7 Minutes to Midnight

[T5_X]

The clock shows the condition of international security, we are currently 7 minutes away. Clicl the link and learn more about the famous "doomsday clock"



http://www.thebulletin.org/clock.html

[GTS Jeff]

Little progress is made on global nuclear disarmament. The United States rejects a series of arms control treaties and announces it will withdraw from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty. Terrorists seek to acquire and use nuclear and biological weapons.

they make it sound like we're in the cold war still...

i think the presentation is a little lopsided...we have to remember that it doesnt really matter if the us withdraws from the abm treaty since theyre pretty much all powerful compared to the other halfassed nuclear nations.....and as for the terrorists, well theyll be around for awhile and shits gona go down, but nothing really "dooms day" like....

[Scott]

Originally posted by Jeff TYPE R
they make it sound like we're in the cold war still...

Not Quite, but its close.

[GTS Jeff]

Originally posted by Scott


Not Quite, but its close.

maybe ure just paranoid.

[T5_X]

Originally posted by Jeff TYPE R
they make it sound like we're in the cold war still...

i think the presentation is a little lopsided...we have to remember that it doesnt really matter if the us withdraws from the abm treaty since theyre pretty much all powerful compared to the other halfassed nuclear nations

No nation with nuclear weapons is "half-assed" russia and the US combined still have the capacity to blow up the entire sruface of the earth many times over, they each still have a sickening amount of warheads.

We also urge the United States and Russia to finally recognize the end of the Cold War by abandoning the practice of maintaining thousands of nuclear weapons on high alert, ready to be fired within minutes. This practice, born of fear and uncertainty during the Cold War, is a dangerous anachronism.

The real danger to the US (and everyone) is the fact that the gap between the rich and poor is growing ever larger, at some point, the poor (which are the majority) are gonna stand up and change things. Kyoto is the only force which is trying to narrow the gap and bring about a higher standard of living for the majority of the world, just read this letter signed by 100 nobel laureates a year ago:

100 Nobel Laureates Warn Our Planet

OSLO, Norway December 7, 2001 At the Nobel Peace Prize



Centennial Symposium here yesterday celebrating the 100th anniversary of the Nobel prize, 100 Nobel laureates have issued a brief but dire warning of the "profound dangers" facing the world. Their statement predicts that our security depends on immediate environmental and social reform. The following is the text of their statement:

THE STATEMENT

The most profound danger to world peace in the coming years will stem not from the irrational acts of states or individuals but from the legitimate demands of the world's dispossessed. Of these poor and disenfranchised, the majority live a marginal existence in equatorial climates. Global warming, not of their making but originating with the wealthy few, will affect their fragile ecologies most. Their situation will be desperate and manifestly unjust.

It cannot be expected, therefore, that in all cases they will be content to await the beneficence of the rich. If then we permit the devastating power of modern weaponry to spread through this combustible human landscape, we invite a conflagration that can engulf both rich and poor. The only hope for the future lies in co-operative international action, legitimized by democracy.

It is time to turn our backs on the unilateral search for security, in which we seek to shelter behind walls. Instead, we must persist in the quest for united action to counter both global warming and a weaponized world.

These twin goals will constitute vital components of stability as we move toward the wider degree of social justice that alone gives hope of peace.

Some of the needed legal instruments are already at hand, such as the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, the Convention on Climate Change, the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaties and the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. As concerned citizens, we urge all governments to commit to these goals that constitute steps on the way to replacement of war by law.

To survive in the world we have transformed, we must learn to think in a new way. As never before, the future of each depends on the good of all.

Not surprisingly, the US turned its back on kyoto, the abm treaty and these 100 nobel laureates.

[GTS Jeff]

russias arsenal is for the most part inoperative. they dont have the resources to even feed their own soldiers...much less coordinate a nuclear attack.

and im not really sure who ure referring to when u say "poor". do u mean the poor ppl of america? cuz those poor ppl are beggars and trashdiggers and really dont present much of a threat. americas true majority is the middle class, who are far from being discontented enough to lead any sort of revolution. now on the other hand, if ure referring to the poor of the world...then yes they are the majority. most of those poor ppl cant do much, but there are some that can....namely terrorists.

just my useless ramblings

[T5_X]

Originally posted by Jeff TYPE R
russias arsenal is for the most part inoperative. they dont have the resources to even feed their own soldiers...much less coordinate a nuclear attack.

and im not really sure who ure referring to when u say "poor". do u mean the poor ppl of america? cuz those poor ppl are beggars and trashdiggers and really dont present much of a threat. americas true majority is the middle class, who are far from being discontented enough to lead any sort of revolution. now on the other hand, if ure referring to the poor of the world...then yes they are the majority. most of those poor ppl cant do much, but there are some that can....namely terrorists.

just my useless ramblings

Then you're quite misinformed on the state of the world. The average american (and canadian) thinks that the US has an iron grip over the world, far from the truth. And does it take that much to coordinate a nuclear attack? All they need is the same facilities they had 15 years ago, which it is more than likely that they do still have, but what do I know, I'm not a Russian millitary official.

And I think from the context of my post, you'd realize that my reference to the poor is the same as that in the letter I quoted.

[GTS Jeff]

Originally posted by Ranger_X31


Then you're quite misinformed on the state of the world. The average american (and canadian) thinks that the US has an iron grip over the world, far from the truth. And does it take that much to coordinate a nuclear attack? All they need is the same facilities they had 15 years ago, which it is more than likely that they do still have, but what do I know, I'm not a Russian millitary official.

And I think from the context of my post, you'd realize that my reference to the poor is the same as that in the letter I quoted.

i dont claim that the us has an iron grip on things...they dont. if they did, we wouldnt have to worry about all this bs with terrorists and whatnot. but i tihnk my point about the russian state of affairs is quite valid. there are TONS of articles about how troubles the russians are going thru right now.

and yea, u caught me. i didnt really read that noble laureate ditty.....and i still havent

[RiCE-DaDDy]

jeff ur just exagerating on Russias poor state, yea they are messed but im sure if they wanted to they could launch enough to blow up the world

[GTS Jeff]

Originally posted by RiCE-DaDDy
jeff ur just exagerating on Russias poor state, yea they are messed but im sure if they wanted to they could launch enough to blow up the world

should i bring up chechnya?

[Scott]

Originally posted by Jeff TYPE R
maybe ure just paranoid.

Maybe, but maybe not. The arsenal of nuclear weapons possesed by "bad guys" is nothing to laugh at. I dont live everyday scared, but when i read the paper about all the conflicts in the world, I worry a bit. Who knows what could happen.

[trendkill]

well... just wait.. that clock thing makes sense. look what is going on lately. this world is getting crazy, and i expect that the U.S. will be at war again with iraq befor spring arrives, from there who knows what will happen. but as treatys and stuff begin to not mean anything, PROBLEMS arise

HISTORY ALWAYS REPEATS ITSELF

[Toma]

A couple comments since I love politics and economy:

Russia has a bigger nuclear arsenal then the US (as if that matters though).

Their "conventional" military technology is ahead of the US. Every man woman and child in russia will starve before their military dies. Did anyone see the report on the national about the torpedo the russians have that was like 3-4 times faster then anything the west had ever seen? The west spent BILLIONS trying to steal the technology, and in the end, Putin sold it to Canada. They had that thing for 15 years, and it was probably what malfunctioned and destroyed the Kursk. Why did the russians sell it after hiding it for 15 years....HINT as always, they have something twice as good now.

The US could not defeat the Serbs after 3 months of bombing. They finally "won" when they started bombing civilian targets, infrastructure, electric and water supplies. They effectively defeated the "people" of Serbia, but barely put a dent in their military. They cannot finish the war in Afghanistan either, they cannot find Bin Ladan or destroy his network. Its much easier to win a war when you have a target and a plan (as in serbia, make the civilian population suffer and surrender). The US is losign the war in Afghanistan because they cannot achieve their original goal (get bin laden and destroy "terrorism"... lol )

Nuclear powers beside Russia.... our only "real" worry is China. They can actually land multiple warheads on our soil. Thats why when the US took a first strike stance, and stated it would not be afraid to use nukes if Russia attacked Taiwan.....well, I got REAL uneasy.

No one else really can. Iraq has no ICBM, and is no danger to us nuclear wise. North Korea, India and Pakistan have rudimentary ICBMs, but they are still relatively harmless to us.

Kyoto is a joke. It is in fact a wealth transfer program that may in fact help "poorer" countries (though not third world countires, only middle income industrialized nations). Kyoto has almost nothing to do with polution. Its number one failing is that its target emmission numbers are based on ten year old data.

Meaning?? Countries that have relatively low polution output, but who had a strong economy since 1992 will be hurt bad (Canada), where as countries with high pollution output, but whos economy has decreased since 1992 will PROFIT (eastern europe, particularily Germany - they have laready met their targets cause their economy has been in the gutter, so they can sell emmission credits to us!!!)

Kyoto needs a RADICAL restructuring based on TODAYS economic activity and emmissions.

Want to stop world poverty? Stop globalization and maybe pay attention to modern versions of Dependancy theory. Teach countries to be self supportive instead of "giving" them money to buy your western garbage products. (and then make them pay you back). This puts them in such HUGE hole that they can never get out. But "aid" is always tied into some sort of economic and political conditions.

[T5_X]

Thx for your input Toma!

There are a ton of complications to Kyoto, but I believe in it because of how much there is a need for a quick, drastic reform in global emissions and western ecological sensitivity. The science behind it is solid, anyone who says its flawed needs to take a look at the overwhelming trends in data. As for how much the reductions will affect global emissions? That is definitly shaky, and it may not help hardly at all, but in terms of western though, its a step in the right direction for once.
Economically, on the whole globally it will bring about a narrower gap between rich and poor, which is good, but as you said it is quite flawed. Many of the countries who have signed are angry at canada for stalling, but we would be hurt much more than them. Oh well, the steps towards global reform and ecological preservation must be taken, even if they're shitty small steps. If its at the cost of a little local dispairity then I don't give a shit, we'll survive a tiny bit of discomfort, if sea level rises 1.5 M, 17 million people in bangladesh may not survive at all.

[300rwhp]

toma your very smart but you know that russians have not been able track us subs since the 60's so who cares how fast the torp is it has no us sub target if it tried to attack a carrier group the us subs attached would here it long b4 and be able sink it long b4 she could open the sub doors cuz floodin the tubes would set us sub off

[300rwhp]

oh but for that matter the russian nukes icbms are far more accurate than the us nukes and they have more its just they dont "have" tactical nukes and there missile platforms are all easily found the reason for the greater accuracy is the targets are programmed in for each warhead whereas the us nukes recieve target info from gps sats and the missile platforms. the russians assumed that there platforms would be destroyed and therfore the target data would no be able to be transmitted
the russians cant defeat the us sub fleet especially the boomers

[300rwhp]

and lastly toma you know that there is two types of war these days full out total war (unrestricted) and their is limited compaign war the us is waging limited wars all over and has hence why they either suck or loose
examples

vietnam
west african nations
north korea
serbia bosnia
and comming soon columbia

if she waged total war against those above mentioned she would destroy them

also we must remember it only takes one nuke and only one man to push the button
toma when i get back to calgary we should go for a pint and discuss world politics it would be nice to talk to someone who has a vast knowledge on the subject and doesnt think like an ingnorant american