• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The Coming Wars

calamity said:
Stability is not the norm. MADD worked when only 2 or 3 nations had nukes. Once 10 to 20 have them, all bets are off. For sure.
Click to expand...

That is exactly the problem that is developing, though, the nuclear weapons are not the only variable in this process of destabilization.
 
Praxas said:
Then feel free to move there and defend Israel yourself.
Click to expand...

Maybe he only meant that a turned back is an invitation to a traveling knife. ;)
 
joG said:
That is exactly the problem that is developing, though, the nuclear weapons are not the only variable in this process of destabilization.
Click to expand...

For years I used to be against the idea of strong armed dictators suppressing the masses in radical countries. "Give them freedom, let them have democracy, sell them Big Macs." Those were my beliefs.

Mostly this was because I never quite realized just how radical these crazies would turn out to be once unleashed. I now call democracy "DemoCrazy" and believe the strong-arm is the only stabilizing solution to keep these people in check. I can see why Trump and Putin are all in for supporting Assad.
 
calamity said:
For years I used to be against the idea of strong armed dictators suppressing the masses in radical countries. "Give them freedom, let them have democracy, sell them Big Macs." Those were my beliefs.

Mostly this was because I never quite realized just how radical these crazies would turn out to be once unleashed. I now call democracy "DemoCrazy" and believe the strong-arm is the only stabilizing solution to keep these people in check. I can see why Trump and Putin are all in for supporting Assad.
Click to expand...

Though, I doubt Russia would be incapable of a less authoritarian system, it is quite true that democracy is not a trivial affair. It needs work every day and even, where the structure is superior, making it work is quite a chore. You cannot just install a Constitution. The people have to learn how this sophisticated piece of social technology works. At the best of times this takes time. It is for this reason that longish periods of occupation after installing a democratic system seem to produce better results.

It is also true that a well functioning democracy cannot fail. After all, it is a complicated instrument made of human material.
 
calamity said:
Ok, I'm not going to blame Trump for this condition--he probably just brings it more into focus than the "kick the can down the road" types we've seen in office before him--but, IMO, we are clearly on a collision course for war. Several wars.

1. China--at the very least we will engage in a trade war. And, we probably should. Why? Well, we can't continue to farm out our own manufacturing to them, thereby feeding them trillions of dollars so that they can build a modern army, navy, air force and marines. Imagine China with a dozen aircraft carriers, and you get the drift. No way can the US allow that to happen.

2. Iran--anyone who thinks this country will allow Iran to push its weight around in the Mideast and threaten Israel is smoking crack. Obama tried to make a treaty. I call it kicking the can down the road. In the end, Iran is a growing problem. And, I suspect we will stuff them when given the chance.

3. Islam--anyone who thinks Islam itself is not a threat is smoking crack. Why? Islam does not compromise. Just ask India.

4. Russia--well, we have a few common enemies, like Islam and China. Maybe kissing some Putin ass makes sense. Certainly, it makes more sense to buddy up with a nation that is a natural enemy of both Islam and China than it would to piss them off. It sure makes sense to have a strong Russia to the East when you see Europe turning more and more Islamist. Maybe crazy like a fox that Trump is.

Just some thoughts that have been running through my head over the last two or three days.
Click to expand...


Let me just start out by saying I don't believe George W. Bush was a "kick the can down the road" kinda president.
In the summer of 1996 then Texas Lt. Governor Rick Perry stated to me that, "we are here today to look into ways to finance a Bush 2000 run."
This was a full 4+ years before the 2000 election.
I knew at that moment in time that if Bush were to become president that the US would become involved in another war in Iraq in due time.
I recall watching Colin Powell speak on LIVE television before the UN in February, 2003, as he lied about offensive weapons systems & chemical weapons within Iraq.
Bush had an agenda BEFORE he was elected & it was an agenda to make an attempt to transform the greater Middle East region into a vision of the PNACers.
Bad thing is the results of Bush's agenda in Iraq basically destabilized the whole Middle East region.
Bush was not a "kick the can down the road president."
The real irony is the bigger destabilized mess that Bush left in the Middle East will eventually have to be cleaned up by someone .......
 
cuban smokes said:
Let me just start out by saying I don't believe George W. Bush was a "kick the can down the road" kinda president.
In the summer of 1996 then Texas Lt. Governor Rick Perry stated to me that, "we are here today to look into ways to finance a Bush 2000 run."
This was a full 4+ years before the 2000 election.
I knew at that moment in time that if Bush were to become president that the US would become involved in another war in Iraq in due time.
I recall watching Colin Powell speak on LIVE television before the UN in February, 2003, as he lied about offensive weapons systems & chemical weapons within Iraq.
Bush had an agenda BEFORE he was elected & it was an agenda to make an attempt to transform the greater Middle East region into a vision of the PNACers.
Bad thing is the results of Bush's agenda in Iraq basically destabilized the whole Middle East region.
Bush was not a "kick the can down the road president."
The real irony is the bigger destabilized mess that Bush left in the Middle East will eventually have to be cleaned up by someone .......
Click to expand...

I was surprised to see just how important of a role Saddam played in stabilizing that region.
 
calamity said:
I was surprised to see just how important of a role Saddam played in stabilizing that region.
Click to expand...

I was not; Saddam was put into place for a reason & supported by elements that many to this day are still not aware of, or privy to .......

it was inevitable that once Saddam's regime was gone then the entire ME would be a Hell whole that the PNACers desired to have the US take the opportunity to mold the region into something that it can never be made into ............

there is an old saying; 'be careful what you wish for'
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom