Politics (formerly Election 2012)

Invisusira's playground

Moderators: Aergis, Invisusira

Re: Politics (formerly Election 2012)

Postby Koatanga » Thu Feb 13, 2014 2:58 pm

Io.Draco wrote:Everything short of a nuclear attack would result in a long and costly war against Iran, even if Israel got involved to help you out. Although taking the gloves want means what that the US no longer gives a damn about the Geneva convention. Oh that would never have major political repercussions against the country.

Also that ICBM attack, not going to happen. For all the BS that's in the media that the US is under threat by Iran and North Korea those countries aren't going to launch ICBMs against the US. What would be the gain?

That's my point. Iran is not going to launch at the US because the US would literally go ballistic on them. The US outspends Iran on military budget by two orders of magnitude. Nothing to gain and everything to lose.

As far as the Geneva convention is concerned, don't underestimate (or misunderestimate) the arrogance of the US. They figure they can do what they want because who's going to enforce it?
Un-Retired. Ish. Koatanga, Shapely, Sultry of Greenstone - Dath'Remar
Koatanga
 
Posts: 1663
Joined: Mon Nov 17, 2008 12:46 pm

Re: Politics (formerly Election 2012)

Postby Fivelives » Fri Feb 14, 2014 1:21 am

We actually do hold pretty tight to the geneva and hague conventions*. It's less a matter of "who's gonna enforce it" and more a matter of "if we break the rules, so will they" and that would be horrifyingly bad. Terrorists aren't exactly an army and even the taliban and al-qaeda haven't gone and broken those treaties wholesale. If we publicly break them, then it becomes the US versus the entire world - and that's something that not even WE are arrogant enough to think we would come out on top of.

Not to mention the massive diplomatic ramifications. Even if our allies didn't dogpile on to attack us, they definitely wouldn't be allies anymore.

* There have been, currently are, and will continue to be, mistakes made and exigent circumstances that force minor violations. But on an individual basis it wouldn't be the same as wholesale violations of the treaties.
- I'm not Jesus, but I can turn water into Kool-Aid.
- A Sergeant in motion outranks an officer who doesn't know what the hell is going on.
- A demolitions specialist at a flat run outranks everybody.
User avatar
Fivelives
 
Posts: 2801
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2008 7:55 pm

Re: Politics (formerly Election 2012)

Postby Koatanga » Fri Feb 14, 2014 2:45 am

Well, it's not like the US gives a damn what the UN has to say about anything, so if I was Iran, I wouldn't want to rely on the US holding to any international accord. It may not be likely they would do anything against international treaties, but that's far from ruling it out as a possibility, particularly in a retaliatory situation.
Un-Retired. Ish. Koatanga, Shapely, Sultry of Greenstone - Dath'Remar
Koatanga
 
Posts: 1663
Joined: Mon Nov 17, 2008 12:46 pm

Re: Politics (formerly Election 2012)

Postby Fivelives » Fri Feb 14, 2014 5:36 am

The Hague and Geneva conventions aren't a UN thing. And the US has been stopped by the UN before - keep in mind that there are 5 countries (US, UK, China, Russia, and France) that have veto powers in the UN. Most recently, Russia and China vetoed a plan drafted by the US to go into Syria.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-18914578
- I'm not Jesus, but I can turn water into Kool-Aid.
- A Sergeant in motion outranks an officer who doesn't know what the hell is going on.
- A demolitions specialist at a flat run outranks everybody.
User avatar
Fivelives
 
Posts: 2801
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2008 7:55 pm

Re: Politics (formerly Election 2012)

Postby Klaudandus » Fri Feb 14, 2014 6:02 am

I'll just say this. I miss the days of the surplus.
The Element of Forum Hyperbole
Image
---
Flüttershy - Draenei Protection Paladin, Aerie Peak
Klaudandus - BE Protection Paladin, Feathermoon (Semi-retired)
User avatar
Klaudandus
 
Posts: 9349
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 7:08 am
Location: Texas' Armpit

Re: Politics (formerly Election 2012)

Postby Io.Draco » Sat Feb 15, 2014 10:56 am

Koatanga wrote:Well, it's not like the US gives a damn what the UN has to say about anything, so if I was Iran, I wouldn't want to rely on the US holding to any international accord. It may not be likely they would do anything against international treaties, but that's far from ruling it out as a possibility, particularly in a retaliatory situation.



Considering they didn't do it with Afghanistan when the World Trade Center was bombed I'd doubt they would do it for Iran.
User avatar
Io.Draco
 
Posts: 1138
Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2007 1:33 am

Re: Politics (formerly Election 2012)

Postby Fridmarr » Sat Feb 15, 2014 11:48 am

Iran launching ICBM's at us is not on the same scale as the 9/11 attacks, and I'd expect a retaliatory series of strikes designed to make sure they were utterly incapable of launching another sort of offensive for a generation or so. And in that scenario we'd have the full support of our allies regardless of any sort of international laws that may come into play.
Fridmarr
Global Mod
 
Posts: 6464
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2007 1:03 am

Re: Politics (formerly Election 2012)

Postby Io.Draco » Sat Feb 15, 2014 12:31 pm

I don't quite agree, especially if the US starts breaking the Geneve and Hague conventions wholesale you would find European support for American action quite frankly limited.

As for the response to the strike. Well that would depend on the targets hit. The only realistic scenario where Iran would fire an ICBM to hit the mainland of the USA would be as part of pre-emptive strike against the US military forces, specifically those in the Arab Gulf. In that scenario the target would be military. This would only happen if Iran firmly believed that the US was being ready to attack them.

While I would expect messages of support from US allies in that event I would not expect any real military or even political support to materialize, at least from the EU. Europe doesn't care at all for the notion of getting dragged into a war against Iran because of American idiocy in preparing to strike/invade Iran.

As for Israel..well let's just say that if they were not getting ready to help the US in their attack on Iran they would not lift a finger to help you, because doing so means facing Hezbollah.
User avatar
Io.Draco
 
Posts: 1138
Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2007 1:33 am

Re: Politics (formerly Election 2012)

Postby Koatanga » Sat Feb 15, 2014 7:41 pm

Io.Draco wrote:Considering they didn't do it with Afghanistan when the World Trade Center was bombed I'd doubt they would do it for Iran.

That's because Afghanistan - the country - didn't attack the US. Instead it was a terrorist organisation that operated out of several countries, including Afghanistan.

When it was Iraq, the US ignored the UN, so I have no doubt they'd do it for Iran.
Un-Retired. Ish. Koatanga, Shapely, Sultry of Greenstone - Dath'Remar
Koatanga
 
Posts: 1663
Joined: Mon Nov 17, 2008 12:46 pm

Re: Politics (formerly Election 2012)

Postby Fivelives » Sun Feb 16, 2014 7:37 am

The UN didn't tell us we couldn't invade Iraq, they just declined support. Essentially, we didn't even ask for UN support beforehand, because we knew we'd never get it - especially with Russia and China being able to veto any resolution to deploy a joint task force. Iraq is a good customer for arms deals with both Russia and China, so it's pretty close to a sure thing that any attempted resolution to get UN nations to invade Iraq would have been vetoed by one or the other.

Given that the UN stands pretty firmly behind sanctions on Iran's nuclear program, though, if Iran were to launch a preemptive strike against the US then the UN would likely be behind a full scale invasion of Iran from all member nations.

That would change the instant that the US started wiping its collective ass with the Geneva and Hague treaties, though. We would likely be "withdrawn" from the UN for that, or at least severely penalized - probably by taking us off of the security commission, leaving us without veto powers. There isn't any precedent for countries being kicked out of the UN, but there also isn't any precedent for a signatory of either of the "rules of war" treaties being unapologetically violated either. I would argue that they would have to make a pretty severe example of the first country to do so, and by removing the US from the UN that would count as a "pretty severe example". The US would become diplomatically radioactive and NOBODY would want to deal with us, and it would effectively be the end of the United States.
- I'm not Jesus, but I can turn water into Kool-Aid.
- A Sergeant in motion outranks an officer who doesn't know what the hell is going on.
- A demolitions specialist at a flat run outranks everybody.
User avatar
Fivelives
 
Posts: 2801
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2008 7:55 pm

Re: Politics (formerly Election 2012)

Postby Fridmarr » Sun Feb 16, 2014 9:47 am

I guess I'm lost on the notion of why we'd be ignoring the Geneva convention anyhow? It would certainly not be necessary to accomplish the mission in Iran, particularly if they launched first.

That said, the UN's standards for membership are incredibly low. If you look through the list of members, there isn't exactly a shortage of regimes that have soundly ignored Geneva (and lots of other international treaties). They don't kick out nations, they attempt a diplomatic approach to stop the action and then maybe afterwards prosecute leaders. Kicking a country out would kind of be a bit self defeating for the UN.
Fridmarr
Global Mod
 
Posts: 6464
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2007 1:03 am

Re: Politics (formerly Election 2012)

Postby Fivelives » Sun Feb 16, 2014 11:08 pm

There have been a number of countries "withdrawn" from the UN because they no longer exist, but none have ever been forcibly withdrawn. One country tried to voluntarily withdraw, but the UN ignored them until they stopped talking about wanting out.

And the countries that wipe their collective asses with the Geneva and Hague treaties are generally those who aren't signatories to them. If you aren't a signatory of a treaty then you can't be held to the terms in those treaties. Given that it's the US who prosecutes war crimes (for the most part), I don't think they would have any recourse BUT to kick us out if we were to go off the rails like that, since we wouldn't respond to any of the UN requests to show up for our own trial.
- I'm not Jesus, but I can turn water into Kool-Aid.
- A Sergeant in motion outranks an officer who doesn't know what the hell is going on.
- A demolitions specialist at a flat run outranks everybody.
User avatar
Fivelives
 
Posts: 2801
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2008 7:55 pm

Re: Politics (formerly Election 2012)

Postby Fridmarr » Mon Feb 17, 2014 9:43 am

I'm sure they'd manage to setup another of their special courts for us, like they do when their members break international law, even if we weren't the ones doing the heavy lifting.

Again, kicking us out would be self defeating and I don't know what it would gain them. A big part of their job is to fix these issues, diplomatically, and kicking us out would be akin to giving up on their biggest prize ever. They'll use their usual forms of punishments with declarations and sanctions and so forth.

But I'm willing to bet internally those responsible would have their own issues. Such violations would create massive political issues here ranging from impeachment to certainly not getting re-elected, and most likely result in electing officials that would address the problems and deal with the violators. I really don't think that leadership in any westernized country could commit massive scale atrocities and not pay a price at home, which is kind of the anchor of the UN anyhow.

Any way, that's all just speculation either way, but I think this whole digression is moot. I have no idea why we would be ignoring Geneva anyhow, it seems totally unnecessary and unrealistic.
Fridmarr
Global Mod
 
Posts: 6464
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2007 1:03 am

Re: Politics (formerly Election 2012)

Postby Klaudandus » Mon Feb 17, 2014 10:49 am

Why can't the US stop playing World Police? People in the middle east hates us for two reasons.
- We meddle in other people's business
- We are seen as Israel's lapdog.
The Element of Forum Hyperbole
Image
---
Flüttershy - Draenei Protection Paladin, Aerie Peak
Klaudandus - BE Protection Paladin, Feathermoon (Semi-retired)
User avatar
Klaudandus
 
Posts: 9349
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 7:08 am
Location: Texas' Armpit

Re: Politics (formerly Election 2012)

Postby Amirya » Mon Feb 17, 2014 10:55 am

How unpatriotic of you. Everyone knows that All Real Americans do not "meddle" but "bring democracy" to the unenlightened masses.

Geesh.
Image

Fetzie wrote:The Defias Brotherhood is back, and this time they are acting as racketeers in Goldshire. Anybody wishing to dance for money must now pay them protection money or be charged triple the normal amount when repairing.
Amirya
Maintankadonor
 
Posts: 2950
Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2007 2:59 am

Re: Politics (formerly Election 2012)

Postby Fivelives » Mon Feb 17, 2014 11:32 am

Klaudandus wrote:Why can't the US stop playing World Police? People in the middle east hates us for two reasons.
- We meddle in other people's business
- We are seen as Israel's lapdog.

We do it because somebody has to, and nobody else that's even remotely reasonable is willing to. Would you really want China to be in charge of policing world human rights issues? How about Afghanistan deciding women's rights? Or how about Iran in charge of negotiating peace treaties? Maybe you'd like Syria in charge of disarmament and chemical weapons programs?

Essentially it's a case of the people who would be best at the job are those who are completely unwilling to do it. At one point, I think that the US as a nation was unwilling to do it but recognized the need. Unfortunately, I think we've gone beyond that to where we actually enjoy being Team 'Murka: World Police™ (Fuck Yeah!). That shit about "bringing democracy" pisses me off to no end. We go in to perfectly functioning countries and force our system of government on them like a damn plague or something. We have become what we once feared - back in the 50s the "Red Scare" was in full effect, and we were deathly afraid of the spread of communism. So how exactly is our method of "bomb the democracy into them" even one single iota better?

