DShox Posted January 11, 2006 Share Posted January 11, 2006 Hi, As a massive critic of the Iraq war with an absolute loathing of the present government, I wanted to gauge opinion on the build up to another war in the oil rich region of the middle east. Personally, if one country is allowed nuclear weapons then so is any other. Certainly, Iran should be allowed to decide its own energy mix without a Whitehouse spokesman or Jack Straw expressing concern 'on behalf of the international community' and referring it to the UN Security Council. The only ones making the most noise are those who have polarised middle-eastern opinion right against them from abusing their military power for the past few decades in the name of political influence in a key economic nation. Theres a big difference with Iraq - the people actually back the leader and this includes educated groups such as students. The country is much larger than Iraq and the fallout and the number of families seeing their kids/parents blown to bits will push so many into the arms of freedom fighter and terrorist groups for the resources to deal out revenge. A political blunder regarding the comment about Israel was a god send to Bush/Blair - it has given them the excuse to go one step further. Its no concidence that Bush/Blair are really keen to see human rights flourish in Iraq and Iran - lets forget about the 4 million killed in almost 4 years in Angola as a result of CIA involvement that still continues to this day. I'd even like to organise a Jap super car rally involving Supras / Skylines / NSXs / rx7s / S14s you name it - each playing out loud the sound of bombs and mgs as we cruise through every major city in the country. Anyway I'm done. Ta, D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chilli Posted January 11, 2006 Share Posted January 11, 2006 I don't think we should keep poking the hornet nest, in case we get stung... Think there is enough hatred of the west that many would join a holy war against us in an instant! I hope you're wrong about the build up to another war As a slight aside, after watching the excellent Richard Dawkins "the root of all evil" on Monday night I was terrified by the attitudes of the hardcore religious groups, islamics and bible bashing americans from the bible belt alike really. I don't want to offend anyone (probably aready have) and there will always be exception, but from what I could see this religious dogma is rather like being brainwashed. IMHO the world would be a safer place if everyone could actually think for themselves and not use God as an excuse for anything they see fit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DShox Posted January 11, 2006 Author Share Posted January 11, 2006 agree. i mean im sikh - i appreciate my history and live by some key values but dont project this over and above any one else - for a start i dont know enough about anythin' to have a meaningful debate anyhow! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted January 11, 2006 Share Posted January 11, 2006 Waaay too heavy for me this time of night. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobSheffield Posted January 11, 2006 Share Posted January 11, 2006 agree. i mean im sikh - i appreciate my history and live by some key values but dont project this over and above any one else - for a start i dont know enough about anythin' to have a meaningful debate anyhow! technically speaking you HAVE started a meaningful debate!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DShox Posted January 11, 2006 Author Share Posted January 11, 2006 ah im gonna go boil that rice and open the tuna - add mayo and bread you got a gooood meal instantly! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CJ Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 Well I think you are talking absolute bollocks.... ...you never mix rice with mayo! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DShox Posted January 12, 2006 Author Share Posted January 12, 2006 noooooo!!! got it all wrong - chewin on dry tuna! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
imi Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 So whats it all about anyway....is it about religion??? or is it about stuff Mr Oilman sells??? Or maybe they are trying to liberate the helpless people of the world...?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SupraStar 3000 Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 Just spent 15minutes typing a response to this thread, then after reading it back decided to delete as i wasn't convinced with my own agreement. Hard topic to discuss and its obvious a amicable answer will be found on this forum. I will say this. religion has alot to answer for as its responsible for numerous wars and deaths, but GOD gives us ALL morals and a sense of right and wrong. So maybe its the religious leaders that are responsible, not any particular religion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chilli Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 It was almost too heavy for me last night too lol, nearly deleted my post because it is a really tough subject, all of it, war, religion etc but then though it's good to hear other people opinions too so it seemed worth joining in at least. I'm with Dawkins on this one though: good people do good, bad people do bad but religion has the power turn turn good people to bad We certainly don't need any sort of war or violence justified by 'God' - what kind of God and religion is that? Any form of closed minded 