The article I posted makes an interesting case about this as most people would've imagined World War III to be a confrontation between major powers with the likelihood of a nuclear exchange. This makes me wonder about the events during the Kennedy Administration that led up to the Cuban Missile Crisis which almost led us toward a nuclear war between Cuba and the Soviet Union back when Fidel Castro was in power that almost triggered World War III. That was nearly 50 years ago which was during the height of the Cold War when Russia was still a communist nation.
Currently the major power players in this exchange are ISIS/ISIL (a.k.a. the Islamic State), the Ukrainian rebels, and the Libyan insurgents with Russia, Turkey, and Iran eventually playing a major role in the war as well. As the United States became a war weary nation for going into Iraq and Afghanistan in the last decade, ISIS/ISIL is poised to take over Baghdad and the Iraqi Government while Afghanistan is still a mess as well but not nearly as bad as in Iraq right now depending on how you look at it.
Unless this war is contained it will escalate into a global conflict that risks nuclear confrontation most likely from Iran and perhaps Russia If Putin is as crazy as Hitler was during WWII. North Korea on the other hand has been sitting on the sidelines lately with Kim Jong Un's whereabouts unknown but I can't rule out the possibly of the nuclear threat they could pose in the near future. I can't see the United States putting the nuclear option on the table since President Obama cut it's nuclear stockpile in order to persuade Iran to end it's nuclear weapons program.
"Restriction breeds creativity." - Sheldon Menery on EDH / Commander in Magic: The Gathering
"Cancel Culture is the real reason why everyone's not allowed to have nice things anymore." - Anonymous
"For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world, and loses his own soul?" - Mark 8:36
"Most men and women will grow up to love their servitude and will never dream of revolution." - Aldous Huxley, Brave New World
"Every life decision is always a risk / reward proposition." - Sanjay Gupta
I do not think any of the current conflicts taking place will result in escalation to nuclear warfare. Asymmetric nuclear warfare would be condemned wholesale, and I can't see any of the countries resorting to that. Currently there are no conflicts between two nuclear powers, and if there were, the thread of mutually-assured destruction would dissuade the nuclear option (though, more than that, it dissuades those countries from directly conflicting with each other in the first place).
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
My Moderator Helpdesk
Currently Playing:
Legacy: Something U/W Controlish EDH Cube
Hypercube! A New EDH Deck Every Week(ish)!
There will not be a nuclear war, or a great powers war of any description, over the current conflicts in the Middle East. Right now, it's basically ISIS vs. everybody else, and ISIS does not have nukes and is not a great power. Take ISIS out of the equation, and you've got the Syrian civil war. Russia and the West back different teams there, but neither has any incentive whatsoever to start shooting at each other directly. Hell, the West at least has been doing its damnedest to pretend nothing is happening in Syria for three years now.
In East Asia, China is being a maritime bully, but even though the responses of the other nations involved (Japan in particular) have sometimes exacerbated the situation, it has still remained basically within the framework of international diplomacy as recognized in the post-World-War-II order. I cannot see it escalating into a shooting war any more than any other tensions between great powers have escalated into shooting wars since 1945. The way for China to start World War III would be by invading Taiwan, and they haven't been making any more threatening noises than usual on that front, because they don't want to start World War III. Now, North Korea is harder to assess. I think their long-term strategy is just to continue extorting the civilized world for concessions. This is, let's be honest, a pretty stable plan as long as they keep their expectations realistic, which they have so far. If they do start a war, they could kill many many people in the region, but it would be over very very fast. China would not back them up. In fact, China seems to be getting increasingly fed up with their antics. It would not be so much a war as one little country committing a suicide bombing.
Ukraine is a lot like Syria, in that the West has made it clear they're not going to get directly involved in the fighting. So World War III is not in the cards there. The threat in Europe is that Russia calls the bluff that is NATO by stirring up some ***** in the Baltic countries. And unlike China invading Taiwan, I'm actually worried that this might happen. Putin's Russia is really terrifying. He's cemented control domestically, and been going from success to success internationally. He's got a nationalist-messianic complex that's visible from the Moon, and historically, at this stage in their careers, people like him usually feel invincible. So if he tries his usual "implausible deniability" tactics in Estonia or Latvia, he may expect that NATO will back down because he is not overtly committing an act of aggression against a member state, the way we largely ignored Georgia and demurred over Ukraine. But as frustrated as I am with the fecklessness of Western leadership in the face of international crises, I think this would be a catastrophic misreading of the situation on Putin's part: Obama, Cameron, and the rest have been clear that although they aren't doing much about it, they don't actually believe the lies he's peddling. So another proxy conflict in a NATO nation would have to be taken as an act of aggression. The question is whether Putin is too overconfident to see it this way.
If war does break out between nuclear powers, I think Wildfire393 may be correct that the MAD threat keeps nuclear weapons from being deployed, as long as neither side feels like it is in an existential crisis. This would be a very bad development - not nearly as bad as if the nukes are deployed, of course, but still a fundamental blow to the post-World-War-II order. Because, of course, it has been the threat of nuclear escalation that has kept the great powers from going to war after 1945 the way they did fairly regularly before then. If they get the message that they can still advance their interests by fighting old-style conventional wars without nukes, that's going to start happening again.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Vive, vale. Siquid novisti rectius istis,
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
Unless this war is contained it will escalate into a global conflict that risks nuclear confrontation most likely from Iran and perhaps Russia If Putin is as crazy as Hitler was during WWII. North Korea on the other hand has been sitting on the sidelines lately with Kim Jong Un's whereabouts unknown but I can't rule out the possibly of the nuclear threat they could pose in the near future. I can't see the United States putting the nuclear option on the table since President Obama cut it's nuclear stockpile in order to persuade Iran to end it's nuclear weapons program. [/color]
How do you suppose that conflicts fought by countries in the Middle East will affect countries in East Asia?
And N. Korea is the most rational political actor in recent history. Unless someone actually pushes them to the breaking point (as in actually declare outright war on them), N. Korea won't ever do anything.
