American extortion fails to intimidate

America threatening a sovereign nation and the worlds largest democracy at that !
That fact that absolutely no evidence has been offered to back Americas claim seems to not stop American cajoling other nations for illicit support . This international criminality should not be stood for , the logic is crystal clear Americas Iran policy is one based on deceit . So it is clear proof that Iran is being fitted up for an act of American belligerance justified on a basis of intimadation of other peace loving nations .

This immediate and brave Indian rejection of American extortion clearly shows Americas waning influence in global affairs , the fact is America will lose out here as India will turn to Russia to purchase such technology .

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

*yawn*
More illogical assumptions with no supporting evidence.
As if the American Government owes you an explination??

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

What are you talking about the first link clearly shows the US leaning on India and the second link shows India rejecting US demands . That is the evidence , or do you have another interpretation of policy procedure other than extortion as to what the US did to India .

I think they owe the world an apology .

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

American dont mess with nuclear powers.

 

Brian, I don't think you are in any position to know the true intentions of the Iranian government. One thing is for sure, they are in favor of destroying Israel, and that's not what I call being peaceful.

 

Not to mention the vote hasn't even gone through yet. India has already voted with the U.S. to refer Iran to the UN security council and they will most likely vote with the U.S. again.

 

I hope they were not blackmailed in any ways.

 

We need to defend the right of the oppressed countries not only to make use of atomic energy but also to acquire nuclear arms which under the threat of the permanent US war are a powerful tool of self-defence.

 

1) Not being permitted to obtain nuclear weapons is not what I would call oppressed. I call it prudent.
2) Atomic energy is fine. Atomic weapons are a different story.
3) US threat of war isn't permanent.
4) A powerful tool of self-defense it may be, but it's also a powerful tool of offense.

Nuclear weapons in the hands of the wrong people is a worst-case scenario. I know what your going to say Brian-America has nukes, therefore we've reached the worst case scenario. The fact of the matter is that America has no intentions of nuking a country that doesn't nuke first. Our nuclear policies don't include preemptive strikes. On the other hand, a country that wants to US gone might not have qualms about nuking America first. Therefore, it seems to be in the United States' best interest not to let hostile parties acquire nuclear weapons (or nuclear "defense", for that matter).

 

1) Not allowing certain states to obtain nuclear weapons is not what I would call oppressed. I call it prudent.
2) Atomic energy is fine. Atomic weapons are a different story.
3) US threat of war isn't permanent.
4) A powerful tool of self-defense it may be, but it's also a powerful tool of offense.

Nuclear weapons in the hands of the wrong people is a worst-case scenario. I know what your going to say Brian-America has nukes, therefore we've reached the worst case scenario. The fact of the matter is that America has no intentions of nuking a country that doesn't nuke first. Our nuclear policies don't include preemptive strikes. On the other hand, a country that wants the US gone might not have qualms about nuking America first. Therefore, it seems to be in the United States' best interest not to let hostile parties acquire nuclear weapons (or nuclear "defense", for that matter), and America has the influence to make sure that they get their wish (although how much longer that influence will continue is another subject altogether).

 

I must say: If everyone has nukes, no one will use them, because everyone knows that everyone dies in nuclear warfare. So I think its better if every country has them, so all the countries can be a threat to eachother and then there will be some real ballance.

Its checks and ballances that keep peace.

 

But all it takes is one madman in control who doesn't care about the welfare of humanity to launch the nuke the will end the world as we know it. Wouldn't it make more sense to get rid of the nukes that the few countries have than try to arm the entire world with nuclear weapons? And with so many nukes floating around, the opportunity for WMD to be lost is extremely high. Just look at Russia's predicament; during the breakdown of the Soviet Union, many WMD were lost in transit, but Soviet/Russian officials refused to confirm this until recently. Again, all it takes is one terrorist organization bent on ridding the world of the Great Satan to set off a nuclear halocaust.

AmishRakeFight

 

That dependes from which country you sit in , if you were now in Iran and having wittnessed the US tear up Afghanisatn and Iraq and listen to Bush declare Iran the most dangerous global threat . I would say their point of veiw would be they would like America disarmed because they fear it .

Well the power is in the hands of the West they can quite easily make the first step to disarm .

No but before America it was the European powers threat of war and after America goes into decline it will agin be Europe threatening the 3rd world . Empires come and go but the conditions are permanment .

You masy ask yourself why are these nations developing weapons , have you thought maybe it is simply for a deterrent against a predator nation ?

Why is America in the Mid East Amish ? Seriously is there any reason America must be there ? Must America back Israel ? How is staying in the Mid East benefitting the US people or economy ?

 

I believe that is the veiw from the 3rd World this segement of humanity feels utterly powerless against America and the EU , they belive such a weapon gives them some security .

 

Brian, I've said numerous times that I do not agree with the war in Iraq. The reason, IMO, that America is in the Middle Easy is because of oil. And I don't agree with America holding Israel's hand. But it is what it is. I'm not a government official, and I don't make the decisions.

You said it yourself. The threat of US war is not permanent.

AmishRakeFight

 

That is the problem , no matter what I say and no matter what you say and the fact many others think it , we are all powerless . The fact is now polls from what I have been reading show the majority of Americans back an attack on Iran . Recall before the majority of Americans were against such an action 12 months ago . Its manufacturing consent , people basically believe their goverments and follow .

 

and USA can never have a mad President,

We need to deter American Madmen.

 

America checks and balances will not allow a whimsical nuclear strike.

 

Too many obstacles for a rogue U.S. president. A nuke launched by the U.S. without first being attacked with a nuke will never happen.