As far as being Israel's lapdog, that's a whole other can of worms. Being an ally doesn't necessarily mean you're a lapdog. Israel is (as far as I know) the only country we're accused of with that, despite having strategic alliances with a number of other countries that are just as strong as those we have with Israel. So why aren't we accused of being, say, France's attack dog? Or maybe the UK's yappy anklebiter?
- I'm not Jesus, but I can turn water into Kool-Aid.
- A Sergeant in motion outranks an officer who doesn't know what the hell is going on.
- A demolitions specialist at a flat run outranks everybody.
User avatar
Fivelives
 
Posts: 2801
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2008 7:55 pm

Re: Politics (formerly Election 2012)

Postby Amirya » Mon Feb 17, 2014 11:52 am

And the worst part of the "bringing democracy" crap is that I look out how dysfunctional our own government is nowadays, and the only thought in my head is, "who the fuck would want to have this sort of this?"

Then it gives me ideas as to what my non-American fictional characters say to their American counterparts...
Image

Fetzie wrote:The Defias Brotherhood is back, and this time they are acting as racketeers in Goldshire. Anybody wishing to dance for money must now pay them protection money or be charged triple the normal amount when repairing.
Amirya
Maintankadonor
 
Posts: 2950
Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2007 2:59 am

Re: Politics (formerly Election 2012)

Postby Fivelives » Mon Feb 17, 2014 12:11 pm

The fucked-upedness (if that isn't a word, it damn well SHOULD be) of our government proves that it's functioning as intended. The bigger problem is the electorate being willfully ignorant of the issues and the candidates platforms/voting records. Also, being unable/unwilling to learn the way our government actually functions.

In fairness though, I think when junior high and high school civics classes stopped being mandatory (thank you, standardized fucking tests and the "teach to the test" philosophy they encourage) that started the downward trend in people knowing how our government works. Now the people who are voting are those who never took those classes (or it's been so long they've forgotten How Things Work), so they have no clue how the system of checks and balances actually works. Look no further than people claiming that executive orders mean the president can essentially make everyone do whatever he wants as proof.
- I'm not Jesus, but I can turn water into Kool-Aid.
- A Sergeant in motion outranks an officer who doesn't know what the hell is going on.
- A demolitions specialist at a flat run outranks everybody.
User avatar
Fivelives
 
Posts: 2801
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2008 7:55 pm

Re: Politics (formerly Election 2012)

Postby Koatanga » Mon Feb 17, 2014 12:28 pm

Fivelives wrote:
Klaudandus wrote:Why can't the US stop playing World Police? People in the middle east hates us for two reasons.
- We meddle in other people's business
- We are seen as Israel's lapdog.

We do it because somebody has to, and nobody else that's even remotely reasonable is willing to. Would you really want China to be in charge of policing world human rights issues? How about Afghanistan deciding women's rights? Or how about Iran in charge of negotiating peace treaties? Maybe you'd like Syria in charge of disarmament and chemical weapons programs?

I think the point is that no single nation should be the sole judge of what happens around the world. Iran feels as comfortable with the US policing everything as the US would is Syria was in charge.

The US is one of the more isolationist populations in the world. The average American has no clue what the pulse of the world is. The US is making greater strides toward joining the rest of the world - it's up to 1/3 of the population having a passport, which is double what it was in 2000, and much better than the 3% who had passports in 1989. But there's still a long way to go just to catch up to the likes of Canada, where 65% of the people have passports.

The world should not be policed by a people who don't even visit it. How can the US pretend to understand or be a part of the world if the vast majority of the people voting for American leadership don't even visit countries outside the US? It's not fit to hold such a position. It's not part of the global community, yet it elects itself Global Cops because it spends more on military than the next 10 nations combined, 9 of which are allies.

If there's a guy on your block who collects lots of guns and keeps to himself, that's not a candidate for Sheriff.
Un-Retired. Ish. Koatanga, Shapely, Sultry of Greenstone - Dath'Remar
Koatanga
 
Posts: 1663
Joined: Mon Nov 17, 2008 12:46 pm

Re: Politics (formerly Election 2012)

Postby Klaudandus » Mon Feb 17, 2014 1:03 pm

Fivelives wrote:As far as being Israel's lapdog, that's a whole other can of worms. Being an ally doesn't necessarily mean you're a lapdog. Israel is (as far as I know) the only country we're accused of with that, despite having strategic alliances with a number of other countries that are just as strong as those we have with Israel. So why aren't we accused of being, say, France's attack dog? Or maybe the UK's yappy anklebiter?


