Oh Shit World War Three Is About To Start

[Jokerman]

^i I think it'll catch on in the States.

 

[Bender]

Oh Shit World War Three Is About To Start

Bring it come, i'm tired of all this talk of war. I'll look forward to armageddon

 

[CalcuoCuchicheo]

Human rights violations fall under the jurisdiction of the UN, so does nuclear proliferation (well the realm of international law really). I've said before, and I will say it again, what everyone seems to miss is that the US, despite the power it holds in the international arena, does not have the authority or the right to step in and take control of such issues. Just because something is wrong, does not give anyone the right to take matters into their own hands. International politics is still made up of "nation states" and with this we must adhere the most fundamental of concepts - sovereignty. We cannot interfere merely because morality tells us to, we have to utilise the accepted and legitimised methods. This is the essence of international law and if we are to have peace, we need to understand and accept this as authority.

You say something must be done to stop these HR violations, I agree wholeheartedly. The unilateral approach to international affairs that the US embarks upon, however, prevents any affective measures to resolve these violations, as it undermines and thus, weakens the authority of the UN. If we are trully concerned about human rights (and don't be fooled, this is hardly ever on the agenda in regards to foreign policy) then a collaborative effort needs to be undertaken, once again, using the right procedure.

Very well said.

Those who believe America are right to attack whichever country they feel should read this.

Just like I've been saying, America have no right to interfere whenever they feel like it - there are proper channels to go through.

 

[Morris]

the united states was built on the labor of Africans who were stolen from there home and made to work for nothing.

Not really. Africans who were sold into slavery in the Americas worked on plantations. The United States obviously transformed from an agrarian country into a manufacturing/industrial one during the 19th century while slaves still worked fields. Slavery was basically the last vestige of the agrarian South before Reconstruction began to catch it up after the Civil War.

North Korea hasn't been invading countries left right and centre,

Hello? South Korea?

 

[Morris]

We cannot interfere merely because morality tells us to, we have to utilise the accepted and legitimised methods.

The United Nations is not a legitimate method for solving international problems for a few reasons. Firstly, the General Assembly is composed of large voting blocs, the violator often has UN standing, and as we've seen recently UN officials are completely corrupt.

 

[Amara]

The United Nations is not a legitimate method for solving international problems for a few reasons. Firstly, the General Assembly is composed of large voting blocs, the violator often has UN standing, and as we've seen recently UN officials are completely corrupt.

The UN system as it stands now is imperfect, you are right about that. But once again you miss the main point - the idea of an international body rather than a nation state is a much more viable and legitimate source of authority. This is why I support moves for reform of the structure of the UN - namely, giving the General Assembly greater power in regards to security issues (which would entail making the SC redundant). Otherwise, abolish the veto power in the Security Council, so the votes should work purely on a percentage basis of the whole council.... this would make the UN, in a sense, a more "wordly" body, rather than a means for the strong to exert influence and control.

 

[Morris]

But once again you miss the main point - the idea of an international body rather than a nation state is a much more viable and legitimate source of authority.

Well yeah, but if the current one is broken and there are no plans to reform it and it clearly does not work, then your vision is unrealistic.

is why I support moves for reform of the structure of the UN - namely, giving the General Assembly greater power in regards to security issues (which would entail making the SC redundant).

This is not a good idea. Tunisia shouldn't have as much influence in an international body as a developed nation. And the likes of Syria and Iran shouldn't even be in an international body, let alone have equal status with the United States.

 

[Amara]

Well yeah, but if the current one is broken and there are no plans to reform it and it clearly does not work, then your vision is unrealistic.

There is much talk of reform, unfortunately, like most issues of importance, it resonates only in the academic realms.... I think, however, that if their authority is continually undermined, changed will be forced.

This is not a good idea. Tunisia shouldn't have as much influence in an international body as a developed nation. And the likes of Syria and Iran shouldn't even be in an international body, let alone have equal status with the United States.

There are several different scenarios enisaged here, not simply one nation, one vote. Although, I think that system would be quite reasonable, because for example, a state which is small in size, population and influence is still quite capable of making informed decisions in regard to security - maybe even more so because they are less inclined to base decisions on their own self gain.

In addition, we should not fear states which differ in from ours, simply because, and I assume your concern is, that they may greater yield power...the thing is, the power imbalance that we have at the moment, for instance the permanent members of the SC having the veto power, is just as daunting and unjust as the idea of power in the hands of others. The whole notion of "deserving" status is so subjective, and can never trully be justified.

Other scenarios are that we base SC votes on the basis of population, i.e. one representative of an area is sent to the UN to make decisions on their behalf (much like the way Parliaments are run here). Or divide the world into regions for the purposes of the SC and have regional representatives, i.e. Europe, North America, Oceana, whatever...

