General Politics Discussion Topic [closed]

Originally posted by wtshnnfb01:[..]

I was just commenting on how fickle global alliances are. I mean look at Japan nowadays. Sure, we nuked them, and they commited some of the most heinous war crimes of the second world war against our troops, but now there arguebaly our biggist ally in Asia. Also, the keeping war violent thing only works against sain leaders.

In any case, I think you country may be on the verge of a civil war, in which case all the US has to do is sit back, and support the side we like with supplies, airstrikes, and Green Berets to provide training. If it dont work out well, a conventional ground campaign would be just as effective a few years down the road. Possibly more so, since our enemies numbers will have been drained, and the u.S. military is upgrading much of its equipment over the next few years.

Originally posted by Ali709:[..]

About the first part, you're not fighting with sane leaders. Vietnam: Communists, Iraq: Saddam, Afghanistan: Taliban, Iran: well, you know... if the leaders are sane, you probably won't have to start a war and will fix it all through dialog.

About the second part, no we're not on the verge of a civil war, you don't know the Iranians so well. It's mostly cold now, yes, there are protests, the next one is planned for Monday, but less people will turn up and the government forces will attack the people even more to scare them. All the hope that is left is for some legal ways to stop ahmadinejad...there are rumors that people inside the system are trying to find legal ways to change the president and have new elections.

My point is that what the US does, is not helping us, it's helping Ahmadinejad. You have to understand that there are huge numbers of not properly educated people from the rural areas in Iran, they believe whatever this guy tells them in his speeches, and he uses the examples I mentioned to fool these people into thinking that the west is the devil and he is their only savior, and all the opposition to the government are Israeli spies...
As stupid as all these may sound, when those naive people hear it from their supposed president, they believe it.

Just yesterday, he said that he has PROOF that the US is trying to stop the return of the hidden Imam (a belief among Shias, that there is a hidden Imam that will one day return to save the world, something like the messiah). Every educated Iranian just laughs at this, but some believe it, they are brainwashed.
Sometimes all we need is for you to JUST step aside, not step aside and help the good side, no, cause your help will decrease their support.

Sorry for the long rant, I'm just angry, tired and sad about my country's situation. We used to be the greatest empire. Cyrus the great, our emperor was a great leader, and the first leader the put human rights into action, he was the first leader to come up with anything like that...bleh, whatever

Originally posted by wtshnnfb01:[..]

By all acounts, your country was once among the greatest in the world.

Fun fact, despite the fact that the relations had gone down the toilet, your country covertly supported Israels bombing of Saddamns reactor back in the early 80s. I guess working with them was preferential to letting him get nukes.

Originally posted by BBC
Copenhagen summit urged to take climate change action
Danish Prime Minister Lars Loekke Rasmussen has described the UN climate summit in Copenhagen as an "opportunity the world cannot afford to miss".

Opening the two-week conference in the Danish capital, he told delegates from 192 countries a "strong and ambitious climate change agreement" was needed.

About 100 leaders are to attend the meeting, which aims to reach agreement on supplanting the 1997 Kyoto Protocol.

The UN says an unprecedented number of countries have promised emissions cuts.

Mr Rasmussen told delegates that the world was looking to the conference to safeguard humanity.

"For the next two weeks," he said, "Copenhagen will be Hopenhagen. By the end, we must be able to deliver back to the world what was granted us here today: hope for a better future."

Later, Rajendra Pachauri, who heads the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), criticised the "climategate" affair - the recent publication of e-mails among scientists assessing global warming at Britain's University of East Anglia.

He said the breaches showed "that some would go to the extent of carrying out illegal acts, perhaps in an attempt to discredit the IPCC".

Saudi climate negotiator Mohammad Al-Sabban, who has been resisting emissions curbs, told the conference that trust in climate science had been "shaken" by the leaked e-mails.

UN climate convention head Yvo de Boer said the time had come to deliver cuts in greenhouse gas emissions.

"The time for formal statements is over. The time for re-stating well-known positions is past," he told delegates.

"Copenhagen will only be a success if it delivers significant and immediate action."

Connie Hedegaard, conference president and Denmark's former climate minister, said: "This is our chance. If we miss it, it could take years before we got a new and better one. If we ever do."

Tougher targets?

Mr de Boer said offers of finance for clean technology for poor countries were also coming through and that talks were progressing on a long-term vision of massive cuts by 2050.

On Monday, South Africa became the latest country to make an offer - saying it would cut by one-third the growth of its carbon emissions over the next decade, subject to getting more funding and help from wealthier countries.

In July, the G8 bloc of industrialised countries and some major developing countries adopted a target of keeping the global average temperature rise since pre-industrial times to 2C.

However now the G77/China bloc - which speaks on behalf of developing countries - is discussing whether to demand a much tougher target of 1.5C.

A number of African delegations are backing the argument made by small island states that 2C will bring major impacts to their countries.

BBC environment correspondent Richard Black says this would raise a huge obstacle, because none of the industrialised countries have put forward emission cuts in the range that would be required to meet a 1.5C target.

The African Union has threatened to walk out of the talks if industrialised countries do not agree to help poor ones pay for the transition to cleaner economies.

Tougher targets?

Meanwhile, a new poll commissioned by the BBC suggests that public concern over climate change is growing across the world.

In the survey, by Globescan, 64% of people questioned said that they considered global warming a very serious problem - up 20% from a 1998 poll.

To stress the importance of the summit, 56 newspapers in 45 countries are publishing the same editorial on Monday, warning that climate change will "ravage our planet" unless action is agreed, the London-based Guardian reported.

The editorial - to be published in 20 languages - was thrashed out by editors ahead of the Copenhagen talks, the newspaper said.

"At the deal's heart must be a settlement between the rich world and the developing world," the editorial says.

Environmental activists are planning to hold protests in Copenhagen and around the world on 12 December to encourage delegates to reach the strongest possible deal.

Any agreement made at Copenhagen is intended to supplant the 1997 Kyoto Protocol on climate change, which expires in 2012.

World leaders who have pledged to attend include US President Barack Obama, UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown, French President Nicolas Sarkozy and Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh.

The main areas for discussion include:
Targets to curb greenhouse gas emissions, in particular by developed countries
Financial support for mitigation of and adaptation to climate change by developing countries
A carbon trading scheme aimed at ending the destruction of the world's forests by 2030.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8398510.stm

Originally posted by yuri31:[..]

Let's see what they can do about this so-called global warming....on the funny note- our Prime Minister said yesterday that he had solved the crisis.

Originally posted by wtshnnfb01:[..]

In the wake of the so called "Climategate" scandal, one must wonder how this will turn out.

Originally posted by Macphistfly:Nobody has a problem with that war-mongering bastard Obama getting the nobel peace prize?

It makes me furious.

He sits and is entertained by Nordic singers, while 10% of America starves and goes unemployed, as the middle class is being eroded as young men and women die fighting invisible enemies.

No fucking more of this.

Originally posted by MWSAH:[..]

It wasn't the best idea in the end, to give him that Nobel Peace Price but I prefer Obama above Bush for sure. And I'm sure he's doing all he can.

Originally posted by haytrain:Anyone else find it ironic that Obama accepted the Nobel Peace Prize with a speech defending our war?

Originally posted by yuri31:[..]



He makes me feel sick. He says his government can offer health care to everyone despite the fact it's financial crisis out there. What's The Saviour of the Earth and the Near Space going to do next? Catch Bin Laden on his own?