BF2S Forums Disturbing The Peace

Phantom2828 wrote:

LOL US wow people amaze me. Talk about country jealousy. Kinda how if you are American and go to another country, once people find out your American they kinda sneer at you like a dumb redneck.
If anything US is provider of global stability.

R0lyP0ly wrote:

vpyroman wrote:

Globally USA because we have global capabilities, an idiot in office, and the ability to enforce our will upon every developing country. Locally, its Israel because the Jews are the root of every war located in Europe and western Asia. Romans in the early AD centuries, Crusades, WW2, all the fighting currently in that area.

even if President Bush is an idiot (which i dont want to get into), you show your obvious lack of any realistic knowledge of the US govt -- bush has very little power in the way of actually doing something; being President means he can only attempt to persuade Congress into declaring war. You want someone to blame for this War on Terror? I'll give you 535, in America, we call it Congress. THEY declared war, and just because the Republicans have (er, had) control of Congress doesn't mean they are mere pawns in "Dubya's" hand. A unified government does not mean the President gets his way, so to speak. (Need i remind any one of Clinton's "Hillary (health) Care" reform that was shot down in flames in a Democrat-controlled Congress?)

I will concede, however, that George Bush is not the most charismatic speaker we've had, but that does not make him an bad politician, nor does it give you a reason for you to say our governemt is headed by an idiot.

Back on topic-- if pressed to choose between the listed countries, I would have to say Iran. China is subtlely changing into a more pro-Western nation, this will give our global economy a boost, though i think at the cost of a bit of the United States' prominence on the world market. Israel does have religious issues, but it is in more of a defensive state, as it should recognize the fact that, while the United States is embroiled in a conflict in Iraq/Afghanistan, it has little force left to defend Israel. I also believe the leaders of that 'area', so to speak, are smart enough to realize the ramifications of a nuclear war. Russia is everybodys favorite 'down with the Commie's, etc' country. In fact, it poses the least of a threat to global stability, as it has taken a 3rd party stance to most world events, though that could change with the suprise announce of their President, Putin, of his early retirement. His new favorite isnt much different that Putin; i expect little change in Russias stance on world policy/events. Lastly, north korea...ahhh....lets just say that they are like the 5th grade bully everyone remembers -- all brawn, until someone stands yp and follows through, like the US/UN economic sanctions, after which NK decides "on their own" to resume nuclear disarmament talks. IRAN, though, is a dynamic nation that changes its 'face' depending on who its currently 'dealing' with. Personally, i think more than a few Iraq WMD are in there somewhere (the UN bureauctratic mess gave Hussein ample time for relocation of wpns), and, unlike Israel, i dont believe the leadership is stable (or smart) enough to hold off on drastic, nuclear, measures. Iran just doesnt have a lucid identity, and that makes them one tough cookie to make realistic conjectures on

/breathe

Stingray24 wrote:

Not any one nation.  Radical islamic terrorists are the greatest threat to global security.  If I have to pick a nation: Iran - terrorist funding and recruitment central.

CameronPoe wrote:

The sacrifice of your fellow countrymen was in essence for little or nothing but their sacrifice is to be immensely respected.

weamo8 wrote:

I voted Israel.  I like Israel, and I am happy my country supports them, but their existence (which they are entitled to) creates a lot of problems.

Phantom2828 wrote:

R0lyP0ly wrote:

vpyroman wrote:

Globally USA because we have global capabilities, an idiot in office, and the ability to enforce our will upon every developing country. Locally, its Israel because the Jews are the root of every war located in Europe and western Asia. Romans in the early AD centuries, Crusades, WW2, all the fighting currently in that area.

even if President Bush is an idiot (which i dont want to get into), you show your obvious lack of any realistic knowledge of the US govt -- bush has very little power in the way of actually doing something; being President means he can only attempt to persuade Congress into declaring war. You want someone to blame for this War on Terror? I'll give you 535, in America, we call it Congress. THEY declared war, and just because the Republicans have (er, had) control of Congress doesn't mean they are mere pawns in "Dubya's" hand. A unified government does not mean the President gets his way, so to speak. (Need i remind any one of Clinton's "Hillary (health) Care" reform that was shot down in flames in a Democrat-controlled Congress?)

I will concede, however, that George Bush is not the most charismatic speaker we've had, but that does not make him an bad politician, nor does it give you a reason for you to say our governemt is headed by an idiot.

Back on topic-- if pressed to choose between the listed countries, I would have to say Iran. China is subtlely changing into a more pro-Western nation, this will give our global economy a boost, though i think at the cost of a bit of the United States' prominence on the world market. Israel does have religious issues, but it is in more of a defensive state, as it should recognize the fact that, while the United States is embroiled in a conflict in Iraq/Afghanistan, it has little force left to defend Israel. I also believe the leaders of that 'area', so to speak, are smart enough to realize the ramifications of a nuclear war. Russia is everybodys favorite 'down with the Commie's, etc' country. In fact, it poses the least of a threat to global stability, as it has taken a 3rd party stance to most world events, though that could change with the suprise announce of their President, Putin, of his early retirement. His new favorite isnt much different that Putin; i expect little change in Russias stance on world policy/events. Lastly, north korea...ahhh....lets just say that they are like the 5th grade bully everyone remembers -- all brawn, until someone stands yp and follows through, like the US/UN economic sanctions, after which NK decides "on their own" to resume nuclear disarmament talks. IRAN, though, is a dynamic nation that changes its 'face' depending on who its currently 'dealing' with. Personally, i think more than a few Iraq WMD are in there somewhere (the UN bureauctratic mess gave Hussein ample time for relocation of wpns), and, unlike Israel, i dont believe the leadership is stable (or smart) enough to hold off on drastic, nuclear, measures. Iran just doesnt have a lucid identity, and that makes them one tough cookie to make realistic conjectures on

/breathe

Finally someone with some fucking basic knowledge on democratic governments.
The first part that is.
Bush is not a king nor does he have nearly that much power. All he can really do is veto stuff.
I have said this before and you have just said it, If people want to bitch about how we went to war with Iraq bitch at congress not at Bush.
Dumbasses.
+1 for you

Interesting question, but IMO it gives to much credit to GWB. 

Let's not forget he's just a puppet on a string, an idiot who thanks everything he has ever accomplished in his life to his father and the friends of his father, and who is only in office because he lacks a vision of his own and therefor is easy to manipulate.  Sure, he has some charisma with some people who will accept everything with the fitting label attached to it ("religious", "conservative", etc), but after all he is just a dumb cowboy who should have remained on his ranch (no offence to the original cowboys).

Far more dangerous I feel, is the fact that the strings are being pulled by a lot more people we can imagine, most of them being part of the military industrial complex.  People like Cheney, Rove and others who are really in charge and who have their own agenda.  Most of them are never elected by the people, but they have a large influence on the whole process while they steer the elected officials, who are happy they get elected in the first place.

The whole election process in the US in 2000 and 2004 has scared me to see how mighty lies can become when they are brought by media who belong to one of the parties, how shameful it is that it's possible that a person like John Kerry, a veteran of the Vietnam War who has received many honors, and a politician with a message and a view, was spit upon by a lot of mindless people, even in recent posts on this forum.

Those people pulling the strings decide the policy of a country, and when it's a big country like the US, their decisions even have consequences for the whole world.

And that scares me more than the problems with Iran of some lame terrorist in a cave.