Does Iran have the right to make nukes, like other countries

[Sebastianbourg]

Here's a partial list of all the places the USA has "promoted freedom" since the 1840 war with Mexico in which we "liberated" a third of its territory. Any nation that has intervened in fewer of its neighbors' internal affairs has by definition "done more to promote freedom" than the USA.

I love it when anti-American types blame the USA for defending their self-interests against dictatorships, oligarchies and other assorted lawless, expansionist anti-democratic regimes and societies.

Yes, it would be nice for monarchists, fascists, communists, islamic extremists to realize their brutal anti-freedom goals without opposition...but I got news for the naive contributors on NSG, it aint happenin.

Which begs the question, for the 2nd time, name a nation or society that has contributed more to promoting freedom than the USA ?

Your still on the clock...

I'd mostly agree with you statement if it weren't for the fact that you mentioned monarchists as having brutal anti-freedom goals. How on Earth do constitutional monarchists have brutal anti-freedom goals? How are Norway, the UK, Sweden less free than the US? Tell me!

[United States of The One Percent]

Are you seriously asserting that Spain and tiny NOrway have contributed more to promoting global freedom than the USA ?!

You're on the clock...

They have, simply by not contributing as much as the USA has to the detriment of global freedom.

[The Liberated Territories]

No, they do not. But I'd say the same as any country who has the "right" to extort their own citizens to build weapons that can destroy a city in one strike.

[The New Sea Territory]

Uh...yeah, why not? If fucking North Korea, Pakistan and Israel can have nukes, why not Iran?

I'd be for 100% nuclear disarmament though.

[The New Sea Territory]

Are you seriously asserting that Spain and tiny NOrway have contributed more to promoting global freedom than the USA ?!

You're on the clock...

Uh...yeah. America has never supported freedom abroad. So...

[United States of The One Percent]

You know you've won the debate when your opponent prefaces his tripe with laughing emiticons.

[sic]

Keep telling yourself that. In my world, provoking hysterical laughter is not a strategy calculated to win debating points.

Context my anti-American friend. YOu don't need to tell anybody with a base knowledge of geopolitics that the nations your cited are less stable and free than the USA or Western European democracies. HOwever, are you seriously asserting that Cold War El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras were more peaceful, free and stable than these nations today ?!

If one considers life under a military and/or quasi-military dictatorship to be peaceful, free and stable, then I suppose the answer would have to be yes. As long as the USA retains the ability and willingness to interfere in the affairs of other sovereign nations, overtly, covertly, diplomatically, economically, militarily, or any combination of these, no nation's peace, freedom or stability -- certainly not the nations of Central America or the Caribbean -- will be secure.

Note that these Latin American nations will always be less peaceful, free and stable than higher order Western democracies

Wot mate?

higher order Western democracies

higher?

order?

Western?

democracies?

higher order Western democracies

You mean Western democracies whose neighbors haven't repeatedly invaded them, taken over their governments in whole or in part, garrisoned their troops there, promoted military coups and counterrevolutionary brigands, conducted disinformation campaigns, mined their harbors, given aid and comfort to their enemies, supported their separatist groups, established "concessions" that differed little from annexations, and to this day exercise an influence nearly overwhelming to their peoples' national aspirations, not to mention happiness? Those...

higher order Western democracies

?

Riddle me this, Batman: let's say Mexico won the war in the 1840s, forced the USA into a treaty that confined it east of the Appalachians, controlled its extractive industries, encouraged its military to assassinate a half-dozen of its Presidents and force another half-dozen to resign, took over the Erie Canal and ran it for its exclusive benefit, set up and ran plantations in its territory, controlled all its rail transport, took over its customs houses and sent the duties to Mexico City and ran Miami as a Mexican naval base?

Would the USA or Mexico then be a

higher order Western [democracy]

?

Comparing Cold War govt. death squads to the dysfunctional Latin American democracies today is absurd at best.

I'm sure the widows and orphans of yesterday's victims of violence in Latin America must be comforted by the thought that their relatives were killed by relatively random thugs to which the USA is indifferent at best rather than government death squads to which the USA was indifferent at best.

You've amply demonstrated your willful disregard of history and lack of compassion. I see no further point to engaging with you on this or any other subject. Goodbye.

[Ridin Dirty]

I love it when anti-American types blame the USA for defending their self-interests against dictatorships, oligarchies and other assorted lawless, expansionist anti-democratic regimes and societies.

Yes, it would be nice for monarchists, fascists, communists, islamic extremists to realize their brutal anti-freedom goals without opposition...but I got news for the naive contributors on NSG, it aint happenin.

Which begs the question, for the 2nd time, name a nation or society that has contributed more to promoting freedom than the USA ?

Your still on the clock...

I'd mostly agree with you statement if it weren't for the fact that you mentioned monarchists as having brutal anti-freedom goals. How on Earth do constitutional monarchists have brutal anti-freedom goals? How are Norway, the UK, Sweden less free than the US? Tell me!

The monarchs I was referring to existed in the pre-WWI era. Of course, today's monarchies are symbolic and possess little, if any, political power -- however, that was not the case in 1776.

Again, I love it when NSG contributors fallaciously interpret my assertions than attack that strawman. Of course, I NEVER SAID that Norway, Sweden, etc... were LESS FREE, I SAID they contributed LESS to promoting FREEDOM than the USA.

Big difference.

[Ridin Dirty]

Are you seriously asserting that Spain and tiny NOrway have contributed more to promoting global freedom than the USA ?!

You're on the clock...

They have, simply by not contributing as much as the USA has to the detriment of global freedom.

Norway's 'contribution' to promoting freedom was to be overrun in a few days, if not hours by the NAzi war machine. Prior to that they did absolutely nothing to the cause of freedom anywhere. Without US hegemony, Norway, and the rest of scandinavia would be speaking german or russian, pick your poison.

[Ridin Dirty]

Are you seriously asserting that Spain and tiny NOrway have contributed more to promoting global freedom than the USA ?!

You're on the clock...

Uh...yeah. America has never supported freedom abroad. So...

For laughs, guess what nation checked the global communist offensive during the COld War ?

Guess what nation check the Japanese empire's brutal expansionist march in WWII ?

Guess what nation protected Western European from predation by the USSR in 1945 ?

Take a look at a map of freedom and explain why regions dominated by American hegemony are largely free, when the rest of the globe is living in autocratic hell holes ?

[Rebellious Fishermen]

Why is this still being debated?

Iran should clearly not have nukes unless you enjoy recklessness and risk.

[Ridin Dirty]

You know you've won the debate when your opponent prefaces his tripe with laughing emiticons.

[sic]

Keep telling yourself that. In my world, provoking hysterical laughter is not a strategy calculated to win debating points.

Context my anti-American friend. YOu don't need to tell anybody with a base knowledge of geopolitics that the nations your cited are less stable and free than the USA or Western European democracies. HOwever, are you seriously asserting that Cold War El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras were more peaceful, free and stable than these nations today ?!

If one considers life under a military and/or quasi-military dictatorship to be peaceful, free and stable, then I suppose the answer would have to be yes. As long as the USA retains the ability and willingness to interfere in the affairs of other sovereign nations, overtly, covertly, diplomatically, economically, militarily, or any combination of these, no nation's peace, freedom or stability -- certainly not the nations of Central America or the Caribbean -- will be secure.

Note that these Latin American nations will always be less peaceful, free and stable than higher order Western democracies

Wot mate?

higher order Western democracies

higher?

order?

Western?

democracies?

higher order Western democracies

You mean Western democracies whose neighbors haven't repeatedly invaded them, taken over their governments in whole or in part, garrisoned their troops there, promoted military coups and counterrevolutionary brigands, conducted disinformation campaigns, mined their harbors, given aid and comfort to their enemies, supported their separatist groups, established "concessions" that differed little from annexations, and to this day exercise an influence nearly overwhelming to their peoples' national aspirations, not to mention happiness? Those...

higher order Western democracies

?

Riddle me this, Batman: let's say Mexico won the war in the 1840s, forced the USA into a treaty that confined it east of the Appalachians, controlled its extractive industries, encouraged its military to assassinate a half-dozen of its Presidents and force another half-dozen to resign, took over the Erie Canal and ran it for its exclusive benefit, set up and ran plantations in its territory, controlled all its rail transport, took over its customs houses and sent the duties to Mexico City and ran Miami as a Mexican naval base?

Would the USA or Mexico then be a

higher order Western [democracy]

?

Comparing Cold War govt. death squads to the dysfunctional Latin American democracies today is absurd at best.

I'm sure the widows and orphans of yesterday's victims of violence in Latin America must be comforted by the thought that their relatives were killed by relatively random thugs to which the USA is indifferent at best rather than government death squads to which the USA was indifferent at best.

You've amply demonstrated your willful disregard of history and lack of compassion. I see no further point to engaging with you on this or any other subject. Goodbye.

emoticon, fallacies and personal opinion is not valid or reliable evidence for anything other than ideological indoctrination -- in this case, unfounded anti-Americanism

By any rational and objective measure, Latin America is far more peaceful and free than during the Cold War. Moreover, they are lucky they weren't turned communist during the Cold War considering the track record of extreme genocide and tyranny of communist regimes.



