The Biggest Problem for Modern Civilisation?

by Eilzel Sat Mar 23, 2019 9:28 am

So, pretty standard question. We occasionally hear how something is 'the biggest problem' facing the world. This ranges from things like those in my poll (not all of which I agree with, but ARE commonly claimed), and many others.

If you think the biggest problem facing the world is in the poll, choose it. If not, mention it in the comments below and if enough agree I'll add it to the poll.

Will be interesting to see what people think, considering some of the insanity I've read here and seen and heard elsewhere about what our biggest issues really are.

I voted already - for me, Climate Change is, without a doubt, THE biggest concern for us all and the thing we should be working hardest on fixing for the foreseeable future.

by Fred Moletrousers Sat Mar 23, 2019 6:52 pm

I've just voted "nuclear armageddon."

And it will begin in the Middle East.

by Victorismyhero Sat Mar 23, 2019 7:02 pm

I'd agree climate change but I suggest you add biological Armageddon
due to antibiotic resistance many once common place lethal diseases will make a come back.
and or the emergence of an unstoppable "flu"

by Vintage Sat Mar 23, 2019 7:15 pm

Over population

by Eilzel Sun Mar 24, 2019 1:14 am

- Fred, do you really see that when currently no ME nation has nuclear weapons?

- Vic, added (though with catastrophe to avoid repetition), good idea.

- Vintage, agree that that is a contributor to most the listed problems. But from what I've read, OP is actually meant to peak in the next decade or so then begin a decline (just a theory, of course).

by Guest Sun Mar 24, 2019 2:17 am

by Eilzel Sun Mar 24, 2019 5:06 am

gelico wrote:

ME!!

True. But forum rules say we can't make threads attacking posters. So let's just stick with what we got Wink

by Andy Sun Mar 24, 2019 8:26 am

The far left extremists have all but been defeated, leaving the far right terrorists a free hand.
Which we are seeing with our own eyes across the world.

by Eilzel Sun Mar 24, 2019 10:41 am

I'd be very interested in hearing from those who think Political Correctness is ACTUALLY a bigger problem for the world than Climate Change or some of the other options.

And to hear their explanation lol!

by Syl Sun Mar 24, 2019 1:31 pm

I voted Biological Catastrophe....who knows what the next untreatable infectious killer will be or where it will start/spread?

But I dont think any one of the above will be the sole cause (unless its going to be Nuclear Armageddon, and with people like Trump and the Kim Jong un in power that's always a possibility) One catastrophe could have an effect on the others.

I would put political correctness as a none starter.

by HoratioTarr Sun Mar 24, 2019 2:22 pm

I'm of the mind that people will eventually die out. We abuse each other, animals, our planet, our seas and oceans, the air we breathe. We deserve none of it. The planet will survive without us, but we won't survive without it. Our entire history is littered with war and heinous cruelty. And we won't change. Doesn't matter how many scientists tell us, or spiritual people warn us...we'll go our merry way because all most people focus on is money and the getting of money and what money buys us.

As for political correctness. That's a disease that's strangling society as surely as a noose round a rabbit's neck. Stare into the headlights, everyone..it's so pretty....

by Guest Sun Mar 24, 2019 3:25 pm

Eilzel wrote:I'd be very interested in hearing from those who think Political Correctness is ACTUALLY a bigger problem for the world than Climate Change or some of the other options.

And to hear their explanation

I would rather climate change end up killing me, than living in the very deplorable PC culture that is becoming so endemic. We are losing the ability of free speech and even worse free thought.

Who really wants to live in a future, where you can face criminal charges, for being factual correct about biology for instance?
Where people are being investigated and now someone charged for claimed misgendering.

What sort of world will that be to live in, where you cannot even express your own views, through a fear of being charged with a faux hate crime?

There is a huge difference between not believeing that a biological born male, can change to become a biological woman

That should never be a hate crime and this is just one example of the insanity we are and have been heading into

We are entering a world where the next generation is so fragile of anything that is said to them

All this stems from mollycoddling children and Far leftist views entering into education. The worst concept being intersectionality

by Eilzel Sun Mar 24, 2019 3:38 pm

phildidge wrote:
Eilzel wrote:I'd be very interested in hearing from those who think Political Correctness is ACTUALLY a bigger problem for the world than Climate Change or some of the other options.

And to hear their explanation

I would rather climate change end up killing me, than living in the very deplorable PC culture that is becoming so endemic. We are losing the ability of free speech and even worse free thought.

Who really wants to live in a future, where you can face criminal charges, for being factual correct about biology for instance?
Where people are being investigated and now someone charged for claimed misgendering.

What sort of world will that be to live in, where you cannot even express your own views, through a fear of being charged with a faux hate crime?

There is a huge difference between not believeing that a biological born male, can change to become a biological woman

That should never be a hate crime and this is just one example of the insanity we are and have been heading into

We are entering a world where the next generation is so fragile of anything that is said to them

All this stems from mollycoddling children and Far leftist views entering into education. The worst concept being intersectionality

Well, while there are certainly instances of PC going too far, I think it's laughable some people think it a bigger problem than potential biological catastrophes or climate change.

Why?

Simply enough PC affects very few countries and hardly kills or harms en masse.

Try telling countries with severe drought, destructive rising sea levels and extreme weather conditions that not being allowed to say a man is a man is somehow a worse problem than their country possibly being wiped out by the sea Rolling Eyes

by Eilzel Sun Mar 24, 2019 3:38 pm

Note: at least you had the balls to answer Laughing

by Guest Sun Mar 24, 2019 3:45 pm

Eilzel wrote:
phildidge wrote:

I would rather climate change end up killing me, than living in the very deplorable PC culture that is becoming so endemic. We are losing the ability of free speech and even worse free thought.

Who really wants to live in a future, where you can face criminal charges, for being factual correct about biology for instance?
Where people are being investigated and now someone charged for claimed misgendering.

What sort of world will that be to live in, where you cannot even express your own views, through a fear of being charged with a faux hate crime?

There is a huge difference between not believeing that a biological born male, can change to become a biological woman

That should never be a hate crime and this is just one example of the insanity we are and have been heading into

We are entering a world where the next generation is so fragile of anything that is said to them

All this stems from mollycoddling children and Far leftist views entering into education. The worst concept being intersectionality

Well, while there are certainly instances of PC going too far, I think it's laughable some people think it a bigger problem than potential biological catastrophes or climate change.

Why?

Simply enough PC affects very few countries and hardly kills or harms en masse.

Try telling countries with severe drought, destructive rising sea levels and extreme weather conditions that not being allowed to say a man is a man is somehow a worse problem than their country possibly being wiped out by the sea

How is it laughable that now people can be litterally investigated by the Police for a thought crime

Again I would rather get taken out by climate change, than live in a world, that is descending backwards. Whether from the Far left or right.

To a time when western nations lived under heavy censur and arrests for speaking their mind. To the point they were placed in concentration camps or gulags

You asked what is worse, I explain what it is, because this is what matters more to the political Far left and right than climate change. The view to force their beliefs onto people. They dont care about climate change

The point you are missing here mate

by Eilzel Sun Mar 24, 2019 3:51 pm

phildidge wrote:
Eilzel wrote:
phildidge wrote:

I would rather climate change end up killing me, than living in the very deplorable PC culture that is becoming so endemic. We are losing the ability of free speech and even worse free thought.

Who really wants to live in a future, where you can face criminal charges, for being factual correct about biology for instance?
Where people are being investigated and now someone charged for claimed misgendering.

What sort of world will that be to live in, where you cannot even express your own views, through a fear of being charged with a faux hate crime?

There is a huge difference between not believeing that a biological born male, can change to become a biological woman

That should never be a hate crime and this is just one example of the insanity we are and have been heading into

We are entering a world where the next generation is so fragile of anything that is said to them

All this stems from mollycoddling children and Far leftist views entering into education. The worst concept being intersectionality

Well, while there are certainly instances of PC going too far, I think it's laughable some people think it a bigger problem than potential biological catastrophes or climate change.

Why?

Simply enough PC affects very few countries and hardly kills or harms en masse.

Try telling countries with severe drought, destructive rising sea levels and extreme weather conditions that not being allowed to say a man is a man is somehow a worse problem than their country possibly being wiped out by the sea

How is it laughable that now people can be litterally investigated by the Police for a thought crime

Again I would rather get taken out by climate change, than live in a world, that is descending backwards. Whether from the Far left or right.

To a time when western nations lived under heavy censur and arrests for speaking their mind. To the point they were placed in concentration camps or gulags

You asked what is worse, I explain what it is, because this is what matters more to the political Far left and right than climate change. The view to force their beliefs onto people. They dont care about climate change

The point you are missing here mate

The far left is irrelevant. If you lived in a country with real problems, you'd know PC isn't one of them.

The mainstream Left, the Left that matters, tends to more seriously prioritise Climate Change.

You think PC is a bigger issue than I do, for sure. I'm pretty sure we both agree Climate Change is only going to get worse if something isn't done.

by Guest Sun Mar 24, 2019 4:04 pm

Eilzel wrote:
phildidge wrote:

How is it laughable that now people can be litterally investigated by the Police for a thought crime

Again I would rather get taken out by climate change, than live in a world, that is descending backwards. Whether from the Far left or right.

To a time when western nations lived under heavy censur and arrests for speaking their mind. To the point they were placed in concentration camps or gulags

You asked what is worse, I explain what it is, because this is what matters more to the political Far left and right than climate change. The view to force their beliefs onto people. They dont care about climate change

The point you are missing here mate

The far left is irrelevant. If you lived in a country with real problems, you'd know PC isn't one of them.

The mainstream Left, the Left that matters, tends to more seriously prioritise Climate Change.

You think PC is a bigger issue than I do, for sure. I'm pretty sure we both agree Climate Change is only going to get worse if something isn't done.

The far left is not a problem?

Come again?

Tell that to the people living under such regemes today and in the past?

Yes but the center left are silent to the now Far left, who are in this case in the majority of the labour party and like yourself mate. Willing to allow Far leftist to take the reigns of power, if voted in. As you do not see the warning signs

The problem in other parts of Europe is the Far right and they also censur and shut down opposition

You are just too blind to sleeping giants reawaking. That we have not seen since the early 20th century.

The problem today is identity politics on the left and right and neither will do anything about climate chaage

If people really cared about climate change, they would do every in their power to do so themselves by making a difference. Give up their cars. Or at least only drive them when necessary. I can go on the list is endless of what people can do, but arrogantly, people think Governements are required to make this change. When people can do this themselves.

So climate change is a problem in the future and is starting to happen now and we see the effects off this and what is every single human doing about this?

Very little, because they expect someone else to solve this for them, when they themselves do very little to help prevent the problem. Even worse Governements really place this as secondary or actually way down the list to priorities they have.

Hence the PC culture and identity politics ahead, will very much be played out on forcing beliefs onto society and doing little to combat climate change.

Not one person that answered climate change is being honest with themselves, because if they were. That would be the main priority in life to help change and they would change their daily lives to help achieve this.

So I am being very honest mate, because my main concern is identity politics of with PC is a very major part of. As I want to combat climate change, but its never going to happen with theidentity politics we have descended now into in the west

by Eilzel Mon Mar 25, 2019 5:41 am

phildidge wrote:
Eilzel wrote:
phildidge wrote:

How is it laughable that now people can be litterally investigated by the Police for a thought crime

Again I would rather get taken out by climate change, than live in a world, that is descending backwards. Whether from the Far left or right.

To a time when western nations lived under heavy censur and arrests for speaking their mind. To the point they were placed in concentration camps or gulags

You asked what is worse, I explain what it is, because this is what matters more to the political Far left and right than climate change. The view to force their beliefs onto people. They dont care about climate change

The point you are missing here mate

The far left is irrelevant. If you lived in a country with real problems, you'd know PC isn't one of them.

The mainstream Left, the Left that matters, tends to more seriously prioritise Climate Change.

You think PC is a bigger issue than I do, for sure. I'm pretty sure we both agree Climate Change is only going to get worse if something isn't done.

The far left is not a problem?

Come again?

Tell that to the people living under such regemes today and in the past?

Yes but the center left are silent to the now Far left, who are in this case in the majority of the labour party and like yourself mate. Willing to allow Far leftist to take the reigns of power, if voted in. As you do not see the warning signs

The problem in other parts of Europe is the Far right and they also censur and shut down opposition

You are just too blind to sleeping giants reawaking. That we have not seen since the early 20th century.

The problem today is identity politics on the left and right and neither will do anything about climate chaage

If people really cared about climate change, they would do every in their power to do so themselves by making a difference. Give up their cars. Or at least only drive them when necessary. I can go on the list is endless of what people can do, but arrogantly, people think Governements are required to make this change. When people can do this themselves.

So climate change is a problem in the future and is starting to happen now and we see the effects off this and what is every single human doing about this?

Very little, because they expect someone else to solve this for them, when they themselves do very little to help prevent the problem. Even worse Governements really place this as secondary or actually way down the list to priorities they have.

Hence the PC culture and identity politics ahead, will very much be played out on forcing beliefs onto society and doing little to combat climate change.

Not one person that answered climate change is being honest with themselves, because if they were. That would be the main priority in life to help change and they would change their daily lives to help achieve this.

So I am being very honest mate, because my main concern is identity politics of with PC is a very major part of. As I want to combat climate change, but its never going to happen with theidentity politics we have descended now into in the west

Are Identity Politics a massive problem in African, Asian or South American countries? Are they a problem in most of Eastern Europe? Not really.

Is Climate Change a problem is these place? Yes it is.

Are countries at least TRYING to make use of greener energy sources? Yes, they are.

Identity politics (not radical LW socialism, by which I mean actual socialism, not socially liberal indulgences), is an indulgence in some western countries - an issue where everything is pretty good, so people look for silly things to get offended about. But aside from some university campuses, it is barely even a problem. There aren't going to be the horrors of the 20th century based on misgendering people, that is just hyperbole.

Biological epidemics or Climate Change, however, WILL be a problem for A LOT of countries in the future.

I promise you people in Thailand, China, Japan, Morocco, Nigeria, Chile and many many other countries give very little shit about identity politics or political correctness. PC is a problem only in some western countries and entirely amplified as an issue by people who feel not being allowed to offend is the biggest infringement on their human rights that can possibly be imagined.

And I add, that I am not saying PC is not a problem, it certainly can be.

But the biggest in the WORLD, that is western centrism at its finest Laughing

by Guest Mon Mar 25, 2019 6:47 am

Eilzel wrote:

Are Identity Politics a massive problem in African, Asian or South American countries? Are they a problem in most of Eastern Europe? Not really.
phildidge wrote:Yes they are very much a problem within all these nations, espcially Eastern Europe. Which have become very nationalistic and further right. In South America both Far left in Bolivia and venezuela. In Brazil Far right

So yes, really.

Is Climate Change a problem is these place? Yes it is.
phildidge wrote:And what are you and others individually doing about this?
Very little. In fact I would go as to say, that yourself and others are expecting others to resolve this. Whilst you and others continue to go about your lives adding to the problem. By the very fact with how you live your lives.

So it may be the one of the most pressing threats that we see today, but not many people are actually doing anything about this

Are countries at least TRYING to make use of greener energy sources? Yes, they are.
phildidge wrote:Its not enough

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A4kX9xKGeEw&t=2s

Identity politics (not radical LW socialism, by which I mean actual socialism, not socially liberal indulgences), is an indulgence in some western countries - an issue where everything is pretty good, so people look for silly things to get offended about. But aside from some university campuses, it is barely even a problem. There aren't going to be the horrors of the 20th century based on misgendering people, that is just hyperbole.
phildidge wrote:Actually its becoming more and more a problem in society. Take for example people being criminally investigated because they do not subscribe to Transgender radical ideology. Socialism has and always will be a flawed system. Being that in its purest Marxist form. It has always requied states to become Totalitarian and I see no likelyhood of this not changing. If Corbyn and his Momentum cronies gain power. They litterally want to dismantle capitalism. Which though it certainly has its faults. Its got far more people out of poverty than Marxism ever has

Biological epidemics or Climate Change, however, WILL be a problem for A LOT of countries in the future.
phildidge wrote:And Identity politics has always plagued humanity with the worst cases in the forms of Nazism and Communism

I promise you people in Thailand, China, Japan, Morocco, Nigeria, Chile and many many other countries give very little shit about identity politics or political correctness. PC is a problem only in some western countries and entirely amplified as an issue by people who feel not being allowed to offend is the biggest infringement on their human rights that can possibly be imagined.
phildidge wrote:Just as they give the same about climate change. Like I said, most people on climate change are utter hypocrits and would certainl not stop driving their cars for example

And I add, that I am not saying PC is not a problem, it certainly can be.

But the biggest in the WORLD, that is western centrism at its finest

Well I see the west creeping more and more slowly. Into the same problems that faced Europe after WW1. All it could take is another spark, like a crash. Not seen since the Wall street crash of 1929. With such a recession. Placing millions out of work. Identity political parties will easily garner from such a calamity. As they once did so in the past. We are already seeing this ince closer every day. In Italy a radical right party is in power. In Hungary the same radical right identity politics party. In France the Far right is second. In Spain the Far left has gained many seats. We are seeing more and more inch further to the extremes of the left and right mate

by Eilzel Mon Mar 25, 2019 8:29 am

I think you're conflating the Far Right and Left Wings with Identity Politics in ALL cases - which I don't think is the case.

The rise of Hitler and Stalin and other dictatorships wasn't 'identity politics' as it is today. It was Nationalism and Communism. Censorship was on attacking the regime, not on 'protecting minorities', which it is today.

I agree the political extremes ARE dangerous, but the identity politics which protects Muslim, trans people etc from criticism is not the extreme seen in most countries.

by Guest Mon Mar 25, 2019 8:58 am

Eilzel wrote:I think you're conflating the Far Right and Left Wings with Identity Politics in ALL cases - which I don't think is the case.

The rise of Hitler and Stalin and other dictatorships wasn't 'identity politics' as it is today. It was Nationalism and Communism. Censorship was on attacking the regime, not on 'protecting minorities', which it is today.

I agree the political extremes ARE dangerous, but the identity politics which protects Muslim, trans people etc from criticism is not the extreme seen in most countries.

You seriously dont think Nazism for example is not identity politics, when it was based on racial superiority?

by Eilzel Mon Mar 25, 2019 9:39 am

phildidge wrote:
Eilzel wrote:I think you're conflating the Far Right and Left Wings with Identity Politics in ALL cases - which I don't think is the case.

The rise of Hitler and Stalin and other dictatorships wasn't 'identity politics' as it is today. It was Nationalism and Communism. Censorship was on attacking the regime, not on 'protecting minorities', which it is today.

I agree the political extremes ARE dangerous, but the identity politics which protects Muslim, trans people etc from criticism is not the extreme seen in most countries.

You seriously dont think Nazism for example is not identity politics, when it was based on racial superiority?

It's not even close to the same as the PC nuts of today. They wanted to wipe out swathes of people, or at the very least make them second class citizens.

PC nuts want to police language to avoid offending people - an admittedly bad road to go down, but incomparable to Nazism.

by Guest Mon Mar 25, 2019 9:49 am

Eilzel wrote:
phildidge wrote:

You seriously dont think Nazism for example is not identity politics, when it was based on racial superiority?

It's not even close to the same as the PC nuts of today. They wanted to wipe out swathes of people, or at the very least make them second class citizens.

PC nuts want to police language to avoid offending people - an admittedly bad road to go down, but incomparable to Nazism.

I said identity politics with Nazism and it was certainly a form of political correctness, from the warped and twisted view point of the Nazi's

Of course we would not view it that way, but the Nazi's certainly did

So you are very mistaken, as both go down a slipper slope of what you can and cannot say

by Eilzel Mon Mar 25, 2019 10:51 am

phildidge wrote:
Eilzel wrote:
phildidge wrote:

You seriously dont think Nazism for example is not identity politics, when it was based on racial superiority?

It's not even close to the same as the PC nuts of today. They wanted to wipe out swathes of people, or at the very least make them second class citizens.

PC nuts want to police language to avoid offending people - an admittedly bad road to go down, but incomparable to Nazism.

I said identity politics with Nazism and it was certainly a form of political correctness, from the warped and twisted view point of the Nazi's

Of course we would not view it that way, but the Nazi's certainly did

So you are very mistaken, as both go down a slipper slope of what you can and cannot say

We cannot say, you are right.

But what we CAN both say is that Climate Change is an absolute fact we have to address. So one problem is purely speculation as to how bad it will be, whereas the other is a problem every credible scientist is telling us will only get worse.

by Guest Mon Mar 25, 2019 11:25 am

Eilzel wrote:
phildidge wrote:

I said identity politics with Nazism and it was certainly a form of political correctness, from the warped and twisted view point of the Nazi's

Of course we would not view it that way, but the Nazi's certainly did

So you are very mistaken, as both go down a slipper slope of what you can and cannot say

We cannot say, you are right.

But what we CAN both say is that Climate Change is an absolute fact we have to address. So one problem is purely speculation as to how bad it will be, whereas the other is a problem every credible scientist is telling us will only get worse.

I am well aware of the potential problems with climate change mate and what you continually are forgetting. Is the PC brigade place their political beliefs above everything else and hence why so little is being done about climate change. Where even less will get done with identity political groups gaining power.

Anyway, the reality is eveybody has to play their part in regards to climate change and that is so far from happenning. AS people have become so attached to the things they use daily like cars for example. Hardly anyone actually is taking climate change seriously in their every day lives. That is the reality of this, as again they all expect their Governments to do something whilst they do very little themselves.

Catch you later mate Laughing

by Fred Moletrousers Mon Mar 25, 2019 1:53 pm

Eilzel wrote:- Fred, do you really see that when currently no ME nation has nuclear weapons?

- Vic, added (though with catastrophe to avoid repetition), good idea.

- Vintage, agree that that is a contributor to most the listed problems. But from what I've read, OP is actually meant to peak in the next decade or so then begin a decline (just a theory, of course).

Wrong...Israel has nuclear weapons.

Iran probably has production capability, if not actual stocks.

Some former Warsaw Pact (and possibly even more recent Russian) tactical battlefield nuclear ordnance is known to have "gone missing"...and they are hardly likely to be decorating some military memorabilia collector's sitting room wall.

It's only a matter of time, in my opinion, before some rogue state or terrorist organisation gets its hands on a piece of nuclear weaponry ...and uses it.

The most likely small to medium size exchange, again in my opinion, is likely to be between Israel and Iran.

Then would come the domino effect.....

by Eilzel Mon Mar 25, 2019 2:03 pm

Fred Moletrousers wrote:
Eilzel wrote:- Fred, do you really see that when currently no ME nation has nuclear weapons?

- Vic, added (though with catastrophe to avoid repetition), good idea.

- Vintage, agree that that is a contributor to most the listed problems. But from what I've read, OP is actually meant to peak in the next decade or so then begin a decline (just a theory, of course).

Wrong...Israel has nuclear weapons.

Iran probably has production capability, if not actual stocks.

Some former Warsaw Pact (and possibly even more recent Russian) tactical battlefield nuclear ordnance is known to have "gone missing"...and they are hardly likely to be decorating some military memorabilia collector's sitting room wall.

It's only a matter of time, in my opinion, before some rogue state or terrorist organisation gets its hands on a piece of nuclear weaponry ...and uses it.

The most likely small to medium size exchange, again in my opinion, is likely to be between Israel and Iran.

Then would come the domino effect.....

Yes, Israel has nukes, forgot about them, though they are no rogue state and fairly trustworthy not to misuse them.

Don't you think the threat of Iran is largely overplayed?

A terrorist unit getting one and detonating it IS a frightening, and sadly not unrealistic, possibility; but do you really think the response would be a strike on a nation? How would anyone guess which one?

I think the prospect of MAD remains as vital today as it ever was in preventing nuclear destruction tbh. And many countrieams might go unaffected even in a nuclear conflict.

by Guest Mon Mar 25, 2019 2:11 pm

Fred Moletrousers wrote:
Eilzel wrote:- Fred, do you really see that when currently no ME nation has nuclear weapons?

- Vic, added (though with catastrophe to avoid repetition), good idea.

- Vintage, agree that that is a contributor to most the listed problems. But from what I've read, OP is actually meant to peak in the next decade or so then begin a decline (just a theory, of course).

Wrong...Israel has nuclear weapons.

Iran probably has production capability, if not actual stocks.

Some former Warsaw Pact (and possibly even more recent Russian) tactical battlefield nuclear ordnance is known to have "gone missing"...and they are hardly likely to be decorating some military memorabilia collector's sitting room wall.

It's only a matter of time, in my opinion, before some rogue state or terrorist organisation gets its hands on a piece of nuclear weaponry ...and uses it.

The most likely small to medium size exchange, again in my opinion, is likely to be between Israel and Iran.

Then would come the domino effect.....

Israel has had nukes for decades and is more of a deterrent and why I very much doubt they would use them. Unless as a last resort with the nation basically over run, by invading armies. Considering many arab nations are warming to Israel and see Iran as the bigger threat. Its not going to happen from Israel

As to Iran gaining any nukes?

Do you seriously think for one minute Fred, that Israel would allow this? When they exposed to the world, that Iran was actively seeking to build a bomb. That once before both Syria and Iraq under Saddam were seeking to do the same. Where in two seperate daring air strikes by Israel. They took out both their nuke facilities.

Israel would never allow Iran to have nukes, as it would be a massivethreat to their security

Even your view of some tactical nukes going missing. Even in the unlikely event some terrorists get their hands on one and we see a horrific terrorist attack. That is hardly likley to bring about armageddon for the world, but will be a localised horror born out to the people attacked.

I think you are looking in the wrong area here and its more likely a risk of a chemical warfare attack. Either through terrorism, as we have seen on a small scale with the attack in Salisbury. Or something far more major with terrorism

The only possible way we could descend into armageddon. Is if there is an almight economic global crash. Creating mass anarchy.That then sees far right extreme groups gain power once again. Using force to bring about control and that people will willingly accept such a forced control. As they will fear the anarchy far worse than any form of totalitarianism. They will basically sell their souls to multiple devils. Which will no doubt eventually descend the world into global war.

by Guest Mon Mar 25, 2019 2:28 pm

Eilzel wrote:
Fred Moletrousers wrote:

Wrong...Israel has nuclear weapons.

Iran probably has production capability, if not actual stocks.

Some former Warsaw Pact (and possibly even more recent Russian) tactical battlefield nuclear ordnance is known to have "gone missing"...and they are hardly likely to be decorating some military memorabilia collector's sitting room wall.

It's only a matter of time, in my opinion, before some rogue state or terrorist organisation gets its hands on a piece of nuclear weaponry ...and uses it.

The most likely small to medium size exchange, again in my opinion, is likely to be between Israel and Iran.

Then would come the domino effect.....

Yes, Israel has nukes, forgot about them, though they are no rogue state and fairly trustworthy not to misuse them.

Don't you think the threat of Iran is largely overplayed?
.

Yeah that is really being overplayed, not.

The very fact this is a country that continually has vowed to wipe Israel off the face of the earth. Let alone how mossad was able to steal many of their secrets showing that in fact Iran was actively seeking to build nuke weapons

https://www.jpost.com/Arab-Israeli-Conflict/Secret-Mossad-files-show-underground-Iran-nuke-facility-older-than-admitted-583442

https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/how-the-mossad-broke-into-an-iranian-facility-and-stole-nuclear-files-1.6272522

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-43952196

Only people on the left would be so utterly and bloody naive to this

by Eilzel Mon Mar 25, 2019 2:37 pm

phildidge wrote:
Eilzel wrote:
Fred Moletrousers wrote:

Wrong...Israel has nuclear weapons.

Iran probably has production capability, if not actual stocks.

Some former Warsaw Pact (and possibly even more recent Russian) tactical battlefield nuclear ordnance is known to have "gone missing"...and they are hardly likely to be decorating some military memorabilia collector's sitting room wall.

It's only a matter of time, in my opinion, before some rogue state or terrorist organisation gets its hands on a piece of nuclear weaponry ...and uses it.

The most likely small to medium size exchange, again in my opinion, is likely to be between Israel and Iran.

Then would come the domino effect.....

Yes, Israel has nukes, forgot about them, though they are no rogue state and fairly trustworthy not to misuse them.

Don't you think the threat of Iran is largely overplayed?
.

Yeah that is really being overplayed, not.

The very fact this is a country that continually has vowed to wipe Israel off the face of the earth. Let alone how mossad was able to steal many of their secrets showing that in fact Iran was actively seeking to build nuke weapons

https://www.jpost.com/Arab-Israeli-Conflict/Secret-Mossad-files-show-underground-Iran-nuke-facility-older-than-admitted-583442

https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/how-the-mossad-broke-into-an-iranian-facility-and-stole-nuclear-files-1.6272522

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-43952196

Only people on the left would be so utterly and bloody naive to this

You really are a hoot, didge Laughing

You just spent an epic post telling Fred that Iran isn't threat because of Israel; then immediately tell ME that Iran IS a threat Suspect

You really just want to argue with everyone, don't you?

In response to your post, I refer to your earlier post above Laughing

by Guest Mon Mar 25, 2019 2:40 pm

Jordan Peterson: Radicalization of the Left Could Lead to TOTALITARIAN TILT!

we speak to Professor Jordan Peterson. He discusses his perception that the left is radicalising, focussing on equality of outcome which could lead to totalitarianism, inequality, identity politics, climate change, rights vs responsibility and the story of his friendship with a native carver in British Columbia which drives him to tears!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JdFL63vX07Y

by Guest Mon Mar 25, 2019 2:47 pm

Eilzel wrote:
phildidge wrote:

Yeah that is really being overplayed, not.

The very fact this is a country that continually has vowed to wipe Israel off the face of the earth. Let alone how mossad was able to steal many of their secrets showing that in fact Iran was actively seeking to build nuke weapons

https://www.jpost.com/Arab-Israeli-Conflict/Secret-Mossad-files-show-underground-Iran-nuke-facility-older-than-admitted-583442

https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/how-the-mossad-broke-into-an-iranian-facility-and-stole-nuclear-files-1.6272522

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-43952196

Only people on the left would be so utterly and bloody naive to this

You really are a hoot, didge
phildidge wrote:I guess you need to go to specsavers then mate, because I made it very clear Iran is a threat to Israel and that they would never allow them. If it came push to shove. That they would allow them to build a nuke weapon.

Are you seriously suggesting to me, that this means they are not a threat?

You just spent an epic post telling Fred that Iran isn't threat because of Israel; then immediately tell ME that Iran IS a threat
phildidge wrote:Sorry, but where and what statement to Fred did I make, saying that Iran is not a threat to Israel?

Did I say, that they would never allow this to happen and as seen they have exposed to the world the fac Iran has been seeking to build a nuke?

Did I also point out that before both Iraq and Syria sought to build a nuke and that israel neutralised those threats?

I think this is a prime example of you interpreting your view to something I never claim

You really just want to argue with everyone, don't you?
phildidge wrote:Oh I see, so where you incorrectly mistook what I have said, because you hold the most ridiculous leftist bias, to never understand the threats that israel does actually face. Mainly I guess because many of the radical left see Israel as a pariah. Proves to me, you simple cannot even comprehend some very simple posts to you

So I will ask again, how is me saying that Israel will never allow Iran to gain a nuke and would no doubt. As they did before, take out a facility, against the views of the world, to safeguard their own security. You thus viewing Iran as not a threat to Israel?

Sorry, but you must be reading off the Corbynite gibberish script here

In response to your post, I refer to your earlier post above

I suggest you actually also do so as wel. As what did I actually say?

Does that post in anyway, diminish the threat from iran to Israel?

The fact you want to make this about me and not the points, shows how much this is lost upon you

Take your time

by Guest Mon Mar 25, 2019 2:50 pm

Maybe someone can explain how the following would lead to someone thinking Iran is not a threat to Israel?

I seriously dispair when the left then claim that this is being overplayed, as again they have such a poor bias against israel

Israel has had nukes for decades and is more of a deterrent and why I very much doubt they would use them. Unless as a last resort with the nation basically over run, by invading armies. Considering many arab nations are warming to Israel and see Iran as the bigger threat. Its not going to happen from Israel

As to Iran gaining any nukes?

Do you seriously think for one minute Fred, that Israel would allow this? When they exposed to the world, that Iran was actively seeking to build a bomb. That once before both Syria and Iraq under Saddam were seeking to do the same. Where in two seperate daring air strikes by Israel. They took out both their nuke facilities.

Israel would never allow Iran to have nukes, as it would be a massive threat to their security

by Eilzel Mon Mar 25, 2019 3:08 pm

"Do you not think the threat of Iran is largely overplayed?"

What did you understand from this sentence, didge?

Because in the context of this discussion I think it's obvious that I meant 'Iran is not a threat that could trigger a nuclear war'.

Everything you said confirms that. Even IF Iran started a nuclear arms programme, Israel wouldn't let it get off the ground. As YOU pointed out.

Is Iran a threat to Israel? A little, perhaps. But certainly not as long as Israel is the only nuclear power of them. And even IF Iran posed a serious threat to Israel, it is not one that really threatens escalation into a global nuclear conflict.

by Guest Mon Mar 25, 2019 3:17 pm

Eilzel wrote:"Do you not think the threat of Iran is largely overplayed?"

What did you understand from this sentence, didge?

Because in the context of this discussion I think it's obvious that I meant 'Iran is not a threat that could trigger a nuclear war'.

Everything you said confirms that. Even IF Iran started a nuclear arms programme, Israel wouldn't let it get off the ground. As YOU pointed out.

Is Iran a threat to Israel? A little, perhaps. But certainly not as long as Israel is the only nuclear power of them. And even IF Iran posed a serious threat to Israel, it is not one that really threatens escalation into a global nuclear conflict.

A little?

WTF I mean seriously, wow.

Well that is because you never think outside the box mate

It has the potential to actually trigger a global conflict. being as it has support of both Russia and China. Where they all support Assad in Syria and hamas in Gaza. In one aspect fred is right and also wrong. As like i say, Israel would never allow Iran to become such a nucleur threat, but the reality is. Many Arab states see iran as a threat. Hence it has the potential to escalate. Which is seeing nations choose which side and nations to stand by. If other nations were drawn in, they would though always refrain from using their nukes. As they have in many other conflicts from the past in Asia. Where two nuke powers were on opposing sides. So Iran is unlikely to bring about armageddon, but the potential to cause major conflict and is as such a massive threat to peace

So I agree that Iran would not trigger a nucleur war, but it could cause and create a localized Middle East conflict. Which could see other nations drawn into this

So are you seriously suggesting that the threat of Iran is being over played? When its hands are behind conflict in Yemen, Syria, in Gaza, Lebanon previously in Iraq?

Just because israel would never allow Iran to gain nukes, does not mean they are not a massive threat to peace. Its them funding violence and arms to hezbollah and Hamas, both terrorist organisations.

Hence this has the potential to escalate. Where before many Arab states were against israel, now many are siding with them, as they see iran as a major threat to peace

Dont try to mock me with childish antics mate, you are better than that

by Eilzel Mon Mar 25, 2019 3:32 pm

phildidge wrote:
Eilzel wrote:"Do you not think the threat of Iran is largely overplayed?"

What did you understand from this sentence, didge?

Because in the context of this discussion I think it's obvious that I meant 'Iran is not a threat that could trigger a nuclear war'.

Everything you said confirms that. Even IF Iran started a nuclear arms programme, Israel wouldn't let it get off the ground. As YOU pointed out.

Is Iran a threat to Israel? A little, perhaps. But certainly not as long as Israel is the only nuclear power of them. And even IF Iran posed a serious threat to Israel, it is not one that really threatens escalation into a global nuclear conflict.

A little?

WTF I mean seriously, wow.

Well that is because you never think outside the box mate

It has the potential to actually trigger a global conflict. being as it has support of both Russia and China. Where they all support Assad in Syria and hamas in Gaza. In one aspect fred is right and also wrong. As like i say, Israel would never allow Iran to become such a nucleur threat, but the reality is. Many Arab states see iran as a threat. Hence it has the potential to escalate. Which is seeing nations choose which side and nations to stand by. If other nations were drawn in, they would though always refrain from using their nukes. As they have in many other conflicts from the past in Asia. Where two nuke powers were on opposing sides. So Iran is unlikely to bring about armageddon, but the potential to cause major conflict and is as such a massive threat to peace

So I agree that Iran would not trigger a nucleur war, but it could cause and create a localized Middle East conflict. Which could see other nations drawn into this

So are you seriously suggesting that the threat of Iran is being over played? When its hands are behind conflict in Yemen, Syria, in Gaza, Lebanon previously in Iraq?

Just because israel would never allow Iran to gain nukes, does not mean they are not a massive threat to peace. Its them funding violence and arms to hezbollah and Hamas, both terrorist organisations.

Hence this has the potential to escalate. Where before many Arab states were against israel, now many are siding with them, as they see iran as a major threat to peace

Dont try to mock me with childish antics mate, you are better than that

Where's the childish antics? You sound paranoid Rolling Eyes

I don't see escalation from Iran leading to global conflict, it just isn't important enough.

by Guest Mon Mar 25, 2019 3:39 pm

Eilzel wrote:
phildidge wrote:

A little?

WTF I mean seriously, wow.

Well that is because you never think outside the box mate

It has the potential to actually trigger a global conflict. being as it has support of both Russia and China. Where they all support Assad in Syria and hamas in Gaza. In one aspect fred is right and also wrong. As like i say, Israel would never allow Iran to become such a nucleur threat, but the reality is. Many Arab states see iran as a threat. Hence it has the potential to escalate. Which is seeing nations choose which side and nations to stand by. If other nations were drawn in, they would though always refrain from using their nukes. As they have in many other conflicts from the past in Asia. Where two nuke powers were on opposing sides. So Iran is unlikely to bring about armageddon, but the potential to cause major conflict and is as such a massive threat to peace

So I agree that Iran would not trigger a nucleur war, but it could cause and create a localized Middle East conflict. Which could see other nations drawn into this

So are you seriously suggesting that the threat of Iran is being over played? When its hands are behind conflict in Yemen, Syria, in Gaza, Lebanon previously in Iraq?

Just because israel would never allow Iran to gain nukes, does not mean they are not a massive threat to peace. Its them funding violence and arms to hezbollah and Hamas, both terrorist organisations.

Hence this has the potential to escalate. Where before many Arab states were against israel, now many are siding with them, as they see iran as a major threat to peace

Dont try to mock me with childish antics mate, you are better than that

Where's the childish antics? You sound paranoid

I don't see escalation from Iran leading to global conflict, it just isn't important enough.

The following was childish and was poor misdirection

Eilzel wrote:

You really are a hoot, didge

You just spent an epic post telling Fred that Iran isn't threat because of Israel; then immediately tell ME that Iran IS a threat

You really just want to argue with everyone, don't you?

In response to your post, I refer to your earlier post above

As to you thinking its not important enough?

Was Poland important enough for the British and French?

Was it also for the Nazi's and Soviet Union?

The later two, being with the view to deny the self determination of the polish people. To wipe their country from existence

Of course to the undying shame of Roosevelt. Who sold out Poland to Stalin, for his future support in the fight against Japan. Or even more the view that most people in the UK were aghast that when Nazi Germany invaded the Soviet Union. To then we ally ourselves to the Soviet Union. That most people saw them also as a very real threat.

Your view to not being important enough. Clearly shows an ignorance of history mate

by Maddog Mon Mar 25, 2019 5:00 pm

Sovereign debt and budgets.

Most of the West is facing a serious issue with population shifts that are going to put huge strains on budgets.

Western countries have not reproduced at a rate to support the growing number of older people not working.

Japan is already experiencing it, and there GDP shows it.

Simply put, there will not be enough worker bees to support the hive in the coming decades. As one can see in Venezuela today, none of the other problems matter when you are eating dogs. No one in Venezuela gives a fuck about climate change right now.

by Guest Mon Mar 25, 2019 5:21 pm

Maddog wrote:Sovereign debt and budgets.

Most of the West is facing a serious issue with population shifts that are going to put huge strains on budgets.

Western countries have not reproduced at a rate to support the growing number of older people not working.

Japan is already experiencing it, and there GDP shows it.

Simply put, there will not be enough worker bees to support the hive in the coming decades. As one can see in Venezuela today, none of the other problems matter when you are eating dogs. No one in Venezuela gives a fuck about climate change right now.

I agree to your first point, but the reasoning behind this is absurd when you base this on population and GDP, when taking India and china into account. As that renders your argument redundent

To then factor this to failed authoritarian socialism in Venezuela. Next to China and India embracing capitalism. Is absurd

I agree nobody right now makes climate change their priority, but to claim tha western countries have not grown to support the elderly. When they have done so by opening the door to younger immigration. Shows that to be emphatically a lie. Due to the view to adrdress the age gap balance, by wanting younger people to settle here

Hark the Libertarian, who rightly sees faults in policies, but offers no actual solutions

by Ben Reilly Mon Mar 25, 2019 6:01 pm

phildidge wrote:
Eilzel wrote:I'd be very interested in hearing from those who think Political Correctness is ACTUALLY a bigger problem for the world than Climate Change or some of the other options.

And to hear their explanation

I would rather climate change end up killing me, than living in the very deplorable PC culture that is becoming so endemic. We are losing the ability of free speech and even worse free thought.

Who really wants to live in a future, where you can face criminal charges, for being factual correct about biology for instance?
Where people are being investigated and now someone charged for claimed misgendering.

What sort of world will that be to live in, where you cannot even express your own views, through a fear of being charged with a faux hate crime?

There is a huge difference between not believeing that a biological born male, can change to become a biological woman

That should never be a hate crime and this is just one example of the insanity we are and have been heading into

We are entering a world where the next generation is so fragile of anything that is said to them

All this stems from mollycoddling children and Far leftist views entering into education. The worst concept being intersectionality

The scenario you put forward could be fixed without making massive lifestyle changes the world over. But you can't improve humanity if humanity has nowhere to live. Climate change is the biggest threat we face, and I really wish we could stop arguing over whether it's happening (it is!) and start arguing about how we survive it.

by Guest Mon Mar 25, 2019 6:25 pm

>THE Ben Reilly< wrote:
phildidge wrote:

I would rather climate change end up killing me, than living in the very deplorable PC culture that is becoming so endemic. We are losing the ability of free speech and even worse free thought.

Who really wants to live in a future, where you can face criminal charges, for being factual correct about biology for instance?
Where people are being investigated and now someone charged for claimed misgendering.

What sort of world will that be to live in, where you cannot even express your own views, through a fear of being charged with a faux hate crime?

There is a huge difference between not believeing that a biological born male, can change to become a biological woman

That should never be a hate crime and this is just one example of the insanity we are and have been heading into

We are entering a world where the next generation is so fragile of anything that is said to them

All this stems from mollycoddling children and Far leftist views entering into education. The worst concept being intersectionality

The scenario you put forward could be fixed without making massive lifestyle changes the world over. But you can't improve humanity if humanity has nowhere to live. Climate change is the biggest threat we face, and I really wish we could stop arguing over whether it's happening (it is!) and start arguing about how we survive it.

I see the point also goes above your head also

So tell me Ben.

What is the every day joe doing to combat climate change?

Even more so. Why are they reliant and mistaken to believe politicians are the ones to change this?

Climate change is not the most dangereous threat face by humanity at present. Which is the point here and like Maddog states. Quite correctly. People starving and without basic medical needs. In Venezuela, could care too shits about this.

That is not me being harsh and the reality is. Unless people face the reality of problems Ben. Then they are unlikley to take them seriously

So you want to argue over how to survive this. When people are already arguing over how to survive in nations that see their life expectancy dramatically diminished. Due to the unlucky nature and geography. They were born into.

You want to survive this? When people want to litterally hope to see the next day.

This is the problem with you leftists. You want the world to act and yet, you are the first person to shout and say we should not act, when humans are being abused. You think armed intervention is wrong. Never once caring about those in a localised situation facing horrors.

Hence your reasoning is utterly selfish mate

We need the world to get on board with climate change and how on earth is that going to happen. When we sit back and watch nations like China abuse Muslims for example?

You and others quite simple hold a faux pas and quite selfish standard. You like others only thing based small frame. Those closest to you

If you really want to combat climate change. You need everyone on board. These smaller issues are what is needed to resolve first, but you and other leftists place them secondary and why?

As they do not effect you

You want others to act. Then why are you the fisrst to bemoan when your nation does act to safe guard a nation state?

by Fred Moletrousers Mon Mar 25, 2019 6:42 pm

Both Lez and Didge are being uncharacteristically complacent.

Consider for a moment: Iran is at an advanced stage in nuclear weapons research and development. It is not, however, at an advanced stage in the development of long range warhead delivery systems.

North Korea is at an advanced stage in warhead delivery systems (it could probably drop something on San Fransisco tomorrow if Kim (he of the weird hairstyle) so decreed it. It is not, however at an advanced stage in nuclear weapons R&D.

Why do you think the two countries have recently been holding "mutually beneficial" discussions?

by Guest Mon Mar 25, 2019 6:53 pm

Fred Moletrousers wrote:Both Lez and Didge are being uncharacteristically complacent.

Consider for a moment: Iran is at an advanced stage in nuclear weapons research and development. It is not, however, at an advanced stage in the development of long range warhead delivery systems.

North Korea is at an advanced stage in warhead delivery systems (it could probably drop something on San Fransisco tomorrow if Kim (he of the weird hairstyle) so decreed it. It is not, however at an advanced stage in nuclear weapons R&D.

Why do you think the two countries have recently been holding "mutually beneficial" discussions?

Not being complacent at all Fred

North Korea can alreay hit the US with missile technology

If the US had a governement like israel. They would have neutralized this threat

However, North Korea under its new dictator. Clearly has been sending out olive branches to the west

So even if North Korea did as you claim. How would that then bring about armageddon?

It would certainly would create a localised conflict

by Ben Reilly Mon Mar 25, 2019 7:27 pm

Didge, my simple point is that there's no point in fixing the toilet in a house that's on fire.

by Guest Mon Mar 25, 2019 7:31 pm

>THE Ben Reilly< wrote:Didge, my simple point is that there's no point in fixing the toilet in a house that's on fire.

Well Ben, where are you going to shit. When there is no toilet to sit on?

The point you miss is every single human is going to place their most basic needs over everything else

Its why I have continually pointed out. That when people claim to care about climate change. Do they fuck.

They get inside their cars everyday, expecting others to solve a problem, they could inpart help solve themselves

by Fred Moletrousers Mon Mar 25, 2019 7:34 pm

phildidge wrote:
Fred Moletrousers wrote:Both Lez and Didge are being uncharacteristically complacent.

Consider for a moment: Iran is at an advanced stage in nuclear weapons research and development. It is not, however, at an advanced stage in the development of long range warhead delivery systems.

North Korea is at an advanced stage in warhead delivery systems (it could probably drop something on San Fransisco tomorrow if Kim (he of the weird hairstyle) so decreed it. It is not, however at an advanced stage in nuclear weapons R&D.

Why do you think the two countries have recently been holding "mutually beneficial" discussions?

Not being complacent at all Fred

North Korea can alreay hit the US with missile technology

As I have already said

If the US had a governement like israel. They would have neutralized this threat

But they haven't and didn't

However, North Korea under its new dictator. Clearly has been sending out olive branches to the west

And you really believe that?

So even if North Korea did as you claim. How would that then bring about armageddon?

The US would obliterate North Korea, the Israelis would take it as a "prompt" to obliterate Iran...and Putin's reaction would be very, very unpredictable!

It would certainly would create a localised conflict

In your dreams, Didge.....in your dreams.

by Ben Reilly Mon Mar 25, 2019 7:38 pm

phildidge wrote:
>THE Ben Reilly< wrote:Didge, my simple point is that there's no point in fixing the toilet in a house that's on fire.

Well Ben, where are you going to shit. When there is no toilet to sit on?

The point you miss is every single human is going to place their most basic needs over everything else

Its why I have continually pointed out. That when people claim to care about climate change. Do they fuck.

They get inside their cars everyday, expecting others to solve a problem, they could inpart help solve themselves

Individual action is never going to fix climate change. We need the leading carbon culprit nations of the world to commit to renewable energy ASAP. That's why we have things like the Paris Treaty.

by Guest Mon Mar 25, 2019 7:54 pm

Fred Moletrousers wrote:
As I have already said
phildidge wrote:Indeed, but why is their leader sending out feelers to bring about peace?
But they haven't and didn'
phildidge wrote:True, but how does that make your prediction more probable?
And you really believe that?
phildidge wrote:Its not a case of whether to believe as its happened
Do you mean whether i think he is being sincere?
No
The US would obliterate North Korea, the Israelis would take it as a "prompt" to obliterate Iran...and Putin's reaction would be very, very unpredictable!

phildidge wrote:I think I just walked into the realm of insanity conspiracies here. All it needs is some mention of Rothchilds to add to the clearly unhinged view point.

Let me make this very clear. Israel happens to have with the IDF. One of the most moral armies in the world. No other armed forcers sends texts, calls people in advance that they will taregt a building. On top of that they use a rocket roof tap measure, as a further warning.
Why would Israel, going to all these lengths in order to help prevent the loss of unecessary civillian lives. Think its then fine to drop a nuke on Iran?

Sorry, but that has to be the most idiotic claim you have ever made

If Israel wanted to nuke Iran, they could do so tomorrow and do not need any okay from the rest of the world. They never did, when they bombed the nuke facilities in both Syria and Iraq

In your dreams, Didge.....in your dreams.

At least my dreams are not based on you thinking Israel is that hateful, it would seriously drop a nuke on Iran for no other reason, than your warped paranoia

by Guest Mon Mar 25, 2019 7:58 pm

>THE Ben Reilly< wrote:
phildidge wrote:

Well Ben, where are you going to shit. When there is no toilet to sit on?

The point you miss is every single human is going to place their most basic needs over everything else

Its why I have continually pointed out. That when people claim to care about climate change. Do they fuck.

They get inside their cars everyday, expecting others to solve a problem, they could inpart help solve themselves

Individual action is never going to fix climate change. We need the leading carbon culprit nations of the world to commit to renewable energy ASAP. That's why we have things like the Paris Treaty.

Just about the worst answer you have ever made

The problem of climate change, starts with individual people bringing about change

The moment you excuse others and look to center blame, shows you have fallen foul of the problem

In fact its shows you are part of the problem

People everyday get into cars, because they have come to see them as a need and necessity and you think its down to others to solve this, when you do nothing yourself?

I imagine they take the same lame and self centered view point, that you take on this

Believe others will resolve this and continue to believe they will . Untill its too late.

Wait a minute, that has already happened

by Fred Moletrousers Mon Mar 25, 2019 8:09 pm

phildidge wrote:
Fred Moletrousers wrote:
As I have already said

But they haven't and didn'

And you really believe that?

The US would obliterate North Korea, the Israelis would take it as a "prompt" to obliterate Iran...and Putin's reaction would be very, very unpredictable!

In your dreams, Didge.....in your dreams.

At least my dreams are not based on you thinking Israel is that hateful, it would seriously drop a nuke on Iran for no other reason, than your warped paranoia

I never said that Israel is "hateful" at all. The 1947 convention of the Arab states that Israelis should be thrown back to the sea" has never been revoked. The extreme theocratic Islamic state of Iran is Israel's greatest threat, I have worked in Israel and support Israel and its statehood and independence without question.

And I rely on my RAF staff training in international relations as a far, far greater qualification than some fucking "armchair general" opinion based on what he has been able to dredge up from Wikipaedia.

by Sponsored content

What is the biggest problem facing modern civilisation?