jump to last post 1-18 of 18 discussions (61 posts)

What about America?

  1. profile image68
    paarsurreyposted 6 years ago

    What about America?

    Japan’ attempts to avert a meltdown at one of its plants erode confidence in nuclear energy.

    China suspends all new nuclear plants

    Russia is building six new nuclear power plants and has plans for more. It also recently signed an agreement with Belarus to build one there.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/jap … ml?hpid=z3

    Is America peaceful?

    1. Jim Hunter profile image61
      Jim Hunterposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      We need more Nuclear plants.

  2. skyfire profile image72
    skyfireposted 6 years ago

    What peace has to do with nuclear plant built for electricity ?

    1. pisean282311 profile image54
      pisean282311posted 6 years ago in reply to this

      exactly...atleast usa is not going on war in name of spreading god's word...

      1. profile image68
        paarsurreyposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        The only country which has used nuclear devices is America. Am I wrong.

        It is a danger for the Americans if they get a Tsunami.

        1. Hugh Williamson profile image86
          Hugh Williamsonposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          During WW2 there were nuclear bomb projects going on in the U.S., Japan, Britain, Russia and Germany. The U.S. took over Britain's program early in the war.

          Each country was aware of the research going on elsewhere and the issue of who would use the bomb first was based on who got theirs to work first.

          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_n … on_program

          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_ar … rld_War_II

    2. profile image68
      paarsurreyposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      America don't build plants for electricity.

      1. skyfire profile image72
        skyfireposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        American politicians took actions to bully underdeveloped countries in exchange for natural resources. They un-necessarily got involved in many parts of international politics and created plenty of enemies. In order to protect their country from such enemies, they wanted nuclear weapons. Hows this for reality check ?

        1. Hugh Williamson profile image86
          Hugh Williamsonposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          References please. When & where.

          1. skyfire profile image72
            skyfireposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq.

            1. Hugh Williamson profile image86
              Hugh Williamsonposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              3 names is your reference?

              Afghanistan - Done with cooperation from the Northern Coalition, Spain, Australia, Romania, Turkey, Poland, Canada, Italy, France, Germany and UK. A multi-national effort in response to the 9-11 bombing. If there had been no terrorist attack, there would have been no action against the home of the terrorists.

              Iraq - Attacked first to drive them out of occupied Kuwait.
              Attacked again due to the ineptness of American intelligence and/or other ulterior motives.

              Pakistan - Shelterer of the Taliban. The leadership is nominally anti-Taliban. Part of the Afghan war.

              Some good, some bad huh?

              It makes one wonder how 3 million "Great Satan" followers came to live in one place. Maybe you should study your information and then make your own decisions based on your own judgment instead of repeating the rhetoric of others.

              1. skyfire profile image72
                skyfireposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                These 3 countries are evidence that united states interfered for their personal gains.


                Why 9/11 happened to begin with ?


                Not even convincing that they wanted to drive out from kuwait. Why united state interfered in oil-rich countries to begin with ?


                LOL. No wonder you've no idea about pakistan.


                Not good or bad, just pro-us argument.


                You're referring to ?


                *yawn* my argument isn't pro-us like you and my point still stands that US un-necessarily interfered in those regions. Now you need to study more information instead of pitching pro-US arguments to me.

  3. Cagsil profile image60
    Cagsilposted 6 years ago

    Hey Paar,

    America has NO MONEY for nuclear power plants specifically designed for electricity. The pathetic politicians are too busy spending too much on military improvements and stealing money from the citizens.

    Not that you care. But, I guess your point was to point out that America has yet to make any sort of conversion to other power, other than what it already does.

    If you want an answer to as why it hasn't, it's because too many greedy business owners like the status quo and rather not change it.

    1. 2besure profile image84
      2besureposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      If you want an answer to as why it hasn't, it's because too many greedy business owners like the status quo and rather not change it.

      I totally agree Cagsil!  Spot on!

  4. knolyourself profile image60
    knolyourselfposted 6 years ago

    "If there had been no terrorist attack, there would have been no action against the home of the terrorists." The so called 9/11 terrorists were mostly Saudi, so attack Afghanistan.

    1. Cagsil profile image60
      Cagsilposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      No, supposed intelligence said that Bin Laden was in Iraq. wink Bin Laden was supposedly the orchestrator of the attack. wink

    2. Hugh Williamson profile image86
      Hugh Williamsonposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      The 9-11 attacks were done by the Taliban. The Taliban ruled Afghanistan from 1996 onward.

      If you're going to counterattack them for their terrorist act, you attack them where they are, not where they grew up.

  5. knolyourself profile image60
    knolyourselfposted 6 years ago

    "The 9-11 attacks were done by the Taliban." Well that's a new one. You ever hear of al-Qaeda. Not the Taliban. At any rate al-Qaeda is a creation of the CIA. bin Laden has been dead for ten years.

  6. optimus grimlock profile image55
    optimus grimlockposted 6 years ago

    when your ignorant and you hear nuclear you think disaster not nuclear power that can better us!!!

  7. knolyourself profile image60
    knolyourselfposted 6 years ago

    "when your ignorant and you hear nuclear you think disaster not nuclear power that can better us!!!" Actually what I think of is what is happening in Japan right now. I used to think of Chernobyl.

  8. Hugh Williamson profile image86
    Hugh Williamsonposted 6 years ago

    @Skyfire " Why 9/11 happened to begin with ?

    9-11 happened because Bin Laden didn't like an American base on Saudi soil. So killing innocents through an act of terror seemed like the logical thing to do.

    *yawn* my argument isn't pro-us like you and my point still stands that US un-necessarily interfered in those regions. Now you need to study more information instead of pitching pro-US arguments to me.

    You have an agenda and rhetoric and not reasons.

    @knolyourself bin Laden has been dead for ten years.

    If you have proof we'd all love to see it. Or are you just knoly-ing yourself?

    And yes, I did mix up al-Qaeda w/the Taliban.

  9. skyfire profile image72
    skyfireposted 6 years ago

    9/11 happened because US-Laden relationship doesn't last long. American attempt to manipulate things from both sides failed after that and bin laden became vilian. And you got 9/11 that too from US weapons/people/stuff.


    Person who refereed one country with satan worshipers seems to have some agenda and not me. Religious people like you've agendas, hence pro-us argument.

    1. Hugh Williamson profile image86
      Hugh Williamsonposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      You asked "Why 9/11 happened to begin with ?" and I told you. I also told you why the U.S. acted as it did after. I don't recall saying that I nor any other U.S. citizen agrees with everything, especially with the advantage of using hindsight.

      "Religious people like you've agendas, hence pro-us argument.

      Religious? Bin-Laden's religion is why 9-11 happened. Religion is why this happened.



      http://s4.hubimg.com/u/4793087.jpg


      Your arguments again aren't arguments, just saying what you think will impress others the most.

      1. skyfire profile image72
        skyfireposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Just because YOU said doesn't mean US did exactly the same. Why Bin laden feared US presence out of the blue when he was working with them against russians ? It's not just about religion, get over it. Try electing bush or similar deluded politician again to support your this holy theory.


        Nope. It's US interest in Oil-rich countries made this happened. Competing with russia on those soils by using the political leaders from respective countries and if they failed to monitor them, then declare religious terrorism against them. It's way too easy for them to manipulate after that by taking support from people like you.


        Typical religious mentality. You still didn't proved your pro-us, bible thumping argument about satanic worshippers and why US is taking interest in middle-east and some other gulf countries ? Come on, try being more religious and impress me, forget about the others, i hardly care cwhat others think of me. I'm not religious bible thumper like you.

      2. Evan G Rogers profile image77
        Evan G Rogersposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        That's nonsense.

        we were attacked on 9/11 because we've been meddling as tyrants with the governments in the middle east for well over 30 years.

        It had little to nothing to do with religion: Why wasn't ANY OTHER non-muslim country attacked with half as much hatred as we were? Obviously because we're the ones going around telling everyone how to live through the UN.

        Just look at the past few days: we've invaded another MUSLIM OIL-RICH country withOUT a declaration of Congress.

        If China did this to us, we'd be pissed off as well.

        1. Jim Hunter profile image61
          Jim Hunterposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          "Just look at the past few days: we've invaded another MUSLIM OIL-RICH country withOUT a declaration of Congress.

          We sent a few missiles in does that constitute an invasion?

          Usually we like to see our troops come home but I think in this case they can keep the invaders.

        2. Hugh Williamson profile image86
          Hugh Williamsonposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          We've meddled. Sure. The cold war was nothing but the U.S. and the Soviets meddling everywhere.

          The issue at hand is, how should one react when someone meddles? Blow up a building full of innocent people and then brag about it?

          Sorry, there is no justification for that.

  10. knolyourself profile image60
    knolyourselfposted 6 years ago

    "If you have proof we'd all love to see it. Or are you just knoly-ing yourself?"
    There are a number of theories. But if you are using a single guy to justify trillions in war spending, they are not going to make it easy. 

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UnychOXj9Tg

    About two minutes in. By the way she is now dead.

    1. Hugh Williamson profile image86
      Hugh Williamsonposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Sorry, I don't do the fantasy conspiracy thing. Bhutto talks like he's dead in the vid and then follows up talking about him like he's still alive?

      Maybe he is enjoying his 70 virgins, who knows?

      1. Castlepaloma profile image27
        Castlepalomaposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Imagine if some small Muslim group nuked bombed a nuclear plant
        That means bloody Mary's x 70 in paradise for the flight club.

  11. Hugh Williamson profile image86
    Hugh Williamsonposted 6 years ago

    Wow. I'll try to go slow...

    The U.S. is referred to as "The Great Satan" by certain enetities. You seem to want a religious argument. Why? I thought the vid made it clear that I'm not religious.

    I'm not anti-religious either -- it isn't something that I am concerned with. Except, that is, when people use their religion to justify violence...like 9-11.

    Oil? Which country isn't concerned about oil? It's not a reason to go to war, or it shouldn't be. The U.S. goes to war for oil and religion? The world is a little more complicated than that, I'm afraid. Read a newspaper once in a while.

    We were viciously attacked on 9-11 in the most cowardly way. I'm probably not young enough to know everything but I know that you shouldn't do something like 9-11 and expect no reprisal.

    1. skyfire profile image72
      skyfireposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Only by pro-islamic groups.


      I found your argument in religious tone because you're referring to religion to support your theory.


      Religion was used by both side (US and Taliban) in this war. US used religion card to bring Taliban on their side earlier. Talibani's are now using religion to get more followers to support their side.


      US started taking interest in gulf countries with the reason of natural resources. Later this whole affair turned into religion, region and political mess. Do update yourself by joining in discussion with people who live in these places.


      Cowardly ? i don't think so. You reap what you sow. So coming back to my first point in thread- try being hostile to every country for your own benefit and later by being a messiah against so-called terrorism and you invite yourself a trouble.

      1. Hugh Williamson profile image86
        Hugh Williamsonposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        I see many claims but nothing to back them up. Covering up a lack of facts to back up what you say is just rhetoric.

        The U.S. wisely waited for the rest of the world to act in Libya. This is hopefully a good first step - a new policy saying that we don't have to feel responsible solving all of the world's problems.

        I do expect that if Libya doesn't turn out well, the U.S. may still be blamed anyway. More mindless rants, more paranoia...

        It must be difficult to live in your world of following and not thinking.

        1. skyfire profile image72
          skyfireposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          That is applicable to you the most, considering pro-US arguments. I see nothing that shows reality, only US painted as innocent and defensive in your arguments. Much more useless than your twisted rhetoric's..


          Good joke. Are you a sarah palin supporter by any chance ?


          Try practicing that and there will be no more taliban and al-quaeda type of group forming because of you guys.


          *yawn* another PRO-US rant...


          Err.. isn't that the case on your side ? Pro-US arguments are yours, so you must be the one following some sort of agenda, not me.

          1. Hugh Williamson profile image86
            Hugh Williamsonposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            "That is applicable to you the most, considering pro-US arguments. I see nothing that shows reality, only US painted as innocent and defensive in your arguments. Much more useless than your twisted rhetoric's..

            You're becoming repetitive. The U.S. isn't perfect or close to it. We are sometimes the target of the petty jealousy of a few people who know only how to rant -- and not how to fairly assess situations. To do that you need to think, not blindly follow.

            Good joke. Are you a sarah palin supporter by any chance ?

            Name calling. Nice. This really makes you appear intelligent, doesn't it?

            Try practicing that and there will be no more taliban and al-quaeda type of group forming because of you guys.

            There will be no more taliban or al-quaeda in any case.

            Err.. isn't that the case on your side ? Pro-US arguments are yours, so you must be the one following some sort of agenda, not me.

            There isn't much logic to that last statement, nor did I expect any.

            1. skyfire profile image72
              skyfireposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              Err. no that's you, still no proof of your pro-us argument.


              Pot calling kettle, and all that stuff. Pro-US person is attempting to argue on how cool US is handling terrorism, which they created to begin with and then blames others for being a blind follower. Jeez, this is turning out to be a funny thread.


              Let me guess, who started it ?


              Yeah, sure, try taking care of them for now, afterall you invested a lot of tax money into it. lol


              Definitely a sarah palin follower,looking at the attack pattern lol

              1. Hugh Williamson profile image86
                Hugh Williamsonposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                Back on your Sarah Palin "red herring" huh?

                You haven't provided 1 single reference to back up your naive rhetoric.

                Here, read and learn...


                http://asiasociety.org/policy-politics/ … nsequences

                1. skyfire profile image72
                  skyfireposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  *yawn*

                  How much time it took you to search google ? Anyway, News Link to prove PRO-US argument  ? Thanks, that was enlightening. Let's re-elect bush or his minions. US is so innocent and against terrorism. I agree with you completely.

                  Note to HP Engg - please release few fancy yawn smilies. sad

                  1. Hugh Williamson profile image86
                    Hugh Williamsonposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    It takes almost no time at all to do a google search. You should try it sometime.

                    Bush isn't eligible for re-election.


                    "I agree with you completely."

                    I don't want you to agree with me or anyone else completely. Use your own judgment on things instead of repeating what sounds trendy.

  12. Hugh Williamson profile image86
    Hugh Williamsonposted 6 years ago

    "It's really hard to be in your shoes,

    Not really.

    pay taxes

    I pay plenty.

    to fund terrorism

    Terrorists get their funding from many places, they never approached me.

    on one side and then defend the country by being a blind follower

    That's the crux isn't it. Who's the blind follower? That hasn't really been determined, has it.

    pretending like US is against terrorism.

    It isn't?  Y'mean it's all a plot by Palin, Bush, religion etc.?

    What's more ? surprise me.

    What could possibly surprise you? The world is full of plots and conspiracies hatched in the evil empire just waiting to take your stuff and kill everyone. Tinfoil hat time.

    1. skyfire profile image72
      skyfireposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Why ?

      Good for you.


      It seems hard for you to understand the difference between tax money and direct funding, care to read ? afterall your government funded those terrorist, go out of US sometimes to get the feel of it.


      Considering your defense to one country without even understanding it's activities in international politics, it's quite clear to me who is a blind follower.


      Err.. creating terrorists in al-quaeda/taliban on side and then pretending to be anti-terrorist in front of UN doesn't seem to be like ONLY plot by people you worship (err, did i accuse you again, pro-american ?)

      There are plenty of things from your side that could surprise me. Your defense to show US as clean, no-two faced country, is just for the starters right ? there's gotta be more to see in it. As for killing/conspiracies, try entertaining some other American with it.

  13. Hugh Williamson profile image86
    Hugh Williamsonposted 6 years ago

    Your defense of the indefensible would be laughable if it were not at the root of so many of the world's problems. The Khadaffis and Bin Ladins of the world could not function if it were not for blind followers whose sense of morality includes justifying the murder of innocents. Blaming your problems on scapegoats just continues the cycle.

    1. skyfire profile image72
      skyfireposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      *yawn* yet you're the only person who will laugh considering YOU are the one who pay tax to government which creates terrorist organizations. So it's your position that's indefensible, not mine. You're the one trying to justify your country's international un-necessary interference from the start of this thread. I'm just getting the feel of this with your pro-US arguments. It's damn fun. You know nothing about international politics to begin with, random videos/links from google are your only defense of pro-US argument. Still waiting for your proofs to see how innocent US is in international politics. Care to give me those ?


      Let me guess, few years back, these leaders used to be in good terms with your country. Now they're terrorist/murderers ? I agree.

      LOL, this coming from pro-US person is what making me laugh out loud.

  14. Hugh Williamson profile image86
    Hugh Williamsonposted 6 years ago

    Parroting what your professors indoctrinated you with doesn't make you look any smarter. Your defending terrorism tells me all I need to know.

    Maybe when you get more mature and get some life experience you'll develop an ability to see reality & think independently.

    1. skyfire profile image72
      skyfireposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      This coming from a person who can't even prove his pro-us argument makes me wonder who's exactly parroting here.


      so you decided to get back to play the game of accusation ? Cool.


      WOW, so after accusation, we're onto name calling again ? No wonder you're typical American with lot of maturity, so-called logical/highly intelligent/non-parroting/lots of real life experience/ international politics experience. What's more to add ?

  15. Hugh Williamson profile image86
    Hugh Williamsonposted 6 years ago

    "What's more to add?"

    You could try adding an apology to the victims of terrorism everywhere.

    1. skyfire profile image72
      skyfireposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      You mean terrorism created by dictator America and from your tax money ? yeah sure wink

      1. Hugh Williamson profile image86
        Hugh Williamsonposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Careful. Your prejudice and your IQ are both being revealed.

        1. skyfire profile image72
          skyfireposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Aww. Says YOU ? wink

          1. Hugh Williamson profile image86
            Hugh Williamsonposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Good comeback. Kind of proves my point, doesn't it.

            1. skyfire profile image72
              skyfireposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              Nope.

  16. knolyourself profile image60
    knolyourselfposted 6 years ago

    "The cold war was nothing but the U.S. and the Soviets meddling everywhere." The Cold War was a battle between Capitalism and Communism, progressives and conservatives, capitalists and socialists.

    1. Hugh Williamson profile image86
      Hugh Williamsonposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      All true. What's your point?

  17. knolyourself profile image60
    knolyourselfposted 6 years ago

    "All true. What's your point?" Pretty much the summation of all human history,
    progressives stealing from conservatives.

    1. Hugh Williamson profile image86
      Hugh Williamsonposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Yes, I suppose. And the reverse applies also.

  18. knolyourself profile image60
    knolyourselfposted 6 years ago

    "Yes, I suppose. And the reverse applies also." I think of it this way. The American Indians were conservative like nature, there was very little excess and profit.

 
working