Why the hell would they use such NUCLEAR WEAPONS if they knew that MANY people will be affected as well as other living things.wtf is happening to the world right now
This is the same argument most often used to justify tyranny - that you need a big bully lording over everyone to keep the smaller players from becoming bullies themselves. The argument ignores non-military forms of power, ignores motivations for player behavior other than short-term rational self-interest, and pre-empts discussion of the long-term consequences of US hegemony.
What protects Aus is the fact that they are in the COMMONWEALTH. There are many political nuances to messing with the commonwealth and any Aus worth his salt would recognize this. US economic supremacy is propped up primarily on arms sales and to a lesser extent narcotic distribution via the C.I.A. and the US dollar the defacto currency for oil sales world wide. remove 1 leg on the 3 leg stool and you get collapse. It's not complicated. Just hard for some to accept is all.
I think the need for global US protection is kind of overstated but I understand alot of the mindset from the cold war still lingers. In todays world however I would say that most countries, certainly ones in "the west", have little to fear in terms of military or even terrorist attacks.
Also reducing the amount of nukes from the numbers they are in now wont matter too much I dont think. You dont need the obscene amounts that were stockpiled during the cold war.
There was documents talking about US and world wide nuclear disarmament back in the 60s during the Kennedy admin. They stated that the individual countries would disarm and allow the UN to have sole power over nukes. So they can be a global authority.
what a load of bullcrap. nobody cares about US protection. wars are fought economically. Turkey would have nothing to fear from Iran and Japan doesn't have anything to fear from anyone.
Well, wrong person to ask that to. Let's see, I've lived in Europe- Czech Repubic, driven through France, Germany, Italy, England Scotland, Ireland and Wales. I've paddled down the Me'kong delta in Viet 'Nam into Cambodia, flown numerous times around south east asia and Japan. As well as wrapping up a 4,500 miles drive through RSA (Republic of South Africa), Namibia, Botswana and Zambia. Let me guess, you've been to a few countries and since most Americans dont travel you feel like that
qualifies you to comment on positions of Foreign Policy. Further, I don't use my travel experience and my remarkable amount of international friends as a way to legitimize my arguments, which by the very nature of your question, you imply that is your tactic. Even if someone had never left their town, it does not mean they know nothing of Foreign Policy. Please, do tell me, what country doesn't care about U.S. Protection, of the countries that receive it? This is like talking to a pile of hay
You answer by asking a question, and then think to yourself "I'm so smart"- have you considered answering the question? or just asking more questions? in that case it's not a conversation, its an interrogation, and I'm not keen on interrogations
LOL. maybe you need to look at your first reply to my message, because that is EXACTLY what you did. and the interrogation crap makes no sense at all. you never addressed my claims, all you did was act like you know the answers.
Why the hell would they use such NUCLEAR WEAPONS if they knew that MANY people will be affected as well as other living things.wtf is happening to the world right now
xxxCARLxxx004 10 months ago
This is the same argument most often used to justify tyranny - that you need a big bully lording over everyone to keep the smaller players from becoming bullies themselves. The argument ignores non-military forms of power, ignores motivations for player behavior other than short-term rational self-interest, and pre-empts discussion of the long-term consequences of US hegemony.
funkalunatic 2 years ago
Could not talking make you louder? I think this guy should try it.
r22k10 2 years ago
What protects Aus is the fact that they are in the COMMONWEALTH. There are many political nuances to messing with the commonwealth and any Aus worth his salt would recognize this. US economic supremacy is propped up primarily on arms sales and to a lesser extent narcotic distribution via the C.I.A. and the US dollar the defacto currency for oil sales world wide. remove 1 leg on the 3 leg stool and you get collapse. It's not complicated. Just hard for some to accept is all.
Darkhorse21x 2 years ago
I think the need for global US protection is kind of overstated but I understand alot of the mindset from the cold war still lingers. In todays world however I would say that most countries, certainly ones in "the west", have little to fear in terms of military or even terrorist attacks.
Also reducing the amount of nukes from the numbers they are in now wont matter too much I dont think. You dont need the obscene amounts that were stockpiled during the cold war.
Thealazor 2 years ago
daddy ameracER
Steadno 2 years ago
There was documents talking about US and world wide nuclear disarmament back in the 60s during the Kennedy admin. They stated that the individual countries would disarm and allow the UN to have sole power over nukes. So they can be a global authority.
Daniel44125 2 years ago
what a load of bullcrap. nobody cares about US protection. wars are fought economically. Turkey would have nothing to fear from Iran and Japan doesn't have anything to fear from anyone.
Finiras 2 years ago
How old are you? and have you ever read a book? a non-fiction one to be specific?
Checkpoint360 2 years ago
have you ever been outside the united states? do you know anything relevant about the military and relationships of those countries?
Finiras 2 years ago
Well, wrong person to ask that to. Let's see, I've lived in Europe- Czech Repubic, driven through France, Germany, Italy, England Scotland, Ireland and Wales. I've paddled down the Me'kong delta in Viet 'Nam into Cambodia, flown numerous times around south east asia and Japan. As well as wrapping up a 4,500 miles drive through RSA (Republic of South Africa), Namibia, Botswana and Zambia. Let me guess, you've been to a few countries and since most Americans dont travel you feel like that
Checkpoint360 2 years ago
qualifies you to comment on positions of Foreign Policy. Further, I don't use my travel experience and my remarkable amount of international friends as a way to legitimize my arguments, which by the very nature of your question, you imply that is your tactic. Even if someone had never left their town, it does not mean they know nothing of Foreign Policy. Please, do tell me, what country doesn't care about U.S. Protection, of the countries that receive it? This is like talking to a pile of hay
Checkpoint360 2 years ago
I'm not american. why dont you list the countries that need protecting by the US?
you simply don't know what you're talking about.
pretty much the only country that countries need defending from is the US ITSELF.
Finiras 2 years ago 2
You answer by asking a question, and then think to yourself "I'm so smart"- have you considered answering the question? or just asking more questions? in that case it's not a conversation, its an interrogation, and I'm not keen on interrogations
Checkpoint360 2 years ago
LOL. maybe you need to look at your first reply to my message, because that is EXACTLY what you did. and the interrogation crap makes no sense at all. you never addressed my claims, all you did was act like you know the answers.
Finiras 2 years ago
@Finiras what about north korea, china, and russia...if we didnt have nuclear bombs, they would conquer us in a heart beat
lomeloft 1 year ago