Montecresto
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 9, 2013
- Messages
- 24,561
- Reaction score
- 5,507
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
What you do not seem to realize, but is as true as math, is that the growing number of states with nuclear capability does not decrease the probability of thermonuclear night. That worked fin in the Cold War of two superpowers. It a multi polar world without international security internalized at a higher level there is no stable optimum and the game always ends with all the pieces on the floor.
Well there still exists those who are Bi Polar that work in an internalized Higher level of Security. Susan Rice would be an example. Just covering all the bases. :mrgreen:
US sending 300 more US troops to Iraq
Sneaking a few hundred more in there. When will we learn that "nation building" doesnt work by an outside force.
I liked Condoleezza better.
Well the US remains the only country to have used nuclear weapons. I'm not afraid of Iran. That's a trumped up biggie man just as Iraq was. The US has supported militant Islamist groups since Carter. You're under the false impression that the US is interested in stability in the ME, fuzzy math joG!.
Used nukes? And it was right to do so.
But you see, that is not the question. Many games require the players to do things to win that can have negative results for all players or themselves. Have you never looked at these things. They are fascinating and it is certainly a personal loss to ignore them.
I liked Condoleezza better.
Yeah, "games" and "players" calloused much. I don't describe the loss of human life and human suffering in such terms. Btw, if Iran ever did get nukes and used them on us, I'm satisfied that there would be plenty of Iranians that feel as you do, that it was right to do so.
In the last sentence there seems to be a glimmer of understanding of how game theory might work.
Little surprise.
WASHINGTON — A nonpartisan, independent review of interrogation and detention programs in the years after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks concludes that “it is indisputable that the United States engaged in the practice of torture” and that the nation’s highest officials bore ultimate responsibility for it.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/16/w...partisan-review-concludes.html?ref=world&_r=0
Well Assad is taking it to ISIS on his side of the Border and even Bombing their HQ and Religious Court.....But then he also has to watch with BO sending money to the Rebels backed by the MB who have lost in Syria. Since he knows Al Nusra and the Liberation Front will just take them from the MB backed Rebels.
The Kurds have taken Kirkuk and are Holding ISIS off there.. Kerry went to have talks about them going offensive too. But I think they will want their Autonomy now. Plus the majority do identify as Sunni.
Even Al Sistani and Al Sadr wont go for trying to take Assad out.
Then you failed to comprehend the post.
Yes, I remember that article and the report. I didn't agree that "the United States" had tortured and believed that the formulation showed up why this group came to the conclusion it did. After looking at quite a bit of material, I am pretty sure that illegal things happened and that some people did some bad stuff. That it was "the United States" was wrong. It is also rather ignorant to say that the interrogation methods as allowed were torture. But you certainly don't want that to be so.
I suspected you wouldn't grab the face saver I threw you. But you really should look at game theory and its applications. It would do your understanding of some things immens good.
Kind of a quandary isn't it? The best chance the government of Iraq we installed have lies with Iran and Assad's Syrian forces. I think it is high time for Obama to switch sides in Syria. If he wants stability, he switches sides and does so in a hurry. If he wants to help ISIS, he continues to help the rebels.
Using nukes on civilian targets, supporting militant Islamic groups, and sowing instability, and those that excuse it are in need of face savers.
It is far away from the States and bad results from doing nothing will not be our problem as much as their's. And should they not want to deal with it, the bad results will be around their necks. Same thing in Syria and Ukraine. They did it and the dead are their fault. Don't let them forget that their lack of responsibility created the messes.
US foreign policy in the ME has been support of militant Islamic groups and instability for decades. Obama came and will go, US foreign policy will continue to support chaos and instability.
You should try and focus your anger better and try not to mix everything up. That way you would sound more rational.
It is my point of view that it is plain stupid. I can think of no other word.
That was focused like a lazier on failed US policy in the ME. Your just deflecting, because you support US foreign policy in the ME when there is a republican in office, even though all US policy in the ME has been the support of militant Islamic groups to ensure instability. Throughout the last 4-5 presidencies.
There are those that say such things and even some that believe.
Many more than you think.
Operation Cyclone was the code name for the United States Central Intelligence Agency program to arm and finance the Afghan mujahideen prior to and during the Soviet war in Afghanistan, 1979 to 1989. The program leaned heavily towards supporting militant Islamic groups that were favored by neighboring Pakistan, rather than other, less ideological Afghan resistance groups that had also been fighting the Marxist-oriented Democratic Republic of Afghanistan.
Operation Cyclone - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
President Obama has crossed a moral red line. Recently, he did the unthinkable: He announced that the U.S. government would directly arm terrorist groups in Syria.
Read more: KUHNER: How Obama arms al Qaeda - Washington Times
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter
We armed Uncle Joe too. And that was most probably the right thing to do. And he was much, much worse than the Syrian badies. But I hadn't heard that Obama was going to arm ISIL.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?