'I'm right because of God' and everything else is wrong attitude is a dogmatic lost cause. but, fair is fair, our governments dupe us with propoganda and false pretences too -> but at least we stand a chance of seeing this and changing things for the better though. Some parts of the world don't seem to have moved forward in a political/religious/moral sense, for thousands of years and seem to stand little chance of doing so soon either! Once you get the idea that everything you want to justify can be done so in the name of God, why bother changing - you have the perfect excuse to do just about anything, suicide bombers and terrorists alike. anyway, it's too early, time for work me thinks though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Digsy Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 So whats it all about anyway....is it about religion??? or is it about stuff Mr Oilman sells??? Or maybe they are trying to liberate the helpless people of the world...?? At this stage isn't it just about a concern over a massive shift in the balance of power in the Middle East if Iran develops the bomb? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michael Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 GOD gives us ALL morals and a sense of right and wrong. How does a fictional character give us morals? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dragonball Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 How does a fictional character give us morals? Meths on the barbie.... Not sure if you can call a demand for the complete destruction of a race (and religion) of people a 'political blunder' Bit like Sadaam telling the Kurds - 'dont worry this fog will clear and the big pit is just for a new motorway extension...' Sorry but I come to the realisation (albeit late in the day) that peoples views on the subject of Iran / Iraq etc are just so polarised that to atempt to discuss them in any meaningful debate is actually not worthwhile... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 but GOD gives us ALL morals and a sense of right and wrong. No It didn't as the concept of It(what you call God) doesn't exist. IMHO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnA Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 I like the concept of 'non-proliferation' It is very noble. It means "those who've got them keep them, those who haven't got them agree NOT to get them" Guess who is trying to enforce this shite? Total disarmament --- YES! But WTF is 'non-proliferation'? You've got thousands of guns pointed at you and you are expected to *agree* only to use fists? ...And that comes from the "democratic" dogooders eh?... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonW Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 Like it or not the majority of religious extremists base their actions on a warped version of Islam. Iran is governed by Islamic religious extremists who are developing nuclear power that has the potential to be developed into nuclear weapons. Now a religious extremists with C4 taped to his body is one thing but change the weapon of choice to long range nuclear weapon and the world suddenly becomes a very different place. Especially when the leader of said country has openly stated that he wants to wipe Israel off the map. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
imi Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 At this stage isn't it just about a concern over a massive shift in the balance of power in the Middle East if Iran develops the bomb? So you mean it would actually create a balance in the middle east then... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dragonball Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 So you mean it would actually create a balance in the middle east then... What - wiping Isreal off the face of the map...? See what I mean - total polarisation... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
imi Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 What - wiping Isreal off the face of the map...? See what I mean - total polarisation... Paul...youve got extremist views...not everyone thinks like you Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chilli Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 This is such a difficult subject, don't think we are gonna solve it in the forum lol but - non-proliferation -> yes it's a double standard, but then again, should every rogue state in the country be allowed to weald this power without responsibility. It's difficult, on the one hand I say it's not up to us to decide and we can't enforce a policy we don't stick to ourselves. On the other hand, it could be analogous to a parent and child, we don't let kids play with fireworks until they are responsible enough to do so. Impossible to solve though, unless we all disarm - erm yeah right so the whole world will agree to that now? No chance, more likely God himselve will come down and remove all nuclear materials for us Power shifts -> well this is inevitable whatever we do, we can't 'police' the whole world, we are in no position to, that would be democracy for us to give dictatorship to the rest of the world, doesn't add up. What we must do is not burn our bridges and make enemies with everyone! We need to think long term, not short term! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SupraStar 3000 Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 How does a fictional character give us morals? No It didn't as the concept of It(what you call God) doesn't exist. IMHO I accept not all (maybe even most) people don’t believe in “God” But to say “God” doesn't have any influence on your life is (in my opinion) crazy. I haven't been to church in years (even then it was at weddings and funerals) but I still believe in God. Everybody must have some religious connection no matter how minuscule. Its like a powerful motivation or impulse, even instinct. Maybe its just emotion when someone dies that makes your pray to God or look to heavens for reassurance and comfort, I don’t know, but to have absolutely NO religious beliefs is strange. ok,.... that's enough controversial BS from me this year. I’m going back to posting about SuperNanny and Santa Hats threads. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Digsy Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 Let's put this into context. I think common sense and history have proved that while you cannot win an all-out nuclear war, but you can bring a conventional one to a pretty sharp halt with one or two tactical-sized bombs. Japan was willing to take a million Allied soldiers to their graves fighting to the last man if the Home Islands had been invaded at the end of the Pacific war. The Little Boy and Fat Man bombs were used NOT as a first resort to bring the war to an end but as a last resort to prevent a bloodbath. It was the fact that the Japanese simply would not stop fighting a conventional war that necessitated their use. Fast forward to the Cold War. Only The UK and US and the USSR had deliverable nuclear weapons (plus China later on). Two radically opposed ideals that clashed indirectly in Korea and faced off over Cuba as well as playing social, economic and political cat and mouse games for decades, but did either pop a nuke at the other? Even at Cuba, when the soldiers and sailors had orders to push the button at the start of hostilities? Nope, they didn't. Why? Because it would have meant certain destruction. At the time of Cuba, the US warplanners were still working to the SIOP (Single Integrated Operations Plan) which meant that going to war with one nuclear-armed country meant going to war with them all - presumably because you only get one shot at it - so Cuba would have gone global pretty fast. MAD - Mutally Assured Destruction - as unpalatable as it seems on the surface has kept the peace in Europe and betwen East and West for sixty years no matter how different the cultures were. Kept the peace long enough, in fact, for those sides to find mutually acceptable terms. The US President responsible for the biggest re-arming programme since WW2 (Ronald Reagan) probably also did more than any other to bring about a Political end to the Cold War. In short, it may not have been pleasant but it worked. But what would happen if you took two radically opposed nations, who continually skirmished conventionally and gave one a tactical sized bomb with the certain knowledge that the other could not respond in kind? What do you think would happen? I refer you to the first paragraph in this post. Its all about balance. No Superpower will pop a nuke against another country because the first one to do so will become an international pariah. Not to mention the risk that the other superpowers-in-waiting will rush to support the other side and the whole conflict would go global, a'la Cuba. No one is that crazy these days. But two squabbling neighbours chucking tactical nukes across the border? That's a real possibility. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dragonball Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 Paul...youve got extremist views...not everyone thinks like you No, honestly I dont....but when faced with them I do try and place a balanced alternative... I have been appalled at the behaviour of just about every sect or country at one time or another (inc ours)...but this should always be placed firmly on the heads of self seeking weak men...not the God or Prophet that they purport to follow Extreemism in any form is both very unhealthy and unsafe... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chilli Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 I accept not all (maybe even most) people don’t believe in “God” But to say “God” doesn't have any influence on your life is (in my opinion) crazy. I haven't been to church in years (even then it was at weddings and funerals) but I still believe in God. Everybody must have some religious connection no matter how minuscule. Its like a powerful motivation or impulse, even instinct. Maybe its just emotion when someone dies that makes your pray to God or look to heavens for reassurance and comfort, I don’t know, but to have absolutely NO religious beliefs is strange. ok,.... that's enough controversial BS from me this year. I’m going back to posting about SuperNanny and Santa Hats threads. big difference between religion and faith. Faith - anyone can have some faith in something, that can be your own personal beliefs and practices - I have no issues with that at all. In some ways that probably affects us all, indivually. Religion - this is institutionalised dogma. Man made IMHO. Take 1 thousand religions - when any follower will profess his is correct, his is the right God, he is the most faithfull and anyone who thinks otherwise is wrong, that's the kind of brainwashed, self-righteous attitude that can cause wars, violence, conflict and long term hatred - if God exists, this is what God would want? yeah right... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.