Thread: Stop them?

Should we stop countries we do not trust from getting certain weapons?

Originally Posted by Conservative15

Should we stop countries we do not trust from getting certain weapons?

Trying to be the world police and globalist imperialists is what got us where we are today.
Certainly not.

Certainly, if the country has proved itself irresponsible and a threat to global security then preventing them from gaining access to such weaponry is justified.

Originally Posted by Conservative15

Should we stop countries we do not trust from getting certain weapons?

It would depend on why we don't want a country to acquire a particular weapon and the threat posed by that country if it acquires that weapon.

No, unless it's an obvious threat to national security. And no national security is not "they" could bomb us but have not shown interest so far.

Originally Posted by Conservative15

Should we stop countries we do not trust from getting certain weapons?

Yes, it's self-preservation.

If we're not going to do that, we MUST invest massively in the development and deployment of a missile defense system capable of relibably protecting against 99.9% of expected attacks and have an iron clad absolute zero tolerance policy of total obliteration of any and all nations that attempt to attack us with WMD's.

Originally Posted by Freedom for All

Yes, it's self-preservation.

We used WMDs as an excuse to invade Iraq. It was a complete fabrication. After Iraq how do you prevent a repeat of the misuse of self preservation as an excuse to invade another country?

Originally Posted by Freedom for All

If we're not going to do that, we MUST invest massively in the development and deployment of a missile defense system capable of relibably protecting against 99.9% of expected attacks and have an iron clad absolute zero tolerance policy of total obliteration of any and all nations that attempt to attack us with WMD's.

Is there such a missle defense system? No. The cost of developing such a system would be incredibly prohibitive, not to mention that no missle defense system could ever be expected to be effective 99.9% of the time.

The answer lies in maintaining global alliances and engaging in effective and respectful diplomacy.

Originally Posted by Bourne

We used WMDs as an excuse to invade Iraq. It was a complete fabrication. After Iraq how do you prevent a repeat of the misuse of self preservation as an excuse to invade another country?

That wasn't the question presented in the OP.

Frankly, the first thing that should be done to ensure the security of this nation is to take all the Democrats out and shoot them if they won't go voluntarily to a socialist country of their choice.

Loading all those countries up with true-believers would vastly improve the economic dominance of the United States and burden those countries with domestic problems that would help slow their efforts to build WMD's.

And gee, investing in the CIA/NSA and other intelligence services so they can do their jobs better would be smart move towards avoiding those little boo-boos.

Originally Posted by Bourne

Is there such a missle defense system? No.

Hmm....I guess you don't know that the word "developing" isn't a archaic reference by some old-fashioned film photographer with a basement darkroom.

Originally Posted by Bourne

The cost of developing such a system would be incredibly prohibitive, not to mention that no missle defense system could ever be expected to be effective 99.9% of the time.

Well, well, well. Going to discuss costs, are you?

The Constitution does not authorize spending for health care, art, socialist security, medicare, housing, education, public broadcasting, Obama's pals at the planetarium, and none of the shit the government's been forcing us to pay for.

BUT... the Constitution does authorize government spending for national defense.

That is the reason people form governments, after all.

Not so they can rob each other, but so they can be defended from other governments and preserve their freedom.

Originally Posted by Bourne

The answer lies in maintaining global alliances and engaging in effective and respectful diplomacy.

The answer lies in taking no shit and telling nations that want to give us shit that we're bigger assholes than they are and we can always be trusted to give them truckloads of shit for every turd they toss our way.

That's how respectful diplomacy works. First you establish yourself in a position of power.

Originally Posted by Freedom for All

That wasn't the question presented in the OP.

No, but it's a retort to your position that self preservation is a viable excuse to interfer in the sovereignty of another country. As I've pointed out, the debacle perpetrated in Iraq based on lies makes questionable self preservation as an excuse to take military action against another country.

Originally Posted by Freedom for All

Frankly, the first thing that should be done to ensure the security of this nation is to take all the Democrats out and shoot them if they won't go voluntarily to a socialist country of their choice.