Unless this war is contained it will escalate into a global conflict that risks nuclear confrontation most likely from Iran and perhaps Russia If Putin is as crazy as Hitler was during WWII. North Korea on the other hand has been sitting on the sidelines lately with Kim Jong Un's whereabouts unknown but I can't rule out the possibly of the nuclear threat they could pose in the near future. I can't see the United States putting the nuclear option on the table since President Obama cut it's nuclear stockpile in order to persuade Iran to end it's nuclear weapons program. [/color]
How do you suppose that conflicts fought by countries in the Middle East will affect countries in East Asia?
And N. Korea is the most rational political actor in recent history. Unless someone actually pushes them to the breaking point (as in actually declare outright war on them), N. Korea won't ever do anything.
North Korea does fine playing the brinkmanship card, within reason. That position is precarious and can fail at a moment's notice. I also don't put as much stock in Tehran wanting to push things into a position where they could trigger the destruction of their entire nation. The nuclear deterrence is very powerful. Many of the close calls we had with WWIII were during the Cold War and involved the U.S.S.R.
How do you suppose that conflicts fought by countries in the Middle East will affect countries in East Asia?
The only way I can see that happening is If ISIS manages to spread their influence outside the Middle East like they have recently with the United States, Australia, and the United Kingdom. Most of their money comes from ransoms and taking control of oil refineries in the Middle East by selling the oil to the black market while recruiting people to join their cause through social media.
Quote from Blinking Spirit »
Putin's Russia is really terrifying. He's cemented control domestically, and been going from success to success internationally. He's got a nationalist-messianic complex that's visible from the Moon, and historically, at this stage in their careers, people like him usually feel invincible.
I did hear rumors that Putin is conspiring with Iran and other nations in the Middle East against Israel by taking advantage of U.S. military exhaustion in the region in order to get even with the U.S. for defeating the Soviet Union. Dismantling the religious foundation of the U.S. by destroying Israel was his and our enemy's game plan from the get go.
"Restriction breeds creativity." - Sheldon Menery on EDH / Commander in Magic: The Gathering
"Cancel Culture is the real reason why everyone's not allowed to have nice things anymore." - Anonymous
"For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world, and loses his own soul?" - Mark 8:36
"Most men and women will grow up to love their servitude and will never dream of revolution." - Aldous Huxley, Brave New World
"Every life decision is always a risk / reward proposition." - Sanjay Gupta
Putin's Russia is really terrifying. He's cemented control domestically, and been going from success to success internationally. He's got a nationalist-messianic complex that's visible from the Moon, and historically, at this stage in their careers, people like him usually feel invincible.
I did hear rumors that Putin is conspiring with Iran and other nations in the Middle East against Israel by taking advantage of U.S. military exhaustion in the region in order to get even with the U.S. for defeating the Soviet Union. Dismantling the religious foundation of the U.S. by destroying Israel was his and our enemies' game plan from the get go.[/quote]
First off, Israel isn't the religious foundation of the US. The whole Zionist thing is a long history that does involve the Great Awakening that occurred during the 1970's, but let us be honest. The greatest amount of Jews in the world live in New York City. If Israel falls, we would profit. It would not trigger another Crusade, or whatever. Israel has for the last half century maintained a superior military force than all their neighbors. I offer this piece of evidence:
Israel has only gotten more powerful since then, and they play the "Japanese nuclear game." In that they posses nuclear weapons but have them disassembled in secret locations that if they want to become a nuclear power they can, but aren't "really a nuclear power." Hypocrites much? Whatever, when you know the truth that they're like Pakistan, Japan, and friends in the "we're not really nuclear but we really are" with a nod and wink. You can comprehend that Israel has little to worry about without a major power backing an Arab state.
Furthermore, there are states that do a lot of trading with Israel like Jordan that view Israel more and more of a strategic piece in their ability to hold their state together than an outright boogyman. And even if the Israelis would stop screwing off with Palestine, there would not be peace in the Middle East because wierdo's would find something else to gripe about. Considering most of the Middle East was created with magical crayons without regard to real borders, we're in a corrections era.
Besides, there are powers in the Middle East that do not want the west nor the east involved such as Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Turkey. They do and they don't, so as long as the intervention benefits them and their agenda of the moment. Middle Eastern politics is a lot like a bazaar, mostly haggling over the price of blood than actually doing much "big stuff."
As for US military exhaustion, that's up for debate. I'm against invasion into Syria, because it is not our job to play global police man. The Europeans are big boys now and are a fully healed state that did not pick up much of a burden during the last 10 years with regard to war. They could easily have renuclearized Ukraine and pushed back the Russians out. The Ukrainians denuclearized with a treaty from Russia that they would never invade, which was worthless and supports again the main reason why I'm against denuclearization.
Russia didn't want us to extend weapons into neighboring states for a long while, perhaps it's time we rearmed the old border to keep the Ruskies out for the time being until they grow up.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Life is a beautiful engineer, yet a brutal scientist.
If Israel falls, we would profit. It would not trigger another Crusade, or whatever.
We wouldn't profit since China owns our debt, If Israel falls then so does the United States. Also look into George Washington's 1789 Thanksgiving Day Proclamation (which Highroller correctly provided when I mistakenly posted the entire speech on this thread word for word) that warned about the consequence of the United States turning it's back on God and His blessings:
As for US military exhaustion, that's up for debate. I'm against invasion into Syria, because it is not our job to play global police man.
The two major offenders of the current U.S. military fatigue we face right now is Iraq and Afghanistan. Saddam Hussein never had weapons of mass destruction when we invaded in 2003 yet Bush 43 sold it to us on a lie propelled by anger from the attacks on 9/11 as a means to obtain oil in the region while we invaded Afghanistan for lithium aside from suppressing the Taliban. It wasn't until Obama took office that we were able to get rid of Osama bin Laden in Pakistan while we never would've invaded Syria and Libya If we hadn't of invaded Iraq and Afghanistan in the last decade that got us in this mess in the first place.
"Restriction breeds creativity." - Sheldon Menery on EDH / Commander in Magic: The Gathering
"Cancel Culture is the real reason why everyone's not allowed to have nice things anymore." - Anonymous
"For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world, and loses his own soul?" - Mark 8:36
"Most men and women will grow up to love their servitude and will never dream of revolution." - Aldous Huxley, Brave New World
"Every life decision is always a risk / reward proposition." - Sanjay Gupta
How else was I supposed to get the information regarding President Washington's speech from 1789? If it makes you feel any better here's the link where I originally got it from:
"Restriction breeds creativity." - Sheldon Menery on EDH / Commander in Magic: The Gathering
"Cancel Culture is the real reason why everyone's not allowed to have nice things anymore." - Anonymous
"For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world, and loses his own soul?" - Mark 8:36
"Most men and women will grow up to love their servitude and will never dream of revolution." - Aldous Huxley, Brave New World
"Every life decision is always a risk / reward proposition." - Sanjay Gupta
I'm pretty sure that it was his actual speech except that the website I got it from had it separated in paragraphs. I'd rather get back on topic instead of changing the subject any further.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
America Bless Christ Jesus
"Restriction breeds creativity." - Sheldon Menery on EDH / Commander in Magic: The Gathering
"Cancel Culture is the real reason why everyone's not allowed to have nice things anymore." - Anonymous
"For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world, and loses his own soul?" - Mark 8:36
"Most men and women will grow up to love their servitude and will never dream of revolution." - Aldous Huxley, Brave New World
"Every life decision is always a risk / reward proposition." - Sanjay Gupta
The article I posted makes an interesting case about this as most people would've imagined World War III to be a confrontation between major powers with the likelihood of a nuclear exchange. This makes me wonder about the events during the Kennedy Administration that led up to the Cuban Missile Crisis which almost led us toward a nuclear war between Cuba and the Soviet Union back when Fidel Castro was in power that almost triggered World War III. That was nearly 50 years ago which was during the height of the Cold War when Russia was still a communist nation.
Currently the major power players in this exchange are ISIS/ISIL (a.k.a. the Islamic State), the Ukrainian rebels, and the Libyan insurgents with Russia, Turkey, and Iran eventually playing a major role in the war as well.
With the exception of Russia, what about any of these others constitutes a "major power player"?
Unless this war is contained it will escalate into a global conflict that risks nuclear confrontation most likely from Iran and perhaps Russia If Putin is as crazy as Hitler was during WWII.
How?
North Korea on the other hand has been sitting on the sidelines lately with Kim Jong Un's whereabouts unknown but I can't rule out the possibly of the nuclear threat they could pose in the near future.
Wait, so you believe that North Korea will ally with ISIL?
I can't see the United States putting the nuclear option on the table since President Obama cut it's nuclear stockpile in order to persuade Iran to end it's nuclear weapons program.
So then how, exactly, is there going to be a nuclear war?
Unless this war is contained it will escalate into a global conflict that risks nuclear confrontation most likely from Iran and perhaps Russia If Putin is as crazy as Hitler was during WWII. North Korea on the other hand has been sitting on the sidelines lately with Kim Jong Un's whereabouts unknown but I can't rule out the possibly of the nuclear threat they could pose in the near future. [/color]
This doesn't seem like a believable reality to me.
For starter's, Hitler and Putin are completely different animals. Both are/were smart, in Putin's case very clever indeed, but Putin isn't crazy at all.
I don't believe Putin would risk nuclear war either, there's nothing for Russia to gain out of it > if you look at all the actions that Putin has been involved in, in the last decade, all of them had something to gain for Russia.
North Korea? Seriously? Has George Bush really left that much of an impression on you?
The country is bankrupt, their leadership is equally feared & hated by their people, and they have very little chance of anything positive (for them) coming from a war they couldn't sustain. They are not a threat to the west > to Japan and South Korea maybe, but if you're not living in those countries you have nothing to fear as their missles can't reach western targets.
According to my sis-in-law, currently living in South Korea, she says the feeling south of the border is that it's only a matter of time before a military coup brings the whole thing down....
Honestly, the only countries in the world I'm personally afraid of actually using nuclear weapons (besides the US that is) is Pakistan and India.
A lot of bad blood between these two....
While there is a possibility of a nuclear conflict unfolding it's more or less going to result in old-style conventional wars without nukes as Blinking Spirit suggested.
So then how, exactly, is there going to be a nuclear war?
There's not right now since as Blinking Spirit said before that what's going on is an old-style conventional war that's being fought over resources in the Middle East.
I typed in "1789 George Washington Thanksigiving Day" into Google. It was the first result I got.
Well that could've saved me the trouble of getting an infraction earlier. I should've just posted the link like you have instead of posting the entire speech word for word. I was just trying to make a point but I got in trouble for it, so that's that. :/
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
America Bless Christ Jesus
"Restriction breeds creativity." - Sheldon Menery on EDH / Commander in Magic: The Gathering
"Cancel Culture is the real reason why everyone's not allowed to have nice things anymore." - Anonymous
"For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world, and loses his own soul?" - Mark 8:36
"Most men and women will grow up to love their servitude and will never dream of revolution." - Aldous Huxley, Brave New World
"Every life decision is always a risk / reward proposition." - Sanjay Gupta
They are not a threat to the west > to Japan and South Korea maybe, but if you're not living in those countries you have nothing to fear as their missles can't reach western targets.
I care about people who are not me. Even if I didn't, the nuclear immolation of East Asia just might have some effect on the global economy, ecology, and culture.
Honestly, the only countries in the world I'm personally afraid of actually using nuclear weapons (besides the US that is) is Pakistan and India.
A lot of bad blood between these two....
There's not right now since as Blinking Spirit said before that what's going on is an old-style conventional war that's being fought over resources in the Middle East.
That's not what I said.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Vive, vale. Siquid novisti rectius istis,
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
Well what is happening right now is old-style conventional war without nukes which is what I was trying to get at earlier.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
America Bless Christ Jesus
"Restriction breeds creativity." - Sheldon Menery on EDH / Commander in Magic: The Gathering
"Cancel Culture is the real reason why everyone's not allowed to have nice things anymore." - Anonymous
"For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world, and loses his own soul?" - Mark 8:36
"Most men and women will grow up to love their servitude and will never dream of revolution." - Aldous Huxley, Brave New World
"Every life decision is always a risk / reward proposition." - Sanjay Gupta
They are not a threat to the west > to Japan and South Korea maybe, but if you're not living in those countries you have nothing to fear as their missles can't reach western targets.
I care about people who are not me. Even if I didn't, the nuclear immolation of East Asia just might have some effect on the global economy, ecology, and culture.
Agreed.
I was really suggesting that George Bush declaring North Korea was a threat to the USA as unrealistic.
Honestly, the only countries in the world I'm personally afraid of actually using nuclear weapons (besides the US that is) is Pakistan and India.
A lot of bad blood between these two....
And there isn't between North and South Korea?
Sure.
But do both countries have nukes?
No they don't, South Korea does not have any nukes, nor builds them, and actually has a govt policy against building them.
> And that's my point.
Add in the fact that the Hindi's and Muslim's have a long history of bad blood and quite a lot of blood spilt, for example the feud over Kashmir.
Of all the ways we could end up with a 3rd nuke hitting a populated area, after Hiroshima & Nagasaki, I would suggest Pakistan or India have a good chance of either firing one, or receiving one. When you consider that Pakistan has had a long history of unstable govt and military coups, the risk of the nukes going into the hands of someone willing to actually fire one isn't unrealistic.
They are not a threat to the west > to Japan and South Korea maybe, but if you're not living in those countries you have nothing to fear as their missles can't reach western targets.
You do realize that we have military bases there, right?
Also, not really seeing how someone capable of attacking our two greatest allies in the region is something you'd label as "not a threat."
I was really suggesting that George Bush declaring North Korea was a threat to the USA as unrealistic.
You're the only person to bring up Bush in this thread. Get over the guy. It's been six years since he left office, and twelve years since the "Axis of Evil" speech.
Sure.
But do both countries have nukes?
No they don't, South Korea does not have any nukes, nor builds them, and actually has a govt policy against building them.
> And that's my point.
You think two nuclear-armed countries are more likely to go to war than a nuclear country and a non-nuclear country?
When you consider that Pakistan has had a long history of unstable govt and military coups, the risk of the nukes going into the hands of someone willing to actually fire one isn't unrealistic.
Whereas the North Korean government is stable and rational? Didn't you just say you expect a military coup there?
I really don't get your evaluation process. Unless it's "George W. Bush said North Korea was dangerous, and George W. Bush was wrong about everything, therefore North Korea isn't dangerous."
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Vive, vale. Siquid novisti rectius istis,
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
[Color=Blue]The two major offenders of the current U.S. military fatigue we face right now is Iraq and Afghanistan. Saddam Hussein never had weapons of mass destruction when we invaded in 2003 yet Bush 43 sold it to us on a lie propelled by anger from the attacks on 9/11 as a means to obtain oil in the region while we invaded Afghanistan for lithium aside from suppressing the Taliban. It wasn't until Obama took office that we were able to get rid of Osama bin Laden in Pakistan while we never would've invaded Syria and Libya If we hadn't of invaded Iraq and Afghanistan in the last decade that got us in this mess in the first place.
[/Color]
Israel has fallen many times in the past, and always rises. This new incarnation of Israel at sometime will fail, and other times may very well be resurgent. Israel had it's "Jewish crusade" moment a long time ago, and now has a state. The Crusader states were economically viable and had some relative security, it was the bungling of successive crusades and the rise of a strong Islamic caliphate that ended them without the power of the old Byzantine Empire that held a lot of powers out of Europe for centuries.
The issue right now is that there's really few buffer states like Poland with a political alliance block with balls, and Europeans are sort of rather passe' on war right now and really have internal identity issues which is causing them to shoehorn non existent problems into places they don't belong like new political identities over piracy. But whatever, the same with the US and the useless "culture wars" that keeps good policy out of government since we "incrementally have to stop the evil onslaught of gay marriage through DOMA" and other ridiculous concepts. And it's a wonder why we can't get good infrastructure in the US built this generation.
If Israel falls, we would profit. It would not trigger another Crusade, or whatever.
We wouldn't profit since China owns our debt
You mean like 10% of our debt, right? Because while China is the largest foreign holder of US debt it isn't the biggest holder.
That is absolutely the wrong way to look at the situation. The US is the #1 refugee spot in the world, you can look more into the history of WWII Jews like Einstein in the US doing a lot of service to advance our technology and sciences. Equally, Israel is called start up nation in part because well they have a lot of different business start ups. If most Jews in the world are in NYC, and Israel falls many would go to NYC and take their businesses there and other Jewish enclaves in the US as well as building new ones. That's what I mean by "profit," it's called a brain drain. Not that I want Israel to fall, but to be honest we really don't lose as much as say Jordan or few of the other states in the Middle East.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Life is a beautiful engineer, yet a brutal scientist.
If Israel falls, we would profit. It would not trigger another Crusade, or whatever.
We wouldn't profit since China owns our debt
You mean like 10% of our debt, right? Because while China is the largest foreign holder of US debt it isn't the biggest holder.
That is absolutely the wrong way to look at the situation. The US is the #1 refugee spot in the world, you can look more into the history of WWII Jews like Einstein in the US doing a lot of service to advance our technology and sciences. Equally, Israel is called start up nation in part because well they have a lot of different business start ups. If most Jews in the world are in NYC, and Israel falls many would go to NYC and take their businesses there and other Jewish enclaves in the US as well as building new ones. That's what I mean by "profit," it's called a brain drain. Not that I want Israel to fall, but to be honest we really don't lose as much as say Jordan or few of the other states in the Middle East.
Is any of this response directed at me? I was mostly chipping in about the whole "china owns our debt OH NO" thing.