Of course, the USA has engaged in actions that resulted in innocent deaths, however the net end game of these actions has largely resulted in far more freedom, peace and prosperity than would otherwise be the case.

Of course, the USA could've sat on its hands and engaged in isolationism, ala Norway, Sweden, Switzerland... while the world burned and innocents were butchered by expansionist autocratic regimes, but thankfully for the Europe, Western Hemisphere and the Asian Pacific Rim --the US, with significant help from UK, Australia, Canada... came to the rescue, albeit clumsily at times.

[Orbis Pax]

No country should have the right to make nukes.

[Seraven]

No country should have the right to make nukes.

Tell that to the nations with nukes.

I'm sure they won't listen. I'm not mocking what you said, but I'm saying that nations that accept them and the ones who refused will be balanced by numbers, although they all probably agree to make nuclear as energy.

[Floridan Peninsula]

Ok, I'm back on the post to talk about it.

I will not change sides about this very quickly

I think Iran will join with ISIS when it gets the chance. They certainly mustn't be allowed nuclear weapons.

What you just said is SO illogical. Iran is the ONLY country who put troops on the ground. Iran is Shia. ISIL is Sunni and Anti-Shia. ISIL HATES IRAN. IF they took Iran, all hell breaks loose.

The people who say Iran shouldn't have nukes, or they will destroy everyone, that's suiside. It's like killing someone in a military base. Are you going to get shot back, hmmmm...

Anyway about the Engrland thing, I kinda fooled my self, but still, don't think I changed sides.

First, the remembrance day, IRA did it, NOT the parliament, I thought It was the parliament that did it .

But people said they would want massacres in the 20th century. Ok, I got some from the 20th century(I can't believe a 1st world country massacres in the 20th century )(these are a couple)-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qissa_Khwa ... r_massacre
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malabar_Rebellion
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jallianwala_Bagh_massacre
Now going out of massacres, this is other things England did horrible, but didn't give 2 craps about-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Famine_(Ireland)- Some historians think because of the actions from England, they thought this was genocide
Oh yeah, also, Joan of Arch, she was executed from England for being a witch. She was a icon in France. Wow, and England said she was doing witchcraft when she turn into a saint.
Thats what I have for now .

[Karlom-Teravanyia]

I think MAD could a viable means of preventing expansionism. It takes an entire leadership of severely retarded/insane people to launch their nukes and initiate a worldwide nuclear holocaust. There are better odds of one country conquering the world than an entire regime become so convoluted they would destroy the entire world and gain pretty much nothing. Plus, assuming we are attacked by another intelligent race from beyond Earth, a few extra nukes laying around wouldn't hurt.

The main issue is... Just how crazy are the North Koreans?

[Floridan Peninsula]

I think MAD could a viable means of preventing expansionism. It takes an entire leadership of severely retarded/insane people to launch their nukes and initiate a worldwide nuclear holocaust. There are better odds of one country conquering the world than an entire regime become so convoluted they would destroy the entire world and gain pretty much nothing. Plus, assuming we are attacked by another intelligent race from beyond Earth, a few extra nukes laying around wouldn't hurt.

The main issue is... Just how crazy are the North Koreans?

So, your on my side?...

[Washington Resistance Army]

Grave digging is bad.

[Karlom-Teravanyia]

I think MAD could a viable means of preventing expansionism. It takes an entire leadership of severely retarded/insane people to launch their nukes and initiate a worldwide nuclear holocaust. There are better odds of one country conquering the world than an entire regime become so convoluted they would destroy the entire world and gain pretty much nothing. Plus, assuming we are attacked by another intelligent race from beyond Earth, a few extra nukes laying around wouldn't hurt.

The main issue is... Just how crazy are the North Koreans?

So, your on my side?...

Just postulating and waiting for feedback.

[Floridan Peninsula]

Grave digging is bad.

What??

[Floridan Peninsula]

So, your on my side?...

Just postulating and waiting for feedback.

Ok...

[MERIZoC]

Grave digging is bad.

What??

This thread was far over the 4-week limit.

[Floridan Peninsula]

What??

This thread was far over the 4-week limit.

I know, I want to talk about It know.

[Floridan Peninsula]

Wait, there's a 4 week limit?

[MERIZoC]

Wait, there's a 4 week limit?

Yeah, if a thread in general is dead for 4 weeks, you're not supposed to post in it.

[Floridan Peninsula]

Wait, there's a 4 week limit?

Yeah, if a thread in general is dead for 4 weeks, you're not supposed to post in it.

Whatever.