What can be done to defuse America?

[HeyYou]

 

"Also, Donald Trump in charge when North Korea are messing about with missiles? f***ing terrifying."

IMO logically only two eventualities exist: a global ban on nuclear weapons, or something close to all countries developing them. It's simple logic, and a question nobody has credibly answered in over a half century is, which angel of the lord descended and decreed that certain countries have a right to global nuclear terror and all the rest do not? At least according to today's earthquake maps, the era of trying to keep them only in the hands of "good guys" around the world is officially over.

 

I think Trump is working overtime to either generate this conflict, or at a minimum, milk it as a wedge issue with China. I doubt he will, even once, acknowledge that the entirety of our China problem is the fault of nobody other than Richard Nixon and Henry Kissinger, and Reagan and every U.S. president and Congress since 1971. It's wholesale treason imo to force free market capitalism to compete with totalitarian Communism, because competition is not even within the realm of possibility.

 

From what I see, the only country threatening 'global nuclear terror' is North Korea. The US hasn't threatened anyone with nukes. NK, on the other hand, REGULARLY goes off on a nut threatening everyone and their cousin with 'destruction in nuclear fires'....... Even Pakistan, a country that openly supports terrorism, hasn't threatened anyone with their nukes. Nor have they used on. (much as I am sure they would like to drop a couple on India.....)

 

You can't put the Genie back in the bottle. You will never get everyone to disarm. (nuclear weapons) It just isn't going to happen. What is far more likely is that more countries are going to develop them. I suspect Iran will be next.....

[TheMastersSon]

From what I see, the only country threatening 'global nuclear terror' is North Korea

 

imo that's beyond myopic, but it's the typical "good guys" justification for possessing nuclear, chemical and other WMD. The perspective of most of the rest of the world is very different.. Our federal government is the world's primary engine for the development and sales of these military weapons and systems etc and they're among our country's biggest exports. Speaking of Iran, our military has been exporting terror at least since Operation Ajax in 1953. They've had nothing else to do since 1945.

[HeyYou]

 

From what I see, the only country threatening 'global nuclear terror' is North Korea

imo that's beyond myopic, but it's the typical "good guys" justification for possessing nuclear, chemical and other WMD. The perspective of most of the rest of the world is very different.. Our federal government is the world's primary engine for the development and sales of these military weapons and systems etc and they're among our country's biggest exports. Speaking of Iran, our military has been exporting terror at least since Operation Ajax in 1953. They've had nothing else to do since 1945.

 

We aren't generally in the habit of selling nukes to anyone..... (aside from perhaps Israel.....) We did indeed stupidly sell 'dual use' items to Iraq though.... Yeah, Saddam got his WMD capability from the US...... Then we killed him for having it. Nice, don't you think? (even though he had already sent most of it away......)

 

The US has had nuclear weapons since 1944, so far, out of the thousands that we have, we have used...... two. Nowhere have we threatened anyone with nuclear weapons. Not even when they are threatening US with them.....

 

What I find REALLY interesting though, is we invaded Iraq because we 'thought' they were attempting to make nukes. At the time, we knew NK had a nuclear weapons program as well, and even after they tested a couple we still didn't do anything about it. Why? No oil. The whole "WMD" thing was just a smokescreen, the REAL reason we went into Iraq was for the oil. The government lied, and thousand of americans died. (and hundreds of thousands of Iraqis.....) If you look around, you will find articles with statements from the residents of the various countries we have screwed up, that they were BETTER OFF BEFORE we showed up. And it isn't just a few of the residents, it's the majority of them. Yep, the good ol' US of A is a terrorist state. We just put a prettier name on it.

 

Yes, there are a lot of issues with our foreign policy, and it's implementation, but, still, I don't see the world EVER being 'nuclear free' again.

 

Do I AGREE with what our government is doing? Not hardly. We have done more to destabilize the middle east than ANY (all?) terrorist group. And what's even worse is, our government won't admit the major blunder they have perpetrated, and think we should keep going on our present course..... Lets pile some flat out stupidity on top of our previous idiocy. What's worse is, Bush senior KNEW this would happen, TOLD his boy, and his boy ignored him. He wanted his war, Cheney wanted the oil. Now we have the middle east in flames. And it is COMPLETELY OUR FAULT. Basically, all we have accomplished is turn the entire area into a terrorist training ground, complete with real americans to shoot at/blow up. Yeah, that was a good plan.......

[vixsyn]

The US has had nuclear weapons since 1944, so far, out of the thousands that we have, we have used...... two.

It's a good example but let's look that that in context... the US has used two... the only two ever to be used offensively. So in actual effect the US is the only country to follow through on a threat of nuclear weapons.

 

But again, in context, we could say that at the time they didn't actually know the full extent of what they were doing. Sure, some eggheads had said it was probably not a good idea, but you don't know until you try, right?

 

Also TheMasterSon didn't specify nukes - they said "development and sales of these military weapons and systems." And to say the US doesn't sell a variety of weapons to potentially "terrorist" states is like saying the sun doesn't set in the west. Arms deals with various countries are publically reported. And it's not like the US only sells weapons to countries with installed democracies - they sell to several countries with atrocious human rights records, countries that treat their own people with scorn and execute them for even thinking about protesting. Obvious case of this: Saudi Arabia. But god forbid putting human interest above good oil prices. But you clearly know that from the rest of what you said.

 

The idea that some countries get to have nukes and others don't is a pretty huge injustice. Who gets to say who is a terrorist anyway? I'm sure the tens of thousands of Afghani civilians who died as some sort of vengeance for 9/11 didn't feel like they were being liberated or that they were being justifiably punished. An indiscriminate bombing campaign against their country because a faction that was also terrorising them had decided to attack America? Was that fair?

 

Of course, this is meant to be about what can defuse America now. But it's still relevant to a degree. A problem with the US and its involvment in everyone elses wars (or starting them because apparently other peoples' political ideologies are enough reason to attack them) is that none of it is at home. The human cost of these conflicts largely only affects the military, it's not happening in the streets. Many other countries involved in global conflicts have seen hundreds of years of wars at home and abroad, they have a history as aggressors and as victims, and their people have been directly affected in their daily lives by war, whether it was hunkering down in a pig sty to avoid being bombed or by taking refugees into their homes and seeing the suffering of not knowing what had happened to their friends and families. Without that experience to relate to, it may be a little too easy to support going to war. It's not in your back yard, so why should you care that much?

 

Let's not forget Trump's threat to "rain down fire and fury the likes of which the world has never seen" when it comes to making threats.

 

Perhaps everyone needs to have more patience and understanding, and less hate in their hearts. That's too idealistic though, isn't it?

[HeyYou]

Life isn't fair. Neither is international relations. Just ask China. :)

 

People NEED someone to hate..... it distracts them from the woes of their own life. Governments like to give folks a target for their hate, so the folks aren't hating on THEM.

 

Yet another example of the US governments hypocrisy: We won't do anything with Cuba, because of their 'human rights' record, and, they are a communist government.... But, China, with a worse human rights record, and a communist government, gets 'most favored nation' status.... And yes, Saudi Arabia is yet another shining example. Some of our 'friends' are MUCH worse than the folks we try and vilify.......

 

But anyway...... getting back to the original topic, :) Personally, I don't think there is ANYTHING we can do to 'defuse' america. This is yet another genie that we can't put back in the bottle. So long as one side absolutely refuses to admit that their current "I am a victim" culture is the leading cause of their problems, nothing is going to change. In fact, I expect it to get worse, before things get any better. If they EVER get any better.... Maybe in a few thousand years, when mankind has interbred enough that we are all pretty much the same color...... providing we can last that long, without killing ourselves off.

[TexMex477]

 

IMO logically only two eventualities exist: a global ban on nuclear weapons, or something close to all countries developing them

 

 

How was there even logic involved in that?

That is the same nonsense saying if you outlaw all guns criminals won't break the law to use a gun.

[TheMastersSon]

 

 

IMO logically only two eventualities exist: a global ban on nuclear weapons, or something close to all countries developing them

 

 

How was there even logic involved in that?

That is the same nonsense saying if you outlaw all guns criminals won't break the law to use a gun.

 

It's no stretch of logic at all to claim a defense issue is created for everyone, as long as anyone possesses WMD.

[HeyYou]

 

 

 

IMO logically only two eventualities exist: a global ban on nuclear weapons, or something close to all countries developing them

 

 

How was there even logic involved in that?

That is the same nonsense saying if you outlaw all guns criminals won't break the law to use a gun.

 

It's no stretch of logic at all to claim a defense issue is created for everyone, as long as anyone possesses WMD.

 

And so long as someone has them, everyone else is going to want them as well.

 

As I said before, you can't put the genie back in the bottle.

[TheMastersSon]

 

 

And so long as someone has them, everyone else is going to want them as well.

 

That's the same response I had for TexMex477. It's not only basic logic and human nature but established history. Look at the list for any WMD, e.g.:

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemical_weapon_proliferation

 

and tell us how many of these countries are friends of the U.S. Our own WMD arsenal is responsible for a major portion of the list.

[HeyYou]

 

And so long as someone has them, everyone else is going to want them as well.

 

That's the same response I had for TexMex477. It's not only basic logic and human nature but established history. Look at the list for any WMD, e.g.:

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemical_weapon_proliferation

 

and tell us how many of these countries are friends of the U.S. Our own WMD arsenal is responsible for a major portion of the list.

 

Iraq being on the list doesn't really do much for their credibility, considering we spent YEARS looking for WMD's in Iraq, after taking out Saddam, and found some ancient artillery shells (which WE had sold Saddam) and that was it.

 

Regardless, it seems to me the US has more enemies than friends, which only reinforces my contention that folks are going to be very unwilling to give up their nukes, if they already have them, and we can look forward to other folks developing them.