That is absolutely the wrong way to look at the situation. The US is the #1 refugee spot in the world, you can look more into the history of WWII Jews like Einstein in the US doing a lot of service to advance our technology and sciences. Equally, Israel is called start up nation in part because well they have a lot of different business start ups. If most Jews in the world are in NYC, and Israel falls many would go to NYC and take their businesses there and other Jewish enclaves in the US as well as building new ones. That's what I mean by "profit," it's called a brain drain. Not that I want Israel to fall, but to be honest we really don't lose as much as say Jordan or few of the other states in the Middle East.
What about the ongoing Israeli-Palestinian conflict? Are you saying it's okay for the Palestinians and Hamas to take over Israel?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
America Bless Christ Jesus
"Restriction breeds creativity." - Sheldon Menery on EDH / Commander in Magic: The Gathering
"Cancel Culture is the real reason why everyone's not allowed to have nice things anymore." - Anonymous
"For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world, and loses his own soul?" - Mark 8:36
"Most men and women will grow up to love their servitude and will never dream of revolution." - Aldous Huxley, Brave New World
"Every life decision is always a risk / reward proposition." - Sanjay Gupta
That is absolutely the wrong way to look at the situation. The US is the #1 refugee spot in the world, you can look more into the history of WWII Jews like Einstein in the US doing a lot of service to advance our technology and sciences. Equally, Israel is called start up nation in part because well they have a lot of different business start ups. If most Jews in the world are in NYC, and Israel falls many would go to NYC and take their businesses there and other Jewish enclaves in the US as well as building new ones. That's what I mean by "profit," it's called a brain drain. Not that I want Israel to fall, but to be honest we really don't lose as much as say Jordan or few of the other states in the Middle East.
What about the ongoing Israeli-Palestinian conflict? Are you saying it's okay for the Palestinians and Hamas to take over Israel?
"Not that I want Israel to fall," means that I actually like Israel as a state for it's economic and cultural contributions. But my "like" is on the positive, I do indeed hate that they're treating the Palestinians like we did the tribes and in some ways still do. Moving Israel towards a secular state than a Jewish state would have allowed Palestine to become one with greater Israel.
What you have to look at with Israel is that there are some issues within Israel proper, such as Orthodox Jews who do not have to maintain military service while trying to maintain that they are some new Levite tribe that can have a large say in politics and religion...while most Jews that serve in the military as a part of conscription, male or female, are either Reformed or Conservative. Then Orthodox Jews also have issues with regard to what has been called the "morality police" harassing women and the like for not being "modest" and the like with harassment and stalking.
Equally with Israel is the part of the issue with Israeli Arab that are set to take over the country biologically whereas the Jewish number will stay static or even shrink in the coming decades. Yet, since Judaism is not an evangelical religion there's little want to convert Arabs to become Jews. Which maintains an allegiance to try and get Jews to move to Israel to bring up the Jewish population while also mainly only recognizing Orthodox Judaism as the only form of Judaism to sit on councils and the like. So if you're say a Samite, they'll consider you to be a non-Jew and the same with some African Jewish populations have issues trying to say they're Jews trying to move into Israel. It's a warped up process with regard to trying to maintain religious purity while trying to grow the population, you can't have it both ways without conversions.
The Palestinian-Israeli conflict, or as I call it the shadow game. Israel got screwed on the peace process, and Arafat would often go back on his word. There's border conflicts, that frankly could have been settled in the mid 1990's quite easily had Arafat not been a dunce and went for more. This time Netanyahu is the yahoo at the throat of the situation not recognizing Palestine as a real country and forcing the "good Palestine" to align itself with the inept Hamas.
I believe whenever Palestine went for recognition as a country by the UN, we should have stood by that agreement instead of pussying out for fear of Hamas. Part of the reason why Hamas has "death to Israel" is because they're not a state. You eliminate that problem, along with giving the refugees a nice little area to develop into a nice little city in some premiere real estate in a highly economically tied situation. You'd have far fewer terrorists calling for "death to Israel." Ironically, Iranians treat Jews rather well within their own borders. Whereas Israeli Russians that emigrate there were treated as second class citizens for a while, because the "trend" was for the first generation to "suffer" while the second generation would reap the benefits. You're not going to tell a rocket scientist that they're busing tables for the remainder of their career, and they didn't and raised a number of concerns a number of years back. So I do not feel that Israel is all that tolerate and is instead finding itself. The Hebrew language is going through a phase to rekindle itself into a vernacular sort of like Middle English with people inventing new words. It is a very interesting country with a lot of conflicts and so forth.
I like Israel and want it to grow up, it's still an adolescent nation that's still learning what liberty means.
Is any of this response directed at me? I was mostly chipping in about the whole "china owns our debt OH NO" thing.
In a way both of you, but in terms of your assessment the Fed owns most of the debt and can just use currency manipulation to kill the Chinese economy bond holdings then place a call on Chinese local bonds that are owned by the Fed. China keeps it's debt local, Americans nationalize ours.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Life is a beautiful engineer, yet a brutal scientist.
The article I posted makes an interesting case about this as most people would've imagined World War III to be a confrontation between major powers with the likelihood of a nuclear exchange. This makes me wonder about the events during the Kennedy Administration that led up to the Cuban Missile Crisis which almost led us toward a nuclear war between Cuba and the Soviet Union back when Fidel Castro was in power that almost triggered World War III. That was nearly 50 years ago which was during the height of the Cold War when Russia was still a communist nation.
Currently the major power players in this exchange are ISIS/ISIL (a.k.a. the Islamic State), the Ukrainian rebels, and the Libyan insurgents with Russia, Turkey, and Iran eventually playing a major role in the war as well. As the United States became a war weary nation for going into Iraq and Afghanistan in the last decade, ISIS/ISIL is poised to take over Baghdad and the Iraqi Government while Afghanistan is still a mess as well but not nearly as bad as in Iraq right now depending on how you look at it.
Unless this war is contained it will escalate into a global conflict that risks nuclear confrontation most likely from Iran and perhaps Russia If Putin is as crazy as Hitler was during WWII. North Korea on the other hand has been sitting on the sidelines lately with Kim Jong Un's whereabouts unknown but I can't rule out the possibly of the nuclear threat they could pose in the near future. I can't see the United States putting the nuclear option on the table since President Obama cut it's nuclear stockpile in order to persuade Iran to end it's nuclear weapons program.