 

[Zero Cool]

There are several different scenarios enisaged here, not simply one nation, one vote. Although, I think that system would be quite reasonable, because for example, a state which is small in size, population and influence is still quite capable of making informed decisions in regard to security - maybe even more so because they are less inclined to base decisions on their own self gain.

At the basis of this is one fact. The most powerful nations have always combined together one way or another to dictate the world's affairs, this will not change. I agree that the Security Council needs reform however to want the inclusion of states like Tunisia or Syria alongside the big 5 is sheer ludicrity. To inculcate a sense that corrupt nations such as Syria can help dictate the worlds affairs for their own gain is a plan doomed to failure. Perhaps something along the lines of a world parliament would be appropraite however in the long run I believe the U.N. much like the League of Nations before it will become a forgotten entity.

 

[Miner Threat]

North Korea is an extremely dangerous country.

I suggest everyone read the country profile, so you are equipped with the facts and know what you are dealing with.
[/B]

North Korea is only a threat to the unfortunate North Korean people...The regime is dying slowly and hasn' t got any support from anywhere(not even China)...
If there's a threat of WWIII in that region it'd rather come from a conflict between Taiwan(who's backed by the US) and China and it's not likely to happen at the moment...

 

[ArtsyGirl]

Human rights violations fall under the jurisdiction of the UN, so does nuclear proliferation (well the realm of international law really). I've said before, and I will say it again, what everyone seems to miss is that the US, despite the power it holds in the international arena, does not have the authority or the right to step in and take control of such issues. Just because something is wrong, does not give anyone the right to take matters into their own hands. International politics is still made up of "nation states" and with this we must adhere the most fundamental of concepts - sovereignty. We cannot interfere merely because morality tells us to, we have to utilise the accepted and legitimised methods. This is the essence of international law and if we are to have peace, we need to understand and accept this as authority.

You say something must be done to stop these HR violations, I agree wholeheartedly. The unilateral approach to international affairs that the US embarks upon, however, prevents any affective measures to resolve these violations, as it undermines and thus, weakens the authority of the UN. If we are trully concerned about human rights (and don't be fooled, this is hardly ever on the agenda in regards to foreign policy) then a collaborative effort needs to be undertaken, once again, using the right procedure.

I agree.

 

[locomack]

did you forget that the US gave north korea the capeabilities to make 65+ nukes a year in 1994

maybe not such a good move now that they want to nuke your ass

A congressional report says, "The U.S.-funded light water reactors in North Korea will accumulate plutonium in spent fuel at the rate of about 17,300 ounces per year, enough to produce 65 nuclear bombs a year."

The u.s gave nk capabilities, then when nk backstabbed them, the u.s now wants them to get rid of their shit. the u.s got owned nuff said

 

[Amara]

^ It is my understanding that the Light Water Reactors were supposed to be an alternative source of energy, not the gift of nuclear capabilities and were never completed (due to US Admin's failure in that regard). NK is supposed to be creating nuclear weapons out of enriched Uranium, not plutonium.... (I dont have time to check the net, but that's what I think).

 

[Pacaveli-T]

wouldnt stun me.

 

[Amara]

^ It is my understanding that the Light Water Reactors were supposed to be an alternative source of energy, not the gift of nuclear capabilities and were never completed (due to US Admin's failure in that regard). NK is supposed to be creating nuclear weapons out of enriched Uranium, not plutonium.... (I dont have time to check the net, but that's what I think).

oh, it's both....uranium and plutonium. Ironically the plutonium that was supposed to be used as a source of energy in the KEDO agreement after the construction of the reactor.

 

[Infamous Josedy]

All these problems are occuring now simply due to the fact that the Bush Administration believe that they are Supermen.I read History books, and watch documentaries on past wars and back then America was a country that basically kept to its' self, only jumping in WWI and II at the end, but then I guess after saving the world from Nazis, I think America feels that it is the Supreme Country in the world [Which I do believe we are probably one of the last Super Powers in the world] and feel it is their right to protect everybody else.
We really just need to go back to minding our business because medling in international affairs is just going to bring us more and more problems.

 

[Story]

here comes the draft

 

[XxXxDanXxXx]

Wonder what the hell 2pacboard.com is gonna do when the draft hits? Every last american dude on here and British are guaranteed to be drafted if it comes to that.

 

[Story]

^ i wont be, my left leg is so fucked up they wont want me

besides if you have asthma, hay fever, etc they wont take you.

fuck bush ill go to war right after his daughters

 

[Silleone]

fuck a draft, they better take me out becuz there aint no way im gonna join no army without a fucking fight, the army aint shit to a NIGGA WITH A SHORT FUSE.