Jolly Roger
Yes. I am a Pirate.
....troubling to say the least.
I don't think this is going to have pleasant end as we all would like.
I don't think this is going to have pleasant end as we all would like.
-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
New Iran-Syria developments....
- Thread starter Jolly Roger
- Start date
- Status
Jolly Roger said:
I don't think so either. Another issue to deal with. Why can't these middle east countries just live free and prosperous lives? They sit on pure money.
American_Ace
AFROTC
WOOOHOOOO, there will be plenty of war left for me when I finally get a commission and hopefully a pilot slot!
American_Ace said:
That's nice.
Hell, why don't you make sure "there [is] plenty of war left" and enlist today. The Marines fell short of their recruiting mark for the first time in decades last month, and we are always recruiting infantrymen.
Break,
I honestly wouldn't be too worried about this all. It seems like pure posturing. If anyone were to take immediate action, I would say Israel would probably be the first, then Europe. As much as Europe pontificates about "liberal values" and "peace-loving," I still cannot fathom them allowing Iran to go nuclear. This is especially plausible when you consider that if Iran were to attain nuclear warheads, they would undoubtedly be able to reach nearly all of Western Europe.
Maybe I am wrong though, maybe they ARE so soft they would let their neighbors one-up them like that.
gaijin6423
Ask me about ninjas!
"Pontificate" is the greatest word ever...
In looking at which country will do what about Iran, the important question is what form of international relations does each nation favor. Specifically, do they desire uni-, bi-, multi-polar systems? The entire Cold War was a perfect example of a bi-polar international relations system, where two super powers vied against one another for predominance. Although the situation seemed very tense (not to mention all the paranoia), that way of things was inherently far more stable than anything we have today, as the two biggies kept all the little crazies in line. Today, the world is becoming a vastly more multi-polar environment, though. Some countries argue that the international environment will be much more stable if each nation is given the same level playing field (i.e.: If they have nukes). Personally, though, the idea of just one country ruled by a complete whack-job dictator holding the capability to vaporize my family is scary. Imagine if EVERY third-world--or even second world--country had nukes... It'd be like the wild west all over again, but instead of a drunk guy shooting someone else, there'd be entire cities lain to waste. Yeah, not so good.
In looking at which country will do what about Iran, the important question is what form of international relations does each nation favor. Specifically, do they desire uni-, bi-, multi-polar systems? The entire Cold War was a perfect example of a bi-polar international relations system, where two super powers vied against one another for predominance. Although the situation seemed very tense (not to mention all the paranoia), that way of things was inherently far more stable than anything we have today, as the two biggies kept all the little crazies in line. Today, the world is becoming a vastly more multi-polar environment, though. Some countries argue that the international environment will be much more stable if each nation is given the same level playing field (i.e.: If they have nukes). Personally, though, the idea of just one country ruled by a complete whack-job dictator holding the capability to vaporize my family is scary. Imagine if EVERY third-world--or even second world--country had nukes... It'd be like the wild west all over again, but instead of a drunk guy shooting someone else, there'd be entire cities lain to waste. Yeah, not so good.
perchul
Registered User
Ah, I think Ken Waltz is going to die soon. I don't think the polar systems really apply to todays world. The polar systems only recognize nations not unitys. No Nation in the middle east would try to go to war with us, but throughout the mid-east there is an underlying nation with no borders that will. I think Bush trying to set up democratic states in the mid-east he is more going towards the democratic peace thesis...people will soon hate us gaijin.
gaijin6423
Ask me about ninjas!
You mean they don't hate us already?
As far as the arab state is concerned, the area is essentially one big nation. It was Churchill who drew the borders after WWI for the Middle East, and it's caused nothing but problems since then. The same thing happened when Africa was carved up, too. And it makes sense if you think about it, because you're basically taking people from totally different backgrounds and saying, "*BAM!* You are now... An Iraqi!" That wouldn't work anywhere else, and it definitely didn't work in an area with as long a memory for acts against its people as the arab region.
I do think that you're right about the democratic peace idea being persued, though. Personally, I think we should just set up a bunch of McDonald's throughout the entire region. Can you think of two nations with a McDonald's presence that have fought recently? Or even at all? I mean, I could be wrong.
As far as the arab state is concerned, the area is essentially one big nation. It was Churchill who drew the borders after WWI for the Middle East, and it's caused nothing but problems since then. The same thing happened when Africa was carved up, too. And it makes sense if you think about it, because you're basically taking people from totally different backgrounds and saying, "*BAM!* You are now... An Iraqi!" That wouldn't work anywhere else, and it definitely didn't work in an area with as long a memory for acts against its people as the arab region.
I do think that you're right about the democratic peace idea being persued, though. Personally, I think we should just set up a bunch of McDonald's throughout the entire region. Can you think of two nations with a McDonald's presence that have fought recently? Or even at all? I mean, I could be wrong.
HueyCobra8151 said:
Damn right. Everyone here should know about Osiraq and the absolutely brilliant strike the Israelis made on it.
That being said, I believe you are wrong. How do you think Osiraq was built? Why, golly, the French! It's not secret that the Germans (albeit East German at the time) were also contributing to the Middle East Nuclear Society. Europe is full of Muslims. They're not going to do too much to piss them off.
You are right. I must have been drunk when I posted that, I was actually using common sense to try and decide what Europe would do.
In reality they would hold an "EMERGENCY CAUCUS OF THE EU" if Iran got nukes.
Then they would all decide that they didn't have the "moral authority" to deprive Iran of the fundamental right to have nuclear weapons. The countries with high muslim populations, in order to appear as un-racist and anti-semitic as possible, would probably then make a motion to give Iran money and arms with which to defend it's nuclear facilities from war-mongering Israel and America.
Is that better for you?
- Status