"Restriction breeds creativity." - Sheldon Menery on EDH / Commander in Magic: The Gathering
"Cancel Culture is the real reason why everyone's not allowed to have nice things anymore." - Anonymous
"For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world, and loses his own soul?" - Mark 8:36
"Most men and women will grow up to love their servitude and will never dream of revolution." - Aldous Huxley, Brave New World
"Every life decision is always a risk / reward proposition." - Sanjay Gupta
Currently Playing:
Legacy: Something U/W Controlish
EDH Cube
Hypercube! A New EDH Deck Every Week(ish)!
In East Asia, China is being a maritime bully, but even though the responses of the other nations involved (Japan in particular) have sometimes exacerbated the situation, it has still remained basically within the framework of international diplomacy as recognized in the post-World-War-II order. I cannot see it escalating into a shooting war any more than any other tensions between great powers have escalated into shooting wars since 1945. The way for China to start World War III would be by invading Taiwan, and they haven't been making any more threatening noises than usual on that front, because they don't want to start World War III. Now, North Korea is harder to assess. I think their long-term strategy is just to continue extorting the civilized world for concessions. This is, let's be honest, a pretty stable plan as long as they keep their expectations realistic, which they have so far. If they do start a war, they could kill many many people in the region, but it would be over very very fast. China would not back them up. In fact, China seems to be getting increasingly fed up with their antics. It would not be so much a war as one little country committing a suicide bombing.
Ukraine is a lot like Syria, in that the West has made it clear they're not going to get directly involved in the fighting. So World War III is not in the cards there. The threat in Europe is that Russia calls the bluff that is NATO by stirring up some ***** in the Baltic countries. And unlike China invading Taiwan, I'm actually worried that this might happen. Putin's Russia is really terrifying. He's cemented control domestically, and been going from success to success internationally. He's got a nationalist-messianic complex that's visible from the Moon, and historically, at this stage in their careers, people like him usually feel invincible. So if he tries his usual "implausible deniability" tactics in Estonia or Latvia, he may expect that NATO will back down because he is not overtly committing an act of aggression against a member state, the way we largely ignored Georgia and demurred over Ukraine. But as frustrated as I am with the fecklessness of Western leadership in the face of international crises, I think this would be a catastrophic misreading of the situation on Putin's part: Obama, Cameron, and the rest have been clear that although they aren't doing much about it, they don't actually believe the lies he's peddling. So another proxy conflict in a NATO nation would have to be taken as an act of aggression. The question is whether Putin is too overconfident to see it this way.
If war does break out between nuclear powers, I think Wildfire393 may be correct that the MAD threat keeps nuclear weapons from being deployed, as long as neither side feels like it is in an existential crisis. This would be a very bad development - not nearly as bad as if the nukes are deployed, of course, but still a fundamental blow to the post-World-War-II order. Because, of course, it has been the threat of nuclear escalation that has kept the great powers from going to war after 1945 the way they did fairly regularly before then. If they get the message that they can still advance their interests by fighting old-style conventional wars without nukes, that's going to start happening again.
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
How do you suppose that conflicts fought by countries in the Middle East will affect countries in East Asia?
And N. Korea is the most rational political actor in recent history. Unless someone actually pushes them to the breaking point (as in actually declare outright war on them), N. Korea won't ever do anything.
North Korea does fine playing the brinkmanship card, within reason. That position is precarious and can fail at a moment's notice. I also don't put as much stock in Tehran wanting to push things into a position where they could trigger the destruction of their entire nation. The nuclear deterrence is very powerful. Many of the close calls we had with WWIII were during the Cold War and involved the U.S.S.R.
Big Thanks to Xeno for sig art <3.
I did hear rumors that Putin is conspiring with Iran and other nations in the Middle East against Israel by taking advantage of U.S. military exhaustion in the region in order to get even with the U.S. for defeating the Soviet Union. Dismantling the religious foundation of the U.S. by destroying Israel was his and our enemy's game plan from the get go.
"Restriction breeds creativity." - Sheldon Menery on EDH / Commander in Magic: The Gathering
"Cancel Culture is the real reason why everyone's not allowed to have nice things anymore." - Anonymous
"For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world, and loses his own soul?" - Mark 8:36
"Most men and women will grow up to love their servitude and will never dream of revolution." - Aldous Huxley, Brave New World
"Every life decision is always a risk / reward proposition." - Sanjay Gupta
First off, Israel isn't the religious foundation of the US. The whole Zionist thing is a long history that does involve the Great Awakening that occurred during the 1970's, but let us be honest. The greatest amount of Jews in the world live in New York City. If Israel falls, we would profit. It would not trigger another Crusade, or whatever. Israel has for the last half century maintained a superior military force than all their neighbors. I offer this piece of evidence:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yom_Kippur_War
Israel has only gotten more powerful since then, and they play the "Japanese nuclear game." In that they posses nuclear weapons but have them disassembled in secret locations that if they want to become a nuclear power they can, but aren't "really a nuclear power." Hypocrites much? Whatever, when you know the truth that they're like Pakistan, Japan, and friends in the "we're not really nuclear but we really are" with a nod and wink. You can comprehend that Israel has little to worry about without a major power backing an Arab state.
Furthermore, there are states that do a lot of trading with Israel like Jordan that view Israel more and more of a strategic piece in their ability to hold their state together than an outright boogyman. And even if the Israelis would stop screwing off with Palestine, there would not be peace in the Middle East because wierdo's would find something else to gripe about. Considering most of the Middle East was created with magical crayons without regard to real borders, we're in a corrections era.
Besides, there are powers in the Middle East that do not want the west nor the east involved such as Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Turkey. They do and they don't, so as long as the intervention benefits them and their agenda of the moment. Middle Eastern politics is a lot like a bazaar, mostly haggling over the price of blood than actually doing much "big stuff."
As for US military exhaustion, that's up for debate. I'm against invasion into Syria, because it is not our job to play global police man. The Europeans are big boys now and are a fully healed state that did not pick up much of a burden during the last 10 years with regard to war. They could easily have renuclearized Ukraine and pushed back the Russians out. The Ukrainians denuclearized with a treaty from Russia that they would never invade, which was worthless and supports again the main reason why I'm against denuclearization.
Russia didn't want us to extend weapons into neighboring states for a long while, perhaps it's time we rearmed the old border to keep the Ruskies out for the time being until they grow up.
Modern
Commander
Cube
<a href="http://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/the-game/the-cube-forum/cube-lists/588020-unpowered-themed-enchantment-an-enchanted-evening">An Enchanted Evening Cube </a>
http://lcweb2.loc.gov/ammem/GW/gw004.html
The two major offenders of the current U.S. military fatigue we face right now is Iraq and Afghanistan. Saddam Hussein never had weapons of mass destruction when we invaded in 2003 yet Bush 43 sold it to us on a lie propelled by anger from the attacks on 9/11 as a means to obtain oil in the region while we invaded Afghanistan for lithium aside from suppressing the Taliban. It wasn't until Obama took office that we were able to get rid of Osama bin Laden in Pakistan while we never would've invaded Syria and Libya If we hadn't of invaded Iraq and Afghanistan in the last decade that got us in this mess in the first place.
Infraction for plagiarism. - Blinking Spirit
"Restriction breeds creativity." - Sheldon Menery on EDH / Commander in Magic: The Gathering
"Cancel Culture is the real reason why everyone's not allowed to have nice things anymore." - Anonymous
"For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world, and loses his own soul?" - Mark 8:36
"Most men and women will grow up to love their servitude and will never dream of revolution." - Aldous Huxley, Brave New World
"Every life decision is always a risk / reward proposition." - Sanjay Gupta
http://www.wnd.com/2013/11/did-george-washington-predict-americas-fall/
Not the best source I know but close enough I suppose. :/
"Restriction breeds creativity." - Sheldon Menery on EDH / Commander in Magic: The Gathering
"Cancel Culture is the real reason why everyone's not allowed to have nice things anymore." - Anonymous
"For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world, and loses his own soul?" - Mark 8:36
"Most men and women will grow up to love their servitude and will never dream of revolution." - Aldous Huxley, Brave New World
"Every life decision is always a risk / reward proposition." - Sanjay Gupta
"Restriction breeds creativity." - Sheldon Menery on EDH / Commander in Magic: The Gathering
"Cancel Culture is the real reason why everyone's not allowed to have nice things anymore." - Anonymous
"For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world, and loses his own soul?" - Mark 8:36
"Most men and women will grow up to love their servitude and will never dream of revolution." - Aldous Huxley, Brave New World
"Every life decision is always a risk / reward proposition." - Sanjay Gupta
How?
Wait, so you believe that North Korea will ally with ISIL?
So then how, exactly, is there going to be a nuclear war?
http://lcweb2.loc.gov/ammem/GW/gw004.html
I typed in "1789 George Washington Thanksigiving Day" into Google. It was the first result I got.
This doesn't seem like a believable reality to me.
For starter's, Hitler and Putin are completely different animals. Both are/were smart, in Putin's case very clever indeed, but Putin isn't crazy at all.
I don't believe Putin would risk nuclear war either, there's nothing for Russia to gain out of it > if you look at all the actions that Putin has been involved in, in the last decade, all of them had something to gain for Russia.
North Korea? Seriously? Has George Bush really left that much of an impression on you?
The country is bankrupt, their leadership is equally feared & hated by their people, and they have very little chance of anything positive (for them) coming from a war they couldn't sustain. They are not a threat to the west > to Japan and South Korea maybe, but if you're not living in those countries you have nothing to fear as their missles can't reach western targets.
According to my sis-in-law, currently living in South Korea, she says the feeling south of the border is that it's only a matter of time before a military coup brings the whole thing down....
Honestly, the only countries in the world I'm personally afraid of actually using nuclear weapons (besides the US that is) is Pakistan and India.
A lot of bad blood between these two....
While there is a possibility of a nuclear conflict unfolding it's more or less going to result in old-style conventional wars without nukes as Blinking Spirit suggested.
It's a possibility however the odds of that happening right now are very slim.
There's not right now since as Blinking Spirit said before that what's going on is an old-style conventional war that's being fought over resources in the Middle East.
Well that could've saved me the trouble of getting an infraction earlier. I should've just posted the link like you have instead of posting the entire speech word for word. I was just trying to make a point but I got in trouble for it, so that's that. :/
"Restriction breeds creativity." - Sheldon Menery on EDH / Commander in Magic: The Gathering
"Cancel Culture is the real reason why everyone's not allowed to have nice things anymore." - Anonymous
"For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world, and loses his own soul?" - Mark 8:36
"Most men and women will grow up to love their servitude and will never dream of revolution." - Aldous Huxley, Brave New World
"Every life decision is always a risk / reward proposition." - Sanjay Gupta
And there isn't between North and South Korea?
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
"Restriction breeds creativity." - Sheldon Menery on EDH / Commander in Magic: The Gathering
"Cancel Culture is the real reason why everyone's not allowed to have nice things anymore." - Anonymous
"For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world, and loses his own soul?" - Mark 8:36
"Most men and women will grow up to love their servitude and will never dream of revolution." - Aldous Huxley, Brave New World
"Every life decision is always a risk / reward proposition." - Sanjay Gupta
You mean like 10% of our debt, right? Because while China is the largest foreign holder of US debt it isn't the biggest holder.
Agreed.
I was really suggesting that George Bush declaring North Korea was a threat to the USA as unrealistic.
Sure.
But do both countries have nukes?
No they don't, South Korea does not have any nukes, nor builds them, and actually has a govt policy against building them.
> And that's my point.
Add in the fact that the Hindi's and Muslim's have a long history of bad blood and quite a lot of blood spilt, for example the feud over Kashmir.
Of all the ways we could end up with a 3rd nuke hitting a populated area, after Hiroshima & Nagasaki, I would suggest Pakistan or India have a good chance of either firing one, or receiving one. When you consider that Pakistan has had a long history of unstable govt and military coups, the risk of the nukes going into the hands of someone willing to actually fire one isn't unrealistic.
Also, not really seeing how someone capable of attacking our two greatest allies in the region is something you'd label as "not a threat."
You think two nuclear-armed countries are more likely to go to war than a nuclear country and a non-nuclear country?
Whereas the North Korean government is stable and rational? Didn't you just say you expect a military coup there?
I really don't get your evaluation process. Unless it's "George W. Bush said North Korea was dangerous, and George W. Bush was wrong about everything, therefore North Korea isn't dangerous."
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
Israel has fallen many times in the past, and always rises. This new incarnation of Israel at sometime will fail, and other times may very well be resurgent. Israel had it's "Jewish crusade" moment a long time ago, and now has a state. The Crusader states were economically viable and had some relative security, it was the bungling of successive crusades and the rise of a strong Islamic caliphate that ended them without the power of the old Byzantine Empire that held a lot of powers out of Europe for centuries.
The issue right now is that there's really few buffer states like Poland with a political alliance block with balls, and Europeans are sort of rather passe' on war right now and really have internal identity issues which is causing them to shoehorn non existent problems into places they don't belong like new political identities over piracy. But whatever, the same with the US and the useless "culture wars" that keeps good policy out of government since we "incrementally have to stop the evil onslaught of gay marriage through DOMA" and other ridiculous concepts. And it's a wonder why we can't get good infrastructure in the US built this generation.
That is absolutely the wrong way to look at the situation. The US is the #1 refugee spot in the world, you can look more into the history of WWII Jews like Einstein in the US doing a lot of service to advance our technology and sciences. Equally, Israel is called start up nation in part because well they have a lot of different business start ups. If most Jews in the world are in NYC, and Israel falls many would go to NYC and take their businesses there and other Jewish enclaves in the US as well as building new ones. That's what I mean by "profit," it's called a brain drain. Not that I want Israel to fall, but to be honest we really don't lose as much as say Jordan or few of the other states in the Middle East.
Modern
Commander
Cube
<a href="http://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/the-game/the-cube-forum/cube-lists/588020-unpowered-themed-enchantment-an-enchanted-evening">An Enchanted Evening Cube </a>
Is any of this response directed at me? I was mostly chipping in about the whole "china owns our debt OH NO" thing.
"Restriction breeds creativity." - Sheldon Menery on EDH / Commander in Magic: The Gathering
"Cancel Culture is the real reason why everyone's not allowed to have nice things anymore." - Anonymous
"For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world, and loses his own soul?" - Mark 8:36
"Most men and women will grow up to love their servitude and will never dream of revolution." - Aldous Huxley, Brave New World
"Every life decision is always a risk / reward proposition." - Sanjay Gupta
"Not that I want Israel to fall," means that I actually like Israel as a state for it's economic and cultural contributions. But my "like" is on the positive, I do indeed hate that they're treating the Palestinians like we did the tribes and in some ways still do. Moving Israel towards a secular state than a Jewish state would have allowed Palestine to become one with greater Israel.
What you have to look at with Israel is that there are some issues within Israel proper, such as Orthodox Jews who do not have to maintain military service while trying to maintain that they are some new Levite tribe that can have a large say in politics and religion...while most Jews that serve in the military as a part of conscription, male or female, are either Reformed or Conservative. Then Orthodox Jews also have issues with regard to what has been called the "morality police" harassing women and the like for not being "modest" and the like with harassment and stalking.
Equally with Israel is the part of the issue with Israeli Arab that are set to take over the country biologically whereas the Jewish number will stay static or even shrink in the coming decades. Yet, since Judaism is not an evangelical religion there's little want to convert Arabs to become Jews. Which maintains an allegiance to try and get Jews to move to Israel to bring up the Jewish population while also mainly only recognizing Orthodox Judaism as the only form of Judaism to sit on councils and the like. So if you're say a Samite, they'll consider you to be a non-Jew and the same with some African Jewish populations have issues trying to say they're Jews trying to move into Israel. It's a warped up process with regard to trying to maintain religious purity while trying to grow the population, you can't have it both ways without conversions.
The Palestinian-Israeli conflict, or as I call it the shadow game. Israel got screwed on the peace process, and Arafat would often go back on his word. There's border conflicts, that frankly could have been settled in the mid 1990's quite easily had Arafat not been a dunce and went for more. This time Netanyahu is the yahoo at the throat of the situation not recognizing Palestine as a real country and forcing the "good Palestine" to align itself with the inept Hamas.
I believe whenever Palestine went for recognition as a country by the UN, we should have stood by that agreement instead of pussying out for fear of Hamas. Part of the reason why Hamas has "death to Israel" is because they're not a state. You eliminate that problem, along with giving the refugees a nice little area to develop into a nice little city in some premiere real estate in a highly economically tied situation. You'd have far fewer terrorists calling for "death to Israel." Ironically, Iranians treat Jews rather well within their own borders. Whereas Israeli Russians that emigrate there were treated as second class citizens for a while, because the "trend" was for the first generation to "suffer" while the second generation would reap the benefits. You're not going to tell a rocket scientist that they're busing tables for the remainder of their career, and they didn't and raised a number of concerns a number of years back. So I do not feel that Israel is all that tolerate and is instead finding itself. The Hebrew language is going through a phase to rekindle itself into a vernacular sort of like Middle English with people inventing new words. It is a very interesting country with a lot of conflicts and so forth.
I like Israel and want it to grow up, it's still an adolescent nation that's still learning what liberty means.
In a way both of you, but in terms of your assessment the Fed owns most of the debt and can just use currency manipulation to kill the Chinese economy bond holdings then place a call on Chinese local bonds that are owned by the Fed. China keeps it's debt local, Americans nationalize ours.
Modern
Commander
Cube
<a href="http://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/the-game/the-cube-forum/cube-lists/588020-unpowered-themed-enchantment-an-enchanted-evening">An Enchanted Evening Cube </a>