Staredit Network

Staredit Network -> Serious Discussion -> The Axis of the 21st Century
Report, edit, etc...Posted by DT_Battlekruser on 2006-10-11 at 01:11:16
QUOTE(Felagund @ Oct 10 2006, 07:44 PM)
Why are you all being so damn pessimistic? To think that we're on the brink of a world war is preposterous. Nobody has anything to gain by total annihilation. True, there are some people that are crazy enough to still want it, but I think I can safely say that they will be dealt with.
[right][snapback]574735[/snapback][/right]


If the US continues to pressure countries into a lose-lose situation with no way out (surrender to American hegemony or be invaded), there is a definite possibility that a country will see total annhilation as preferable to total defeat.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by MasterJohnny on 2006-10-11 at 02:07:23
Axis
Every other country

Allies
United States
Canada
United Kingdom
France
Japan

what other countries like the U.S.
would the allies be formed just because of their hate of other countries?
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Lithium on 2006-10-11 at 10:59:39
QUOTE(DT_Battlekruser @ Oct 11 2006, 12:10 AM)
If the US continues to pressure countries into a lose-lose situation with no way out (surrender to American hegemony or be invaded), there is a definite possibility that a country will see total annhilation as preferable to total defeat.
[right][snapback]574818[/snapback][/right]

I would agree with Battle. With the looks of it, if America do go that way, then NK will do that. Although, they have nothing that can effect America too greatly. As of their MDs are quite functional.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Desperado on 2006-10-11 at 13:25:54
QUOTE
If the US continues to pressure countries into a lose-lose situation with no way out (surrender to American hegemony or be invaded), there is a definite possibility that a country will see total annhilation as preferable to total defeat.

Countries? You mean dictators and their regimes? You say that like putting pure evil into a lose-lose situation is a bad thing. The only real reason against invading Iraq, Iran, North Korea, or any of our enemies is because doing so loses lives and money. If we could topple the regimes dictating those countries without spending absurd amounts of money and or losing thousands of lives it wouldn't take a heartbeat for us to do it.

QUOTE
George Bush and all of his cabinet should be put up for war crimes/crimes against humanity

Yea .. right, I missed the part where they commited genocide as opposed to liberating a crapty country that prefers it's freaked up existence.

QUOTE
Don't even give me all that Hezbollah horsecrap.

Yea, and Japan never attacked Pearl Harbor. And 9/11 was a fake.

QUOTE
Its a known fact that Israel violated numerous international laws as well as a UN ceasefire.

They didn't violate any laws. The UN comes up with all these bullcrap resolutions outlawing military action except under specific conditions. Then when those conditions are met and Israel or the United States takes action against it's enemy in a perfectly legal way, the UN complains and decides to make a new resolution instead of following the old one. The UN never approves military action, regardless of how many times their demands are not met.

QUOTE
NK at this moment is really of no threat even with its bomb. Unless they sell the bombs to terrorist organizations who could transport it into the country, they have no real use for them.

Exactly. NK has no qualms about selling Nukes to any third party with enough cash.

QUOTE
East Asia against the US (Japan's side iffy; as is the stance of Europe).

Japan would be on the side of the US. England and Germany would be on our side, France would not. Big freaking loss there. People seem to think China's rapid growth can continue indefinetly. Not gonna happen, and as long as it slows down there's no reason for us to go to war with them.

QUOTE
The Christian West against the Muslim Middle East (Europe + US vs. Egypt, Iran, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq, etc.)

Right on. I'm not even Christian.

QUOTE
America is going to take over every country and the world will not be under peace but under imperialism once more.

America has never been an imperialist country. When everyone else was being imperialists, we tried to take over the phillipines and realized "wow this sucks" and gave it back. It's not in our nature to deny rights to anyone who is under the control of the U.S. Except if we're at war with them.

QUOTE
China has declared fully NOT FRIENDLY or ALLIES with North Korea.

Uh, what? The only reason NK still exists as a seperate nation is because of China's economic support. They have been lightly trying to encourage NK to be nicer but they're not trying that hard.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by JordanN_3335 on 2006-10-11 at 14:53:11
QUOTE
America is going to take over every country and the world will not be under peace but under imperialism once more.


Um I was off sick today from school today and theres a proper name for that. Its called manifest destiny.

QUOTE
manifest destiny
n.
1. A policy of imperialistic expansion defended as necessary or benevolent.


Report, edit, etc...Posted by Desperado on 2006-10-11 at 19:23:11
QUOTE
Um I was off sick today from school today and theres a proper name for that. Its called manifest destiny.

Yea.. right. Manifest destiny ended with Haiwaii.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Felagund on 2006-10-11 at 19:44:26
There's a funny quality about developed countries. They don't like war! Even if they don't particularly like other people (such as our racist redneck Americans), they really don't like to wage war. What a lot of you fail to realize (probably because it's "exciting" to feel threatened in a manner) is that there may be perhaps a handful of nations that would so much as consider war, and those are really insubstantial nations.

China doesn't want war. Russia doesn't want war. Bush wants war, but America doesn't want war. Europe doesn't want war. The biggest powers in the world will never again fight with each other because they have so little to gain and so much to lose by fighting. Bush will be out of office in a little over two years. Congress may very well go blue next month, and that could solve a lot of America's... administrative problems.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by DT_Battlekruser on 2006-10-11 at 22:28:25
QUOTE(Felagund @ Oct 11 2006, 04:44 PM)
There's a funny quality about developed countries. They don't like war! Even if they don't particularly like other people (such as our racist redneck Americans), they really don't like to wage war. What a lot of you fail to realize (probably because it's "exciting" to feel threatened in a manner) is that there may be perhaps a handful of nations that would so much as consider war, and those are really insubstantial nations.

China doesn't want war. Russia doesn't want war. Bush wants war, but America doesn't want war. Europe doesn't want war. The biggest powers in the world will never again fight with each other because they have so little to gain and so much to lose by fighting. Bush will be out of office in a little over two years. Congress may very well go blue next month, and that could solve a lot of America's... administrative problems.
[right][snapback]575220[/snapback][/right]


Amen.

QUOTE
Countries? You mean dictators and their regimes? You say that like putting pure evil into a lose-lose situation is a bad thing. The only real reason against invading Iraq, Iran, North Korea, or any of our enemies is because doing so loses lives and money. If we could topple the regimes dictating those countries without spending absurd amounts of money and or losing thousands of lives it wouldn't take a heartbeat for us to do it.


Funny, I must have missed the part of history that proved Kim Jong Il to be "pure evil"...

QUOTE
liberating a crapty country that prefers it's freaked up existence.


650,000 Iraqi civilians died as a direct result of America "liberating" Iraq.

QUOTE
Right on. I'm not even Christian.


Does it matter? The majority religion of the West is Christianity, the leaders of the West are Christian, and Westerners are stereotyped as Christian.

QUOTE
America has never been an imperialist country. When everyone else was being imperialists, we tried to take over the phillipines and realized "wow this sucks" and gave it back. It's not in our nature to deny rights to anyone who is under the control of the U.S. Except if we're at war with them.


I strongly suggest that you study the history of this country. American imperialism started in the early 1800s with our seizure of territory from the Native Americans - it wasn't much of a fight but we seized their land by force and colonized it.

Then came the US expansion of the late 19th century. The US conquered the Japanese, forcibly opening their ports to US exploitation until before the Meiji Restoration and the summarative ejection of foreigners from Japan leading up to the Japanese imperalism of the early 20th century. The US took over Puerto Rico, Cuba, the Virgin Islands; two of which are still US territories today.

After World War II, US imperialism continued with renewed vigor. Though the US never conquered more lands outright, it propped up pro-US governments in the wars in Korea and Vietnam; even against the will of the local people in the case of Vietnam. The US covertly funded a pro-US Saudi royal family in order to secure US companies access to Saudi oil reserves, and began getting itself in involved in every overseas conflict that threatened US interests - from Israel to Vietnam to Iraq, the US has continually used economic and military means to ensure American hegemony.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by HolySin on 2006-10-11 at 22:33:01
Kim Jong Il isn't evil, he's just really insane...
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Desperado on 2006-10-11 at 23:23:36
DTBK before you respond to any of this.. did you actually take the time to write that stuff out or did you copy and paste it from another website? I really hope the latter.

QUOTE
Funny, I must have missed the part of history that proved Kim Jong Il to be "pure evil"...

Yes, you must have.

QUOTE
650,000 Iraqi civilians died as a direct result of America "liberating" Iraq.

Unfortunate. And will the living civilians be any happier? Doubtful.

QUOTE
Does it matter? The majority religion of the West is Christianity, the leaders of the West are Christian, and Westerners are stereotyped as Christian.

I was trying to say "I'm for a war against Islam, but it's not because I'm Christian. In fact I'm not."

QUOTE
I strongly suggest that you study the history of this country. American imperialism started in the early 1800s with our seizure of territory from the Native Americans - it wasn't much of a fight but we seized their land by force and colonized it.

That is not imperialism.

QUOTE
Then came the US expansion of the late 19th century. The US conquered the Japanese, forcibly opening their ports to US exploitation until before the Meiji Restoration and the summarative ejection of foreigners from Japan leading up to the Japanese imperalism of the early 20th century.

Again, not imperialism.

QUOTE
The US took over Puerto Rico, Cuba, the Virgin Islands; two of which are still US territories today.

I don't really know much about Puerto Rica or the Virgin Islands and frankly I'm too lazy to look it up. I highly doubt they fulfill the requirements of true imperialism.

QUOTE
After World War II, US imperialism continued with renewed vigor. Though the US never conquered more lands outright, it propped up pro-US governments in the wars in Korea and Vietnam; even against the will of the local people in the case of Vietnam. The US covertly funded a pro-US Saudi royal family in order to secure US companies access to Saudi oil reserves, and began getting itself in involved in every overseas conflict that threatened US interests - from Israel to Vietnam to Iraq, the US has continually used economic and military means to ensure American hegemony.

Technically not imperialism. Loopholes rock.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by MasterJohnny on 2006-10-12 at 00:19:04
the U.S WAS imperalistic...Manifest destiny...perhaps it will become imperalistic again...invade N.K. and take over it...plant a puppet government...place mcdonalds everywhere...maybe set up a few restricted areas...
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Desperado on 2006-10-12 at 01:12:37
QUOTE
the U.S WAS imperalistic...Manifest destiny...perhaps it will become imperalistic again...invade N.K. and take over it...plant a puppet government...place mcdonalds everywhere...maybe set up a few restricted areas...

Manifest destiny was not imperialism. Imperialism means you take COLONIES where the people there do not have full citizenship. The only thing even remotely close to a colony the United States ever took was the Phillipines and we decided we didn't want that.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by HolySin on 2006-10-12 at 01:15:06
You're kidding right? We wanted the whole western hemisphere. Study the presidency of Teddy Roosevelt, that was imperialism.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by TheDaddy0420 on 2006-10-12 at 01:26:48
QUOTE
650,000 Iraqi civilians died as a direct result of America "liberating" Iraq.


EDIT:

Iraqi civilians died as a direct result of America "liberating" Iraq.


You and I both know there are thousands of different numbers representing the amount of Iraqi civilian death count.

http://www.iraqbodycount.org/

And those have records backing it up. So anyway Im not debating whether there was a lot of civilian deaths, I just think its irrisponsible to throw out a number that high, or any number frankly with out mentioning that we really don't know how many deaths there are.

TOPIC:

I honestly don't think a WW3 is coming but lets have fun.

AXIS:
Iran
Jordan
Syria
Somalia (will be owned pretty fast)
Pakistan (If leader is over thrown, huge maybe)
Sudan (I believe there is a evil regime right now taking over? Correct me please)
North Korea
Palestine (If they don't get their crap together)
Egypt

Allies:
USA
Britian
Israel
South Korea
Australia (Has some troops in Iraq)
Canada
Germany

Sketchy Countries:
France
China
Russia
Saudi Arabia


I probably missed a whole lot of countries, Im just being lazy and not thinking hard enough.

I do not think at the present moment America would be able to WIN a world war right now. We could, though, f**k up anyway country we go against, but if it comes to occupation the American people are WEAK. We are slowly transforming into France and soon we will be yelling "LE SURRENDER!!!" to any war that may come our way. Yeah so I believe we have the STRIKE and SHOCK and AWE capabilities, but a prolonged ground war would not be good.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by DT_Battlekruser on 2006-10-12 at 01:52:40
QUOTE
  DTBK before you respond to any of this.. did you actually take the time to write that stuff out or did you copy and paste it from another website? I really hope the latter.


Search it if you don't believe me, but everything not explicity said otherwise is my own writings.

QUOTE
Yes, you must have.


Do explain.

QUOTE
Unfortunate. And will the living civilians be any happier? Doubtful.


So, the living civilians won't be happer, so the invasion of Iraq really was a good thing because...?

QUOTE
I was trying to say "I'm for a war against Islam, but it's not because I'm Christian. In fact I'm not."


Muslims are for a war against you because you are Christian (you non-specific).

QUOTE
Technically not imperialism. Loopholes rock.


Fine, don't label it imperialism. Call it economic hegemony. Nonetheless, it is America imposing its interests in other countries regardless of the opinions of said countries or the rights of their people. If American betterment is involved, America will go to any means to achieve it.

QUOTE
Iraqi civilians died as a direct result of America "liberating" Iraq.


You and I both know there are thousands of different numbers representing the amount of Iraqi civilian death count.


I was referring to the new study released which cites 650,000 as the civilian death toll.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Desperado on 2006-10-12 at 13:50:02
QUOTE
Search it if you don't believe me, but everything not explicity said otherwise is my own writings.

I said that because your example of Imperialism were far-fetched.

QUOTE
Do explain.

Is there any kind of logical fallacy I can trick you with so I don't have to try?

His people suffer in horrible poverty. He used a loophole to become the head of state without actually being President like his father. He demands the loyalty of all his subordinates and does not consult any opinion other than his own. He's afraid to speak publically. He's a spoiled little kid, and he's ugly too.

QUOTE
So, the living civilians won't be happer, so the invasion of Iraq really was a good thing because...?

I never said it was.

In the beginning some of us thought to ourselves, whatever the intent of the War in Iraq, good might come out of it in any case. We hoped that if we could set up a democracy in Iraq that it might potentially spread throughout the Middle East by inciting people to revolt against their tyrannical governments. At this point, the chances of that happening seem extremely low. It seems that Middle Eastern culture strictly prevents it. If nothing else, those 650,000 civilians proved beyond all doubt that liberty and justice are incompatible with Middle Eastern culture. A very helpful piece of information that will certainly deter the justification of any future war in the region.

The thing is, in the past, war was against people, not governments, not inviduals. War doesn't even work if you try to use it against a government. This is why the United States military forces are increasing their amount of special forces to unprecedented levels. The marines even have Special Forces now.

QUOTE
Muslims are for a war against you because you are Christian (you non-specific).

I'm not sure what you just said there. I practice no religion.

QUOTE
If American betterment is involved, America will go to any means to achieve it.

Why shouldn't we do whatever it takes to better our interests? Is that so wrong?
Report, edit, etc...Posted by lonely_duck on 2006-10-12 at 15:37:01
Imperialism isn't just colonization it's also about influencing other countries to help the Imperialist nation. This happened to Japan when the U.S. came to town with those 3 metal ships. The same thing happened to China but on a much MUCH greater extent. I mean, you look back at China during this time and you'll see that no European country actually controlled any, or very little Chinese soil, but the country was basically overrun with European merchants doing whatever the hell they wanted; this Imperialistic action is called "a sphere of influence" which was used in Africa too. Puerto Rico was basically colonized by America and Puerto Ricans weren't given American rights until later (not sure when). Cuba was influenced after the Spanish American war with America basically putting in a pro-America government and controlling most of the sugar industry; I forgot what this kind of Imperialistic action is called, but there is a name for it. Hawaii was unofficially colonized with a whole bunch of American industry owners taking hold of the sugar cane production of Hawaii and basically pushing around the Hawaiian government. This eventually led to the American government to annex Hawaii without consent of any Hawaiian organization. Any other country mentioned I have very little to no facts on.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Lithium on 2006-10-12 at 18:54:22
Imperialism is basically what started the World war 1 and World war 2.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by DT_Battlekruser on 2006-10-12 at 21:52:04
QUOTE(lonely_duck @ Oct 12 2006, 12:36 PM)
Imperialism isn't just colonization it's also about influencing other countries to help the Imperialist nation.  This happened to Japan when the U.S. came to town with those 3 metal ships.  The same thing happened to China but on a much MUCH greater extent.  I mean, you look back at China during this time and you'll see that no European country actually controlled any, or very little Chinese soil, but the country was basically overrun with European merchants doing whatever the hell they wanted; this Imperialistic action is called "a sphere of influence" which was used in Africa too.  Puerto Rico was basically colonized by America and Puerto Ricans weren't given American rights until later (not sure when).  Cuba was influenced after the Spanish American war with America basically putting in a pro-America government and controlling most of the sugar industry; I forgot what this kind of Imperialistic action is called, but there is a name for it.  Hawaii was unofficially colonized with a whole bunch of American industry owners taking hold of the sugar cane production of Hawaii and basically pushing around the Hawaiian government.  This eventually led to the American government to annex Hawaii without consent of any Hawaiian organization.  Any other country mentioned I have very little to no facts on.
[right][snapback]575634[/snapback][/right]


Amazing! Somebody else with a knowledge of history!

QUOTE
Why shouldn't we do whatever it takes to better our interests? Is that so wrong?


If you don't see something morally wrong with putting the betterment of America over the rights of other people to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, I don't think I can say more to you. All people have natural rights, be they for or against America.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Reichwehr on 2006-10-12 at 22:16:19
Would India be involved at all?
Report, edit, etc...Posted by lonely_duck on 2006-10-12 at 22:25:56
Possibly, if nuclear strike seems imminent. Other than that, I don't see India really caring much enough to speak largely on the subject, they got big problems already in their country.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Cloud on 2006-10-12 at 23:16:03
World War III is with nukes and bombs, World War IV is with sticks and stones. That phase can't be anymore true.

Axis/Allies :

North Korea
China
Egypt
Cuba
Russia
Iran
Iraq(possibly)
Afganistan

Allies/Allies :

United States of America
Canada
United Kingdom
Germany
Japan
Australia
New Zealand
South Korea
Turkey(If they go to war it'll be on America's side)

Suck-Ups/People that'll go down w/o a fight :

France

Neutral

Just about every country I don't have mentioned.

The reason I have the Axis/Allies on both sides is because for all we know having Bush as the President of the United States WE could be the axis and THEY could be the allies. Depends on how many brain cells Bush has left when the war starts or if he's even still president at all. The reason I'm singling out the cowardice of the French is because if they ran at the site for a Germany army what in the world would they do if they saw the Chinease 1 million man army coming through their country? They'd probably start committing mass suside. The thing that scares me the most is that how the United States has so many enemies, everyone with bad relations to the USA will probably join the other side, which Canada isnt apart of. Makes me feel uneasy to be beside the most hated country in the world, cuz if they get nuked Canada has a 90% chance of getting nuked with 'em.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by DT_Battlekruser on 2006-10-12 at 23:33:02
QUOTE(Reichwehr @ Oct 12 2006, 07:15 PM)
Would India be involved at all?
[right][snapback]575977[/snapback][/right]


An interesting question if taken seriously. The US has essentially given India a bunch of nukes, but China also has strong ties to India. Chance are, India would try to stay out of a world war if it had the chance.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Desperado on 2006-10-13 at 10:43:08
QUOTE
Amazing! Somebody else with a knowledge of history!

If that statement in any way insinuates I don't know history you'd be wrong. I know about all that stuff, it's just that it's not definitively Imperialism, it's forcing other people to play with us. And look at how much better off they are! China? Japan? Would you rather they be third world countries? History has shown that America freaks over other people for our own interests, but in the long run those countries become way better off. Look at blacks. If we hadn't enslaved them their ancestors would never have left Africa which is a horrendous mess today. If we went to war with Africa, sure, we'd kill hundreds of thousands of civilians, but in the long run they'd be the better for it. It is an unfortunate sacrifice, a small minority suffers so that the majority can become far happier. This has been true in every war, in every affair, and it is true in every day living.

QUOTE
Why shouldn't we do whatever it takes to better our interests? Is that so wrong?

I think I my previous paragraph adequately covers the answer to this. I surprised even myself with such a logical conclusion.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by IsolatedPurity on 2006-10-13 at 10:59:43
Didn't Bush call Iraq/Iran/N. Korea the Axis of Evil? Or something similiar... so if my memory serves me right, using "Axis" could be justified... even though Bush is the true evil...

Anyways, initially:
Allies:
USA
Isreal (we support them like they were our child -> zionism)
United Kingdom (because... well you know)
S. Korea (please save us from N. Korea)

Axis:
Iran
N. Korea
Afganistan
Syria(?)
Pakistan
Iraq (they will overthrow the government and civil war / try to attack)
Lots of other muslim countries

China, Japan, India, Turkey will try to remain neutral.
Turkey might let us use their airspace / airstrips for a price...
China will end up siding with whoever they will profit with the most...
Japan will eventually side with the Allies due to endagerment...
India will side with the Allies due to their issues with surrounding countries...

I know I'm missing a lot of Axis though... lots of people hate Isreal... and hate us because of that... or they just hate us. I don't think we would have too many allies at first. Most will stay neutral or try not to provide too much support until their country is endangered or they think the war is about to kill the USA and they want to try to save their trading ties.

France won't do anything... or they will have a civil war with the muslims in their country.
Next Page (2)