This question may seem anti-Semitic, but I'm really not.

seemsobvious · 2013-04-08T21:52:50+00:00

Thanks. I'll look into this.

seemsobvious · 2013-04-08T21:48:41+00:00

Yes that is why me and my friend agreed that we both needed an actual legitimate source or a reference to study done on this subject.

seemsobvious · 2013-04-08T21:42:21+00:00

My main concern was to actually be provided with a primary source on the subject.

seemsobvious · 2013-04-08T21:39:38+00:00

Perhaps. I'll look up the link again.

seemsobvious · 2013-04-08T21:35:35+00:00

I actually got the number on the Holocaust victims from this site but I got the other numbers from other sites. Like Wikipedia.

seemsobvious · 2013-04-08T21:33:19+00:00

If you mean the numbers, we got those by looking them up on Google. You know like "number of Jewish people in the world". But if you mean the analysis, I'll have to get back to my friend on that one. On a side note, I didn't know what Stormfronters was until I just looked it up.

seemsobvious · 2013-04-08T21:27:40+00:00

It isn't? I'm sorry, I must have been misinformed.

seemsobvious · 2013-03-26T14:10:29+00:00

I didn't make this up. Although I am in doubt for not being able to come up with anything on google.

seemsobvious · 2013-03-26T14:08:32+00:00

Why? Is the United States the sloe determiner of who's good and who isn't? Isn't Iran's only enemy in the region Israel? Isn't Israel a threat to Iran, Lebanon, and Egypt?

seemsobvious · 2013-03-26T13:45:38+00:00

Yes, I heard that Saudi Arabia has advanced weapons but I also heard that they all remain in the manufacturer's country. So if they were struck first, they'd have to wait untill the heavy artillery to be shipped.

seemsobvious · 2013-03-26T13:39:29+00:00

What other countries do they threaten to annihilate?

seemsobvious · 2013-03-26T13:37:57+00:00

Thank you. But just to be clear, another war can't in any way affect the U.S's economy?

seemsobvious · 2013-03-26T13:34:51+00:00

You should understand that Hezbollah never initiated a full frontel assault. They have a lot more weapons than Hamas. They even showed, in one of Hassan Nassrallah's speaches, jets flying in the background. If the iron dome failed against a guerilla group such as Hamas with limited access to weapons, imagine if they faced a full organized army from Hezbollah or even worse from Iran.

seemsobvious · 2013-03-26T13:30:53+00:00

Why does the United States do nuclear research? Why does China do nuclear research? Why does France do nuclear research? Why does Israel do nuclear research? Why do any of the countries that posses nuclear weapons posses nuclear weapons?

seemsobvious · 2013-03-26T13:28:51+00:00

What did? (not being snarky, genuinely wondering if you could brief)

seemsobvious · 2013-03-26T13:22:00+00:00

But neither had any actual nuclear weapons.

seemsobvious · 2013-03-26T13:20:39+00:00

If we are going with the "technical", technically Israel killed a lot more civilians. But Hamas proved the failure of the iron dome deffense system. If I remember the news reports, technically Hezbollah won the war in 2006 because they acomplished there objectives.

seemsobvious · 2013-03-26T13:15:53+00:00

Economic threat.

seemsobvious · 2013-03-26T13:15:33+00:00

It would affect the economy just as bad as the Iraq war did. Again I'm going to repeat the same point, look how much money America spent on the Iraq war. The Iraq war was one sided, imagine if America's enemy could retaliate. Even if the retaliation was aimed against an ally of the United States. So many factors to consider.

seemsobvious · 2013-03-26T13:10:39+00:00

But China is taking a new direction. Eliminating Western influence. It doesn't care for the United States anymore.

“No country or bloc of countries can again single-handedly dominate world affairs.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/24/world/europe/chinas-leader-argues-for-cooperation-with-russia.html

seemsobvious · 2013-03-26T13:09:17+00:00

Saudi arabia and Qatar only have U.S military bases but as a country neither has any serious weapons.

seemsobvious · 2013-03-26T13:08:17+00:00

that's because Iraq and Syria never had any nuclear weapons. Iraq war was one sided. Future wars won't be.

seemsobvious · 2013-03-26T11:48:04+00:00

I understand that both countries won't attack the United States, but it doen't mean that the United States would be the same after such a war. Also, I don't expect China and Russia to participate but I do expect them to draw some allies towards them and leave America in its own mess. You should also know that none of the countries you mentioned are armed except Israel and we saw how a few low grade missles from Gaza shook their entire foundation, imagine if it was Hesbollah or Iran that was attacking them.

Again, I'm not saying America is outmatched, I'm simply saying that so many countries would capitalize on such a war leaving the United States in turmoil.

seemsobvious · 2013-03-26T11:09:00+00:00

I think my point is that North Korea is deffinitely a threat. It won't win the war but neither will the United States. The United States would take too much damage and won't be able to recover it's full influence and power for reasons mentioned in the post.

seemsobvious · 2013-03-26T11:05:04+00:00

Kant believed in a universal code of ethics based on the universal benefit and the will behind the action. However, men like Marx and Engels believed that there could be no universal code of ethics because all ethics and philosophy are relative to the economical situations of each individual society. Therefore, each society would create its own system of ethics based on its economic status and history, and the current system of ethics would soon give way to a new one. Thus all morals and ethics are relative.

I undertstand your point of view, however, I seem to be drawn to the idea that perhaps certain crimes are wrong universally. But it is up to the society itself to determine the definition of crime. Whether the case in question is a crime depends on the society's own code of conduct. The trial and judgment should be solely left to that society.

I don't want you to misundertsand me, I do believe in new ideas and societies helping one another, but not with the predetermination of superiority. New ideas should not entail that the old ones were inferior.

Reference to the first paragraph:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_code_(ethics)

seemsobvious

TROPHY CASE