Senate The US Politics discussion

We know that many of the fighters from ISIS are Saudis. Just because they have control over a predominantly Sunni country doesn't mean there aren't extremely radical forces brewing under the surface. Wahhabism originated in Saudi Arabia.

We should perform risk assessments on a case by case basis for future eventualities.

And yet if they did you would seemingly have no problem with them attempting to obtain one.

Sure it is. That is why we utilise sanctions and other methods.

 

Except those sanctions aren't actually all taht effective. And they're pretty rubbish,when you penalise non-US companies for dealing with Iran. How much was the fine, $8bn? Think it was BNP Paribas or SocGen.

In any event, you can't disallow countries getting nukes and couldn't control Israel's successful armament. You can try, but it's not actually going to succeed.

 

Google the documentary "Soviet War Scare: 1983". He's interviewed about the incident and states he was immediately fired by his superior officer for telling Moscow it wasn't a real attack.

'Go figure' is right. Firing someone for refusing to start a nuclear exchange sounds like something Trump would do

Peace,

V-03

 

I would argue it did have a significant impact on bringing Iran to the table, as well as destabilising the regimes absolute control on power (which is why they elected a 'so-called' moderate) strengthening what is a significant dissident under-current in Iran. The best way, however, is to have good relations in the first place.

 

Yes; after decades of being utterly ineffectual they eventually brought Iran to the table. Which... as you note is the path of most resistance relative to not being sanctions slapping jerks in the first place.

After all, look how well they worked on Cuba.

 

Well, I don't trust people who unjustified, anti-religious prejudices/bigotry to be completely rational actors, either, so I guess we're even in that regard.

 

Firstly I never said I didn't trust you (assuming you are religious) I said I didn't trust the rationality of religious fundamentalists. Religion is the inherent disregard of rationality, and that is okay for an average religious person, but for a fundamentalist I think it goes to the heart of their ability to be rational actors.

Secondly why utilise the hyperbolic term of 'bigot' to describe this? It's hardly necessary or true.

 

No you didn't. Here's what you said.

Religiousness. The quality of being religious. You then went on to say about religious fundamentalists, but you're clearly giving off mixed messages here.

 

Lord Vivec

The context in which I was saying that was referring to the religiousness of religious radicals, meaning their particular devotion (their religiousness). I also said I don't think that about all religious people. No mixed messages.

 

DP

 

I don't think Iran would be any more likely to use nuclear weapons than the NPT states (India and Pakistan coming to blows would still be the biggest nuclear risk). And that's still terrifying.

 

Convincing argument.

 

Correct.

There are a number of templated reason to acquire nukes. One is to redress strategic imbalance - Russia after WWII, India/Pakistan. One is for greater strategic clout (China, England, France, Israel, Iran). One is because you're barking mad and think people will take you seriously (North Korea - though they're arguably in the strategic clout grouping).

India and Pakistan lack any strategic or tactical plan for when or if they might use nukes. Bugger Iran, this is why your trousers should be soiled.

 

Jimmy Carter just announced that he has cancer.

Edit: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/...has-spread-121300.html?cmpid=sf#ixzz3idUImdT0

 

Best of luck to him.

 

Jimmy Carter is a great human being. I wish him all the best.

 

And I'm the one that said barring illness he could be the first President to live to be in his 100s.

 

Yes this is all about you Juliet, quite right.

 

Not really current politics, but an old controversy from the 1920's is finally settled...

DNA tests prove Warren Harding had a lovechild while President

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/13/u...e-a-mystery-of-warren-hardings-love-life.html

 

First, God bless Jimmy Carter. A wonderful man, and probably the best ex-president the United States has had in recent times. I wish him and his family the absolute best.

Second, I thought everyone would be interested in seeing this video that's been making waves on Facebook. I has a very "nuanced" approach to dealing with radical Muslims.
(If you've already seen it I'm sorry, I've been behind and just discovered this...)
https://www.facebook.com/100010130851342/videos/104765619871133/?pnref=story

 

My Tea Party (distant) cousin is now posting support for Single-Payer alongside support for Donald Trump. (Though know she says she's "Coffee Party") This is the (half-2nd) cousin who had her son change schools because there were too many Indian kids and she was afraid of him catching swine flu. But she also voted for Obama in 2008.

Basically she's the bellwether of current populist feelings in America. And she's advocating for single-payer. Very interesting.

 

I have no idea what's going to happen in health care, but if the GOP wins next year, and they dismantle the ACA, they'd better have a viable alternative that works, and works fast.

If not, I believe support for single payer--and for soaking the rich to get it--will skyrocket. People are fed up with the mess that the US healthcare system as become.

Peace,

V-03

 

Oops. My computer is seeing double today.