Loading all those countries up with true-believers would vastly improve the economic dominance of the United States and burden those countries with domestic problems that would help slow their efforts to build WMD's.

Very dramatic but you haven't made a reasonable point.

Originally Posted by Freedom for All

And gee, investing in the CIA/NSA and other intelligence services so they can do their jobs better would be smart move towards avoiding those little boo-boos.

I completely agree.

Originally Posted by Freedom for All

Hmm....I guess you don't know that the word "developing" isn't a archaic reference by some old-fashioned film photographer with a basement darkroom.

Development of a missle defense system that can deliver a rate of effectiveness of 99.9% is impossible.

Originally Posted by Freedom for All

Well, well, well. Going to discuss costs, are you?

The Constitution does not authorize spending for health care, art, socialist security, medicare, housing, education, public broadcasting, Obama's pals at the planetarium, and none of the shit the government's been forcing us to pay for.

Actually, it does. It allows the legislature to pass laws which result in expenditures.

Originally Posted by Freedom for All

BUT... the Constitution does authorize government spending for national defense.

That is the reason people form governments, after all.

Not so they can rob each other, but so they can be defended from other governments and preserve their freedom.

Again, very dramatic but lacking a point.

Originally Posted by Freedom for All

The answer lies in taking no shit and telling nations that want to give us shit that we're bigger assholes than they are and we can always be trusted to give them truckloads of shit for every turd they toss our way.

That's how respectful diplomacy works. First you establish yourself in a position of power.

We are already a world power. What we need to work on is establishing effective and respectful diplomatic relations with countries which might threaten us. Iran, N. Korea, Russia and China come to mind as examples.

Originally Posted by Bourne

No, but it's a retort to your position that self preservation is a viable excuse to interfer in the sovereignty of another country.

It's the only valid reason.

But it is a valid reason.

Originally Posted by Bourne

As I've pointed out, the debacle perpetrated in Iraq based on lies makes questionable self preservation as an excuse to take military action against another country.

Maybe so. That's what happens when liberals are elected president.

Originally Posted by Bourne

Very dramatic but you haven't made a reasonable point.

Perfectly reasonable point.

No relevance to the OP.

Originally Posted by Bourne

Development of a missle defense system that can deliver a rate of effectiveness of 99.9% is impossible.

Glad to know you're a engineer and not almost a doctor as you've claimed.

1) 99.9% should be the goal.

2) 50% is an adequate deterent when the retaliation is assured and complete. I don't trust Obama to retaliate if we're attacked.

Originally Posted by Bourne

Actually, it does. It allows the legislature to pass laws which result in expenditures.

Actually, you don't know how to read, that's why you became a doctor. The Constitution does not authorize all the socialist deficit busting bullshit we've been saddled with in the last 100 years.

Even Tom Jefferson admitted as much when he requested the Congress introduce an amendment to the Constitution to provide for federal funding of education. No such amendment was passed, and thus no amendment was ever ratified and thus all (that means 100%) of education spending is illegal and unconstitutional, and by comparison all the other bullshit socialist spending is also not allowed.

Originally Posted by Bourne

Again, very dramatic but lacking a point.

The point was plain. The government of the United States was not formed to permit citizens to rob one another via the tax code in order to finance socialist bullshit scams.

That's pretty plain.

Pointy, too.

Originally Posted by Bourne

We are already a world power. What we need to work on is establishing effective and respectful diplomatic relations with countries which might threaten us.

Fine.

First step, tell them if they dis us we're not going to be bend over for them any more.

No foreign aid payment from the United States should go to any country that doesn't act in our interests.

Sounds fair to me. Why pay our enemies? If they're going to hate us, let them do it on their dime.

Originally Posted by Bourne

Iran, N. Korea, Russia and China come to mind as examples.

Ah, the socialist and terrorist nations so strongly admired by you strange socialist anti-American people.