Chat/Comment thread

Yeah, people die because they are not immortal. It is the healthy ones that lay around in long term care facilities taking for ever to expire.This arguement is the worst part of public health care. The insidious erosion of your personal freedoms for the sake of economy.

From Page Not Found

quote:

---

Fifty-six percent of Iran’s oil exports are to
Asia and 29 percent to Europe. Japan and the
People’s Republic of China (PRC) together
buy over one-third of Iran’s oil exports. The
U.S. buys no oil from Iran (other than
specially licensed swaps for Caspian oil).

---

Are you really that simple jar? From the Yale Journal

quote:

---

The following facts about Iran are largely beyond dispute. It is outspent militarily by three of its closest neighbors, including Israel, Turkey, and Saudi Arabia. Its only friends in the Middle East are a few terrorist groups and Syria, a nation beset with domestic furor. It has extraordinarily hostile relations with the United States, and only relatively polite relations with Russia and China. Iran’s existing conventional military forces are obsolete by regional standards. The country suffers from substantial domestic discontent and has undergone serial crises of governance structure since at least the late 1980s. Iran is heavily dependent on resource exports, inextricably and directly linking its economy to the international market and inviting all of the problems normally associated with the resource curse.

---

I think you are supporting the wrong side jar. Do you hate everything about your country?

Is it me or you flip flopping around?Iran is a threat to the US and the world because they are threatening to close the straight of Hormuz. They are threatening to do this because of sanctions aimed at forcing them to comply with international agreements regarding nuclear proliferation. 20% of the worlds oil moves through the straight of Hormuz. Can you see the connection there? The danger is not that they will close the straight because they wont do that for any length of time. The danger is that they will start a shootin war. Yes they will lose and yes it will be their fault. That wont help the dead people much though will it?

What part of letting Iran close the straight and gain nukes is sane?

Well they have been known to shoot themselves in the foot before.The threat is to the fragile stability that exists in the region and the world economy. Even more so if Iran is allowed to aquire nuclear weapons. The sanctions should be enforced and Iranian beligerance
should be met with force.But yeah, there is no danger that the US will lose. There will just be lots of dead Iranians most of whom will have been innocent pawns.

I couldn't disagree more. Is there any country that you would say should not have nuclear weapons?

I think that one should turn off the fan before the shit hits it.Iran is already a pariah and the mullahcrats already hate the West. What is the point of having an enemy if you can't give him a good beat down when he really deserves it. How far do you let them go?

I don't know jar, we might want 1 or 2 around just in case we have to blow up somebodies mothership in hurry or maybe divert an asteroid or something.In practical terms, the cat is out of the bag and the best that we can do is to keep them out of as many hands as possible.I agree that nukes are the bluntest of instruments after the plague and all the more reason to not let some 8th century theocracy have them.I also wish that we could keep the world a peaceful place with a legion of diplomats drinking wine and eating cheese but I don't think we are there yet.

It is not just the US. It is the Western world. Countries like Iran, North Korea, Syria, Egypt and Libia have to get in line. Should we respect their way governing?I agree that we as humans are doing a piss poor job at managing our affairs but you must agree that the freer nations of the world are better than the others.Why are you so insistant that it is all the fault of the US? Are they not trying to bring these rogue nations into the game? Look at China. Play the game and have a better life.Sustainability is another issue but we all need to be pulling in the same direction before we can properly address that.

I don't think every other country wants them and the ones that want them now are still going to want them if the US had none. They will never have parity and having nukes will only increase their chances of getting bombed with regular bombs.I agree that if the US got rid of all of it's nukes the world would be a safer place but only because they could protect their interests without them. As we have seen it is not so pleasant either.

Yes, I agree but the US and the West are more right than Iran.Edited by Dogmafood, : 'are'

What would be the metric if we wanted to compare the two? What do you base your estimations on if not a standard of 'rightness'? So you can only be critical of your own countries policies? I think that seeking nuclear weapons is hardly an internal policy. The world is smaller than that.

I see your points and mostly agree. I find this interesting. Is there not any global standard of 'rightness'? No single point that could be considered right for all people. Like basic human rights. The right to life? Is there no baseline of acceptable behaviour for both people and states?

If I walk down the street brandishing a big sharp knife but doing no harm I will most likely be attacked by the authorities. Perhaps rightfully so. I don't consider myself to be a war-monger. Are there no principals worth fighting for? Just that conventional war is just about as bad as any other kind.Edited by Dogmafood, : No reason given.

OK so we have evolved some standards. If there are some hold outs against those standards should we not seek to include them? If the Iranians want to hang their gays because they are gay should we not try to change that behaviour or do we have no business there? If we actually believe that all people have a right to life should we not work to make that a reality?