Arming Up

Kevster

Why are many nations arming-up? [Hugo] Chavez just announced that he is going to make Venezuela safe with weapons; The US is still violating NATO and continues to do so with this new base in Poland; Russia is also now going to arm itself (Using the US' neglect of NATO as an excuse); China has built-up a huge army; North Korea still has not shut-down it's last reactor; Iran no doubt is building nuclear weapons; Britain has renewed Trident... ...


My feelings are that there will be yet another World War over the coming few years. What the world needs is Bush, Chavez, Ahmadinejad, Jintao, and Jong-Il to get lost and ****-off to an early grave.

Victor

People are spending more because they perceive that other people are arming up.

In reality, its just keeping the arms and aerospace companies busy, delivering not a whole lot.

mike65

There have been very few periods of demilitarisation and one of them was in the early 30s and we know what happened a few years later!

Mike.

InFront

Kevster wrote:

Iran no doubt is building nuclear weapons;

Not intending to start a debate over it but, no. I get worried when I see people say something like that as something resembling a fact or an acceptable, evidence-based statement.

On topic, I don't see any prospect of a world war whatsoever, provided that the next US President is capable of restraint.

Manic Moran

Keeps us modellers busy. With more countries buying more equipment, we can make more interesting models. Just bought a couple of Chinese AFVs, should be interesting builds.

FWIW, the US Army has to a point disarmed, with a drastic reduction in heavy equipment. For example, there used to be at least six tank battalions based in California. Now only a half of a battalion left, everybody else has converted to something else. Kindof sucks, I'm probably going to have to get out of the tank business.

NTM

FTA69

Chavez just announced that he is going to make Venezuela safe with weapons

Well this would be part of his plan to make US interference in his country less of an easy option. He has also created militias amongst students and workers in order to supplement the army.

DadaKopf

Part of the reason for the scale-up (if it's really happening, the USA is still supreme military power) is surely the exhaustion of the world's finite resources - increasingly, oil and water, which as we all know, don't mix.

FYI

Kevster wrote:

Iran no doubt is building nuclear weapons;

No evidence to suggest this, other than US/UK allegations. And we know their previous form on this issue.

Time Magazine

FYI wrote:

No evidence to suggest this, other than US/UK allegations. And we know their previous form on this issue.

Yep, let's trust the country whose president still thinks Allah will enter Tehran this year and will bring the destruction of the Western world.

There's no risk there, no.

In fact, let's use this trivial issue to punish the US for the invasion of Iraq.

Judt

When have countries not been arming up, again? The cold war obviously saw quite a lot of it, but after the collapse of the Soviet Union we simply saw all their stock sold off to the ten million new militias, armies and terrorists running around the place.

At the moment you're hearing more about it because it fits into a global jigsaw. China is the one to be worried about, but not for the next 50 years - they've put their plans to have a blue water navy capable of projecting power overseas into writing, but I find most people are shy to the thought. Get back to me in 60 years, I suppose.

Countries like Venezuela are talking tough - though Venezuela is more like to start a war with the Netherlands than the USA, as the Dutch own a piece of property down there that is not dissimilar to the Argies - Brits situation over the Falklands. Just because the media types want to get into a frenzy about the whole Anti-US thing, don't think not to look beyond it.

Countries are arming all the time. No worries. The big countries are actually disarming a lot.

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

Yep, let's trust the country whose president still thinks Allah will enter Tehran this year and will bring the destruction of the Western world.

as opposed to the country whos president thinks jesus will enter washington this year, and will bring the destruction of the entire world?

Sesshoumaru

I think Iran will be the country that starts WW3. President dinner jacket has given us every reason to believe he wants nuclear weapons. Hopefully the US will nuke em before those mad mullahs and dinner jacket get those nukes they so crave!

FYI

Ibid wrote:

Yep, let's trust the country whose president still thinks Allah will enter Tehran this year and will bring the destruction of the Western world.

There's no risk there, no.

In fact, let's use this trivial issue to punish the US for the invasion of Iraq.

Sorry, but the above makes absolutely no sense.

Hogmeister B

Sesshoumaru wrote:

I think Iran will be the country that starts WW3. President dinner jacket has given us every reason to believe he wants nuclear weapons. Hopefully the US will nuke em before those mad mullahs and dinner jacket get those nukes they so crave!

Yes, because Iran has such a record of aggression and warmongering... There's a big difference between being justifiably peeved at the US (who murdered their prime minister, installed a mini-Hitler in his place, and were then so miffed at his overthrow that they incited the worst Middle Eastern war in centuries) and wanting to incinerate the Earth. The US has invaded more countries in the last five years than Iran has in several hundred years of its history.

Kevster

On that note, why did Iran denounce the Holocaust?


Plus, on the note of Chavez, I think that what he is doing is good in a way because he is forming an alliance amongst the South American (and some Central American) nations; an alliance that can rival the US. Generally - worldwide - I get the feeling that many nations are getting peeved with the US being the dominant power and they are finally doing something about it. This can only be beneficial.

Kevster

I think that what is ironic is the fact that the USA is trying to bring peace to the world but is in fact breeding more terrorists. Perhaps they should look after their own country first, before meddling in others. They have serious issues to contend with back home; namely gun licensing.


What I found truly outrageous was when George Bush Jnr said that he wants to bring democracy to the middle-east. These people don't want democracy. They just want to be left alone.


Kevin.

InFront

Ibid wrote:

Yep, let's trust the country whose president still thinks Allah will enter Tehran this year and will bring the destruction of the Western world.

There's no risk there, no.

That's a mixture of inaccuracy and a complete fabrication to be honest. When you grow a similar concern about the Jewish belief of their Messiah entering Jerusalem, I'll take it seriously.

Frederico

Sesshoumaru wrote:

I think Iran will be the country that starts WW3. President dinner jacket has given us every reason to believe he wants nuclear weapons. Hopefully the US will nuke em before those mad mullahs and dinner jacket get those nukes they so crave!

I think Israel will be the country that starts WW3. Hopefully the Iranians can nuke those dirty jews off the face of the earth before they attack.


Soo, back to topic, I think the current bout of militarisation is mainly due to the current crop of various world leaders... Bush Blair Putin Chavez and so on.

Time Magazine

Mordeth wrote:

as opposed to the country whos president thinks jesus will enter washington this year, and will bring the destruction of the entire world?

Yep, because George Bush does not think Jesus will enter Washington this year. George Bush (I presume) has read the Bible, the book he believes in, which fairly clearly states that nobody knows when there will be a return.

And incidentally, just because you don't trust George Bush with nukes doesn't mean you should trust Tehran with them.

FYI wrote:

Sorry, but the above makes absolutely no sense.

I had my sarcasm hat on .

InFront wrote:

That's a mixture of inaccuracy and a complete fabrication to be honest. When you grow a similar concern about the Jewish belief of their Messiah entering Jerusalem, I'll take it seriously.

Who's to say I don't? Incidentally, just because you don't trust Israel with nukes doesn't mean you should trust Tehran with them.

And to me not co-operating with UN resolutions on anything nuclear is serious evidence of being a bold boy.

Now let's not go entirely off-topic about what Tehran is doing with plutonium or kryptonite. The child who won't show what's in his pockets arouses suspicion so let's get back on-topic as to why the world is arming-up; if that is the case on a global scale.

InFront

Ibid wrote:

Yep, because George Bush does not think Jesus will enter Washington this year. George Bush (I presume) has read the Bible, the book he believes in, which fairly clearly states that nobody knows when there will be a return.

Where exactly are you getting the idea that Ahmadinejad specified a time?. He's said the exact same thing as a Jew would say except he named a different messenger.
I don't know whether you genuinely read this somewhere or are just inventing it first hand, but I suggest you read the speech that people who make points similiar to your one reference.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/iran/2005/iran-050918-irna02.htm (Last paragraph)

You're the guy attributing some relevance to a comment like that, which is very strange considering you don't believe it. How exactly such a prophecy is a perceived as dangerous to someone who doesn't believe it is beyond me.

Frederico

Frederico wrote:

I think Israel will be the country that starts WW3. Hopefully the Iranians can nuke those dirty jews off the face of the earth before they attack.

Take a month off for that and when you come back if I see any more posts like this one, you will be permanently banned.

Manic Moran

[Deleted]

NTM

Sesshoumaru

Sesshoumaru wrote:

Hopefully the US will nuke em before those mad mullahs and dinner jacket get those nukes they so crave!

While I'm here you can have the same medicine as Frederico.
1 month and none of that kind of tripe when you come back please.

Kevster

I cannot believe Frederico said that; That kind of post certainly is not welcome and should be edited by the moderator.


Israel is yet another story in the 'Arming-up' saga. They are continually arming-up because they have hostile neighbours. The reason why they have hostile neighbours is, of course, the US' fault. They [The US] 'stole' land from Palestine and gave it to the Jews. It would be nice if the Palestinians and the other Arab nations in that region could just accept Israel. However, I feel that their hatred for it is based on the fact that it was the US that gave the land to the Jews. The fact that Israel continually sends missiles into neighbouring lands obviously doesn't help either!


...In 100 years, the US has made a mess of Israel/Palestine, Vietnam, Afghanistan, and now Iraq.

Hogmeister B

Kevster wrote:

...In 100 years, the US has made a mess of Israel/Palestine, Vietnam, Afghanistan, and now Iraq.

Indeed. But don't leave out Iran, most of central America, Cambodia, Laos etc., all of whom have suffered irreperable damage and hundreds of thousands of deaths due to the united states' interference.

InFront

Kevster wrote:

Israel is yet another story in the 'Arming-up' saga. They are continually arming-up because they have hostile neighbours.

There is no such thing as a completely hostile country, it's a question of who they are hostile to. A whole lot of people are hostile to Israel who aren't hostile to say, the Swedes or the Chinese or Egyptians, and for good reason.

The reason why they have hostile neighbours is, of course, the US' fault.

The reason why there is hostility to present day Israel is Israel's fault. Israel is no longer some political untouchable who needs to be tiptoed around. It needs to wake up and account for its own actions.

They [The US] 'stole' land from Palestine and gave it to the Jews. It would be nice if the Palestinians and the other Arab nations in that region could just accept Israel.

Many of them effectively do, hence the Arab League Peace Plan.
In terms of arming up, Israel takes the biscuit. It's a region around the size of Leinster with a nine billion dollar military.

Kevster

You misinterpreted my words (then again, I never explained them completely) for I am perfectly aware that the 'hostile neighbours' are not hostile to everyone.

Anyway, whatever the reason for hostility towards Israel, you're right; They need to wake-up and account for their own actions.

Time Magazine

InFront wrote:

Where exactly are you getting the idea that Ahmadinejad specified a time?. He's said the exact same thing as a Jew would say except he named a different messenger.

Christ almighty man, lose the inferiority complex. Whether the President of Iran is a loony and deserves criticism is irrelevant to whether or not the entire Israeli state is loony and deserves criticism.

I don't know whether you genuinely read this somewhere or are just inventing it first hand, but I suggest you read the speech that people who make points similiar to your one reference.

I have read the speech. I was referring to an article I read in the Sunday Times. The closest link I have is here which isn't the exact article but has some of the points made about him.

You're the guy attributing some relevance to a comment like that, which is very strange considering you don't believe it. How exactly such a prophecy is a perceived as dangerous to someone who doesn't believe it is beyond me.

Holocaust denier who wants Israel "wiped off the map" who believes the armageddon is coming while playing with plutonium doesn't make me feel safe. It's his opinions and how these might influence his actions which I consider dangerous. And yes, there are big bright similarities with Bush and Iraq and Israel and Zionism, but please stop using the Shinner tactic of "Well there are other bad things too" as your defence. The guy is a loon who's playing with nuclear material against international disapproval.

Now, for the second time, let's try not derail this thread.

InFront

Ibid wrote:

Whether the President of Iran is a loony and deserves criticism is irrelevant to whether or not the entire Israeli state is loony and deserves criticism.

My point is that this is similiar to a particular Judaeo-Christian belief. Since this thread is about arming up, I'm questioning why you don't see it more relevant to worry about the belief in a Jewish Messiah, a divine right to a state of Israel, coupled with their secret nuclear 'arming up', their lack of regulation and their prophecies.

I have read the speech. I was referring to an article I read in the Sunday Times.

That article is about the speech I linked to, the speech being far, far more innocent than is suggested in the article.

Now, for the second time, let's try not derail this thread.

Then don't bring it up. When you bring up comments as ridiculous as a particular religious prophecy that you don;t believe in being a danger, whilst failing to point out other prophecies that someone else might see as absurd and dangerous, expect it to be pointed out.

MeatProduct

Ibid wrote:

Holocaust denier who wants Israel "wiped off the map" who believes the armageddon is coming while playing with plutonium doesn't make me feel safe.

Hello Ibid, I believe the "wiped off the map" bit was a mistake in translation. A while back there was some talk of this and what he had said was along the lines that a regime change is required both in the US and Israel in order for stability to return. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahmoud_Ahmadinejad_and_Israel#Translation_of_phrase_.22wiped_off_the_map.22

I think the US just picked the worst possible translation that fits into their plan of fear, looks like it worked doesn't it?

Nick

MeatProduct

I also understand that there is some question over the holocost issue too. http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article12790.htm

Regarding the arming up of the plant I can't see that ever stopping as it would need a great deal of trust and good will.

Nick