Quote:
|
Originally Posted by munchen
Are we safer now that we have nukes to "protect us"?
|
Damn straight we are, and I'm no right-wing, I *heart* the military, gun-owner, either. Good example: What do you think has kept India and Pakistan from attacking each other a very long time ago? Hint: neither would survive.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by OFKUO
Amen to that. Diplomacy is often seen as soft or of being a pussy. You know instead of talking about problems, why not blow them up.
Having said that, I'd rather be a pussy than an asshole.
|
So, using your terminology, when the "other" assholes doesn't listen to the pussies, I guess the pussies just get shit on, don't they? ...Talking is only useful if someone is listening, and if you don't prepare for the worst, you won't be ready for it.
Just to pose a scenario: Europe, with a few notable exceptions, is pretty much demilitarized, but wants to send weapons to China, a country that's been known to take what it wants by force (read: "Tibet"). So if China wakes up one morning and decides it wants Taiwan (or any random east Asian country), who's gonna stop them? That's right, the country with the giant high-tech military, 'cause that's the only one they might be afraid of. What else could happen to them? Are the pussies going to tell any (potential) aggressors how badly they're behaving?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by JJRousseau
There are five or six Canada/US topics running on the forums right now that start with a media quote. It's a good basis for discussion but really, if all we know or think about Canada or the US (or anything!) is based on what we read in the newspaper, we don't know much.
|
Call me crazy, but isn't the whole idea of a forum to discuss things? That being the case I think we're doing just fine. I don't think anyone is claiming that they obtain the entirety of their knowledge from the news.