Because Israel is the one that goes in, rattles the middle east, then goes to hide behind the US.

Also, many congressmen, both Republicans and Democrats, are really friendly towards Israel and want foreign policy based on what Israel wants.

And don't forget the whole financial aid to Israel. Do we really need to give billions of dollars to Israel?

Yeah yeah, you can say that Isreal is our foothold in the middle east should we actually need to go invade other countries, but we probably would not need to if we weren't so chummy with Israel.

Funnily enough, Netanyahu has complained several times about Obama not being as chummy as other presidents have been towards Israel.
The Element of Forum Hyperbole
Image
---
Flüttershy - Draenei Protection Paladin, Aerie Peak
Klaudandus - BE Protection Paladin, Feathermoon (Semi-retired)
User avatar
Klaudandus
 
Posts: 9349
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 7:08 am
Location: Texas' Armpit

Re: Politics (formerly Election 2012)

Postby Fridmarr » Mon Feb 17, 2014 1:11 pm

That's not even close to accurate at any level. I mean Israel has no desire to hide behind the US (and how would that make us their lapdog? That doesn't even makes sense) nor do they need too. All of their neighbors attacked them once, bent on wiping Israel off the map and it didn't go very well. Aside from Palestinian territories, Israel doesn't really "go" anywhere and doesn't really get involved with much else. They aren't why we went in to Afghanistan, Kuwait, Bosnia, Egypt, Iraq, or why we are involved in Syria and with sanctions on Iran and all the other crap we are involved in. Israel isn't a big rattler of things in the Middle East these days, but with current regimes in place, as long as they exist there will be some issues.

Israel is a liberalized country, and we are allies with pretty much every liberalized country on the planet.
Fridmarr
Global Mod
 
Posts: 6464
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2007 1:03 am

Re: Politics (formerly Election 2012)

Postby Klaudandus » Tue Feb 18, 2014 3:36 pm

The Element of Forum Hyperbole
Image
---
Flüttershy - Draenei Protection Paladin, Aerie Peak
Klaudandus - BE Protection Paladin, Feathermoon (Semi-retired)
User avatar
Klaudandus
 
Posts: 9349
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 7:08 am
Location: Texas' Armpit

Re: Politics (formerly Election 2012)

Postby Amirya » Tue Feb 18, 2014 4:21 pm

Uhhh...I'm not as up to date on DinoAir as I should be, but how the hell does one determine CO2 ppm at that time? And in which period?

Also, I have this sneaking suspicion the marijuana in CO is crossing state lines.
Image

Fetzie wrote:The Defias Brotherhood is back, and this time they are acting as racketeers in Goldshire. Anybody wishing to dance for money must now pay them protection money or be charged triple the normal amount when repairing.
Amirya
Maintankadonor
 
Posts: 2950
Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2007 2:59 am

Re: Politics (formerly Election 2012)

Postby Passionario » Tue Feb 18, 2014 11:51 pm

The civil war in Ukraine is rapidly going hot. :(
If you are not the flame, you're the fuel.
User avatar
Passionario
 
Posts: 2241
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 2:52 am

Re: Politics (formerly Election 2012)

Postby Sagara » Wed Feb 19, 2014 12:18 am

Heard about that on the news. The typical message here in Brussels is that downtrodden citizens are forming human chains behind the radical activists that are currently facing the police forces.

Then again, I currently suspect any message brought to me from occidental sources as pro-manifestant (and I don't suspect any pro-police report, I just remember they're pro-russian, and agree that the bullshit ratio is off the grid).
When that day comes, seek all the light and wonder of this world, and fight.

Worldie wrote:I used to like it [mean] back on Sylvanas.

Queldan - EU Stormrage (H) - Good night, sweet prince.
User avatar
Sagara
 
Posts: 3272
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 1:04 am
Location: Belgium

PreviousNext

Return to Arkham Asylum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

Who is online

In total there is 1 user online :: 0 registered, 0 hidden and 1 guest (based on users active over the past 5 minutes)
Most users ever online was 380 on Tue Oct 14, 2008 6:28 pm

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest