like you cannot differentiate between an interest and a vital interest. Although Ukraine is of interest to the U.S. because the U.S. does have an interest in containing Russia, it is not a VITAL interest. However, Crimea is a vital interest of Russia. There is no panic on my part. What I am trying to do is keep people who think like you that actually have power from putting the U.S. in a position in which there would actually be a need to panic.

    If the U.S. launched an assault to take Crimea from Russia, Russia would be in a situation in which their conventional forces would be overwhelmed by U.S. military superiority. In that situation it is highly likely that they would retaliate with nuclear weapons. Why some idiots want to put the U.S. in such a position over Ukraine is mind boggling.

    That said, let me ask you a question. Do you think that the U.S. should take Crimea and eastern Ukraine from Russia by force?
    No, they would not likely respond with Nuclear Weapons. Why on earth would they risk their people and their Sovereign territory over Ukraine ? They wouldn't. Not too mention the current stock piles of Nuclear Bombs on both sides primarily contain strategic weapons with low yields.

    The big 40 Megaton city killers don't exist anymore and the largest weapon we or the Russians have is around 9 Megatons.

    The only threat of a Nuclear strike would be from a rogue Nation, Terrorist organization or rogue individual.

    It takes a vivid imagination to come up with a scenario that would lead to a all out Nuclear exchange with Russia.
    The New Democratic Party Slogan :

    " Return to Power By Any Means Necessary "

  7. #37
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Last Seen
    08-18-15 @ 09:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,974

    Re: Which is better, a multi polar world or a nuclear war?

    Quote Originally Posted by Fenton View Post
    No, they would not likely respond with Nuclear Weapons. Why on earth would they risk their people and their Sovereign territory over Ukraine ? They wouldn't. Not too mention the current stock piles of Nuclear Bombs on both sides primarily contain strategic weapons with low yields.

    The big 40 Megaton city killers don't exist anymore and the largest weapon we or the Russians have is around 9 Megatons.

    The only threat of a Nuclear strike would be from a rogue Nation, Terrorist organization or rogue individual.

    It takes a vivid imagination to come up with a scenario that would lead to a all out Nuclear exchange with Russia.
    I think that you are dead wrong. A U.S. assault on Crimea would be a direct attack on the heart of Russian naval power. Russia would surely lose in a full, direct, conventional conflict with the U.S. It would be a devastating blow to Russian power, because that is the only place from which they can project substantial naval power. Yes, they would be forced to retaliate with nuclear weapons under such a scenario. Do you actually think Russia could let the U.S. severely damage their naval power in such a way? You must be out of your mind.

    I asked you a question. Do you think that the U.S. should take Crimea and Eastern Ukraine from Russia by force? What's the matter, cat got your tongue?

  8. #38
    Sporadic insanity normal.


    The Mark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Last Seen
    12-13-17 @ 11:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    19,736

    Re: Which is better, a multi polar world or a nuclear war?

    Quote Originally Posted by MildSteel View Post
    I think that you are dead wrong. A U.S. assault on Crimea would be a direct attack on the heart of Russian naval power. Russia would surely lose in a full, direct, conventional conflict with the U.S. It would be a devastating blow to Russian power, because that is the only place from which they can project substantial naval power. Yes, they would be forced to retaliate with nuclear weapons under such a scenario. Do you actually think Russia could let the U.S. severely damage their naval power in such a way? You must be out of your mind.

    I asked you a question. Do you think that the U.S. should take Crimea and Eastern Ukraine from Russia by force? What's the matter, cat got your tongue?
    Personally, I think the ideal solution would have been some kind of negotiated deal where Russia was allowed to use the naval facilities they needed without basically having a civil war in a couple countries.

    But apparently that didn't happen and Russia considered conflict worth the rewards.

    Unless I'm way off target here.
    Education.

    Sometimes I think we're alone. Sometimes I think we're not. In either case, the thought is staggering. ~ R. Buckminster Fuller

  9. #39
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:04 AM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    43,341

    Re: Which is better, a multi polar world or a nuclear war?

    Quote Originally Posted by idea_steed View Post
    I can get the "excitement "in the video games. Don't want a real one.
    Then we had better get an international system the robustly guarantees security in place, because otherwise we will get the Real One.

  10. #40
    Student
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Brussels
    Last Seen
    02-12-15 @ 11:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    154

    Re: Which is better, a multi polar world or a nuclear war?

    Under the current circumstances - and for the forseeable future - the only thing worse than a world dominated by the US is a world not dominated by the US.

Page 4 of 16 FirstFirst ... 2345614 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •