Iran soon?

Quote:

April 17 issue.

It could be April 17 of last year.

Or maybe it's EXTREMELY forward planning, like to the next level!

Most amazing jew boots

Originally Posted by dope

I doubt that US will be attacking Iran anytime soon considering they're still tied up over Iraq.

I sure as hell hope you're right. It really bothers me how in George Washington's farewell speech, he specifically said to any future presidents of America something along the lines of "Do your best to remain neutral in world affairs."

Now here we are, the most imperialist country in the world!

There's nowhere I can't reach.

Messing with world affairs isn't one of the criteria for being a superpower.

It's just something a superpower usually does, because it is a superpower. Not the other way around

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

Originally Posted by Lord Styphon

Good call!

To call the U.S. an illegitimate country that had just rebelled against Britain is inaccurate, since when Washington left the Presidency, the Revolutionary War had been over for 14 years. The nations of the world acknowledged it during that time, including Great Britain, making it legitimate.

Your statement about the U.S. being friendless (save France), powerless and defenseless is also inaccurate in its totality. During Washington and Adams' administrations, the United States and France became increasingly hostile to each other, and more pro-Britain. Towards the end of Adams' administration, in fact, there U.S. fought an undeclared naval war with France. Which the U.S. won. Within a few years, the United States was able to sustain a war in the Mediterranean against the Barbary Pirates. Granted, it wasn't a major war, like the ones being waged in Europe at the same time, but that's still far from home. Powerless countries can't do that.

Stoob's quotation of Washington is also inaccurate. Washington wasn't advocating neutrality, he was advocating not entering "permanent" or "entangling" alliances with other countries. He was all for temporary alliances that served a particular need should one arise, but a permanent alliance would tie the U.S. to other nations, which might become detremental to the U.S. later (as in the case with the alliance with France). His idea was not to promote American isolation from the world, but to let the United States "act for ourselves and not for others." (The next time the U.S. signed a treaty of alliance was 1949.)

Besides, it isn't as if neutrality and imperialism can't co-exist. For most of the Victorian Era, Great Britain remained largely neutral in European affairs, but during that same time, the British Empire expanded to cover 2/5 of the world's land area.

*Makes note to himself never to try and duel Styphon in a history-off...or duel a mod in any other thing for that matter*

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?

Originally Posted by Yggdrasil

China can have their say in world affairs through the UN or whatnot, but being able to act independently on these affairs is totally another matter. Thats what seperates a superpower, to say a reigonal power, which is probably what China is right now.

I don't know, the age of a "regional" anything is coming to an end. I think if you have the resources to be a regional power in this day and age, then you have the resources to be a world power.

I was speaking idiomatically.

Just because they have a long way to go doesn't mean there is anything standing in their way.

What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now?

I stand massively corrected.

Still, your major point was that the biggest problem for a country is secrecy. Well, the cat's already out of the bag, so there's no sense in them even worrying about secrecy. As far as obtaining materials, aren't the Russian more than willing to sell nuclear technology? Weapons are their biggest export right now.

FELIPE NO

Say what?

How did Israel screw the US over?

What, you don't want my bikini-clad body?

Okay, but that's not really Israel's fault. I mean, Israel wasn't trying to hurt the U.S., they were just looking after their own interests.

The U.S. supplying Israel with weapons isn't Israel screwing the U.S. over, it's the U.S. screwing the U.S. over.

Jam it back in, in the dark.