I can't understand how it's ok for the US to have AND to share their nuclear weapons with Isreal, but it's not ok for others to develop nuclear power?

All these invasions and wars stem from what happened on 9/11.

Even in the P.N.A.C.(Project for a New American Century) document, released before 9/11, it states that the Middle East must be controlled for it's energy resources. First invading Afghanistan, then Iraq, Iran and Syria, in that order! So we'll see how things work out in the next couple of years.

But there's a bigger picture to look at here. It's all about world domination, to have a World Bank, World Currency and a One World Government. And it's the major bankers behind it all. Look up the Bilderberg Group and the Trilateral Commission to find out more.

Just a question for the Americans here - Do you know that Canada, Mexico and the USA are merging to form the American Union?

Quote from Racer Y :

blabla

You are right. The middle east has always been a shithole, arabs have been killing each other there since the prophet died.
And I do hope people actually realize that irans nuclear ambition aren't for peacefull things. But some people rather keep believing in their fairytales, just like in the late 1930's and 40's...

RacerY, the region has been a crapfest for centuries. Bin Laden was the right target, not Saddam, or his oil fields - regardless of how much better off Iraq might be without him.
The media reports on Iraq are biased, so that effectively makes it all a big mess, that no one can take second hand news reports from without a pound of salt.

The US world police after the cold war? Well, ok, why don't you move to an alternate commie universe? LOL Enjoy that..
Dropping two nukes in anger? Someone got army general stars for their birthday..

The UK needs to play Iran's BS game and get the sailors out.. "sign of weakness" or not, and then sock any future Iranian territorial trespass with no warning.
The region is a crapfest and ought to be left on its own to sort its crap out.. and if it wigs out like europe did 70 years ago, we know who will be asked for their help..

Quote from Becky Rose :

In which case, why are America allowed them? Given that they are the only country to have EVER deployed a nuclear weapon in anger... And they did it twice at that!

You missed out the fact that they dropped them on a country who was negotiating surrender, so president decided to speed it up by a few days and drop 2 nukes on them.

Another armchair general .. Two days late, tho.

Quote from mikey_G :

The middle east has always been a shithole, arabs have been killing each other there since the prophet died.

Please name a country on Earth that doesn't have a history of violence. Humans are violent by nature, especially when they gather into 'nations', and even more so when those nations pray to fairygodfather deities.

Quote from ATC Quicksilver :

You missed out the fact that they dropped them on a country who was negotiating surrender, so president decided to speed it up by a few days and drop 2 nukes on them.

According to my own reasonably well informed, but not conclusive, knowledge of that period of history Japan was not negotiating surrender at that time. The emperor wanted to surrender after the first bomb but the generals - who really controlled the country - refused to allow it.

After the second bomb the Emperor bypassed his generals by giving a speach on national radio announcing the country had surrendered, so the generals first heard of their defeat at the same time as the rest of the world.

In fact, Japan was extremely defiant of it's imminent defeat and over half of the high command was in favour of lining up every man, woman and child on the beaches - with whatever device to use as a weapon they could lay their hands on - and mass charging the invasion. It would have been a huge catastrophe of human loss which, it is estimated, would have resulted in approximately 25 million fatalities in the first 24 hour - mostly Japanese civilian.

It is because of this America decided to use the atom bomb. Bearing in mind the long term consequences where not realised back then.

Having said all that, I still dont get why the only country to have ever deployed them in anger is not only allowed them, but allowed to dictate who has them?

Interestingly, they threatened a country called "Great Britain" with war should she ever develop nuclear weapons, hense the great secerecy around their development and when Britain did the first Nuclear test (of which my great uncle was part (target I think ! )) she had to lie and deceive that she had a stockpile - just goes to show how fragile peace was in the early post war years.

Quote from mikey_G :

The main problem with the western countries that exert their powers in the ME, is that they don't have a clue how the things work there, and that has created the most mess.
But after 40 years the west still has no idea how work their relationships in the ME, they even look stupid in the eyes of many Arab governments.
And the best example of that now is Great Britain.

Agreed. Although if we're honest the act of founding nations such as Iraq and Israel was what created the mess, the continuation of that messiness is due to the UN still defending those policies and attempting to make them work when they clearly don't. The resentment will burn on forever with whichever factions being repressed by the local rulers - in your case Israel, in post-war Iraq I suppose we'll have to wait and see.

Quote from Racer Y :

...

Your response contained too many "LOL"s for me to bother reading it.

Quote from nihil :

Please name a country on Earth that doesn't have a history of violence. Humans are violent by nature, especially when they gather into 'nations', and even more so when those nations pray to fairygodfather deities.

I agree 100%.

ORDO AB CHAO(Latin)-Order out of Chaos. When you find out who's moto that is, you will find out who is behind all of this 'chaos'.

^^ That pretty much sums it all up :monkey:

How about this for a crazy idea?

All countries pull all troops out of foreign countries, let them fight their own battles (like all the 'developed' countries did 150-250 years ago) and the governments start dealing with their won problems.

Eventually the fighting countries will either wipe each other out or discover that it's not worth the waste of life, and come to an arrangement of their own, without the influence of external political parties trying to persuade them to do something for their own gain.

If America had an outside body watching over it, the Revolution would never have happened. Likewise with the revolts and stuff in western Europe in the 18th and 19th centuries. Let them sort it out themselves.

We got through it, they will too.

America did have an outside body watching over it, that was the whole point of the revolution wasnt it?

Quote from Dajmin :

How about this for a crazy idea?

Let them sort it out themselves.

We got through it, they will too.

We® would not allow that to happen, since We® have vested interests in the stability of those countries.

Quote from Dajmin :

Let them sort it out themselves.

Yea, lets replay WW2, and only start caring when it's too late

Quote :

We® would not allow that to happen, since We® have vested interests in the stability of those countries.

yup. if their countries go to shit, then our oil prices go up. that is the reason, and the only reason that the US cares about what's going on in taht area of the world. if there wasn't oil there, i'd bet money that the US wouldn't be either. sounds shallow. and it is. but that's the way this gov't thinks and works. some of us here are trying to get this changed...we are just out voted by idiots.

Quote from Becky Rose :

According to my own reasonably well informed, but not conclusive, knowledge of that period of history Japan was not negotiating surrender at that time.

no they werent ... but they were trying to negotiate peace

Quote from glyphon :

if there wasn't oil there, i'd bet money that the US wouldn't be either.

i would even go as far as to say israel wouldnt exist if there wasnt any oil in that area of the globe

I read half way through this and got bored.

The idea of having nukes are not to want to use them, but as defence.

A country that has nukes is seen as powerful because of them. Now no one knows they never want to use them, but at the same time they know if they try and attack that country then the nuclear reply to that would wipe out the attacking country, meaning that no one wins, and as these things go if one country attacks another allies get involved. So Country A nukes Country B, so they defence system nukes Country A, but Country C (A's ally) finds out about this and they are not happy, so they attack Country B who attacks Country C. But now Country D (B's ally) is pretty pissed at all the attacking so they attack Country A and C in support of Country B, but now Country A and B's allies starts in the fight.

Bottom line is no one wins, everyone loses. As a wise man once said "I do not know what weapons World War III shall be fought with, but I do know World War IV shall be fought with sticks and stones". A cookie to anyone who knows who.

Quote from P5YcHoM4N :

Bottom line is no one wins, everyone loses. As a wise man once said "I do not know what weapons World War III shall be fought with, but I do know World War IV shall be fought with sticks and stones". A cookie to anyone who knows who.

Einstein

Quote from P5YcHoM4N :

Bottom line is no one wins, everyone loses. As a wise man once said "I do not know what weapons World War III shall be fought with, but I do know World War IV shall be fought with sticks and stones". A cookie to anyone who knows who.

Albert Einstein, now give me my cookie!

edit. oh bollocks, beaten... But about bombs, I would recommend a game called DEFCON. Bit simple little game, but really gives impression how much would a global nuclear war suck.

Someone mentioned nukes?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nZMwKPmsbWE [obligatory language warning,and the last part isn't exactly OT]

Quote from Shotglass :

i would even go as far as to say israel wouldnt exist if there wasnt any oil in that area of the globe

Yeah, if there would be no oil, mozes would have walked to florida

Seriously, if that was the case someone would've picked a piece of land which actually had oil...

This is some interesting reading:

"A Global Intelligence Briefing for CEOs"

http://www.performancesimulations.com/files/GIB.rtf

"A Global Intelligence Briefing for CEOs" by Herbert Meyer
(About Herb Meyer: served during the Reagan administration as special assistant to the Director of Central Intelligence and Vice Chairman of the CIA’s National Intelligence Council. In these positions, he managed production of the U.S.National Intelligence Estimates and other top-secret projections for the President and his national security advisers. Meyer is widely credited with being the first senior U.S. Government official to forecast the Soviet Union’s collapse, for which he later was awarded the U.S. National Intelligence Distinguished Service Medal, the intelligence community's highest honor. Formerly an associate editor of FORTUNE, he is also the author of several books. Herbert Meyer P.O. Box 2089 Friday Harbor, WA 98250.)

Quote from mikey_G :

Yeah, if there would be no oil, mozes would have walked to florida

Seriously, if that was the case someone would've picked a piece of land which actually had oil...

OY VEY! may as well give it up mikey... if you listen to their responses, you'll notice it's almost word for word the same crap you hear from intellectually isolatated college proffesors, peacenics, the media and whatever anti-American pundit you can think of. I honestly think they have been too indoctrinatred to ever understand. just look at their counter arguments. LOL (oops shouldn't have put the LOL in now Kev won't read it)
those are the personality types commercial advertisers love.

Oh and since you ppl just wanna go there, the reason why we used nukes on japan? President Truman was given estimates of US losses that would occur if a conventional invasion was to happen. the losses conservatively estimated was 1 million. the Japanese losses would have been astronomical.
there no negotiations beforehand. I think the Japanese went to the Soviets
hoping they could bring an end to the war, but the Soviets weren't going to help. But I don't know that for sure.

And another reason we are bristling with nukes had something to do with this thing called the Cold War. Maybe y'all heard of that? or is that being revised as well?
And yeah, I'll admit the political chess games we played with the Soviets in that region during that time period helped pave the way for most of the crap we have going on there now. but what else was there to do?

Quote from mikey_G :

Yeah, if there would be no oil, mozes would have walked to florida

Seriously, if that was the case someone would've picked a piece of land which actually had oil...

im talking about past ww2 israel