Should the US ban the UK from having nuclear weapons?
So a lot of people here have pointed out the preposterous lack of self-awareness required to even ask the question.Can I just investigate the legal implications? On what basis would the US ban the UK (or indeed anyone) from doing anything?The UK is not a subsidiary of the USA, although you could argue that since the Second World War it has been a client state. It is not owned by the USA, and it is not subject to American legal decisions except as stipulated in treaties into which British governments have voluntarily entered.To be clear, the USA has not ‘banned’ Iran from having nuclear weapons. It has, along with a number of co-signatories, reached an agreement with the Iranian government which rewards Iran for modified behaviour. Within that agreement there are mechanisms for responding should either party fail to live up to their obligations (as it appears the USA is starting to do). But it’s still not a ban.The practicalities of banning a country, which at the most basic level is a piece of land, from doing anything are ridiculous.Say America, labouring under the delusion that it owns the planet, decided to ban Belgium from making cheese. How would they enforce that? US police have no jurisdiction, US court rulings mean nothing. The only means of enforcement available is military. Of course, if America were to pursue that option then every country with a Treaty of Mutual Defence with Belgium would come down firmly on Belgium’s side. That includes two nuclear powers (three if you count Israel, but I suspect they would stay out of it).Essentially what this question asks is this:Should the USA use military might to force one of it’s closest allies and biggest trading partners to stop buying American weapons, in the process alienating at least two and perhaps three permanent members of the security council (who are nuclear powers), and likely incurring massive economic sanction from across the developed world?I’m going to say no, but I guess I’m a liberal snowflake like that.Small edit for clarity - the potential third member of the security council I was referring to was China, which has huge inward investment in the UK. I did not mean Israel, despite the earlier reference, who are not permanent members.
5 reasons for high unemployment rates in developing countries?
1. No employment opportunities created 2. Difficulty in self employment as no one shall hire them due to no money. 3. Poor health conditions make it difficult for people to try to creat opportunites 4. Government or groups stopping charity helping people in need halting proper development 5. Lack of training opportunities
Will Iran be able to survive the new sanctions? If so, what will Trump do to get his own "better deal"? If not, what will be the end result, war, bankruptcy, and mass riots overthrowing the system? Are sanctions alone powerful enough?
Given the firmness of Donald Trump regarding the Iranian nuclear weapons development program that resulted in the US disregarding the Obama legacy “agreement” the sanctions will continue until regime change is effected, one way or the other. The key is Iran being discredited due to supporting terrorism in other countries, which alarms Americans as it means terrorists will likely get to explode a nuclear weapons somewhere at some time. The most likely targets are, of course, Israel and the US.With such a foundation, and given the US and Israel currently each have the means to destroy Iran militarily, it is only a matter of time before all this comes to a head. The Iranian people are much more rational than their clerical leaders, apparently, so there is a 50–50 chance they will take care of removing the current regime and, also, get rid of the nuclear weapons program that unnecessarily threatens their well being, given the foundation presented above.Given adequate provocation, the US will likely destroy the entire Iranian military in about 30 days, very systematically. The nuclear weapon facilities will also be destroyed concurrently, with a limited number of special forces “making sure” and capturing key personnel for interrogation. It will take another 10 years or so for Iran to recover from the collateral damage and social disruption, assuming the regime change occurs as expected. If not, then Iran may never recover as no one will want to allow fanatics to be in charge again.Again, most Iranians are relatively non-terrorist and quite reasonable, so they may be able to effect a proper change in Iran’s hostile posture against their proclaimed “enemies” around the world.
Why don't Israel and the USA attack Iran?
On the grounds of Iran "not being nice"? Being an Israeli. I wouldn't want Israel to attack Iran, either. War is hell and I don't think you understand what going to war means, not to the country nor to the people you send to war. Fighting an unnecessary war is even worse. While I can see Israel's need to look into such an option, why would the US want to?When you say "All they do is talk, its pathetic.", do you understand the alternative? While you blame Obama for driving the country into bankruptcy, you want to go out for yet another expensive war, much like the ones that brought the US closer to bankruptcy. Let's break this in two, shall we? There is foreign policy and economics here, those two are separate issues. The economy under Obama is doing extremely well, better than under most presidents. Saying that "In the end the USA is going to go bankrupt and its all because of Barack Obama." is not only outrageous but also hilarious, given the condition the country was and the reasons for it, when he got in office.In regards to foreign policy, while I disagree with some of his views, he most definitely has an agenda and he is honestly keeps to his ideology, which is much more than I can say about Trump, which everything he says is meant to inflame and most definitely won't be applied. You want the kind of respect Putin gets? Go to Russia, try living there for a while, you'll get respect from the rest of the world, perhaps. But good luck with freedom of speech, corruption and a few other minor issues Russians have to deal with.Remember that America is what it is because of ethics, not in spite of it.Thanks for the A2A.
What is going to happen when the Middle East runs out of oil?
Alright first of all I am in no means an expert this is my thought out answer.First of all when you say oil I guess that you include natural gas too because that is actually a bigger business than oil and is often confused with the oil business.First of all Arabia Saudi, UAE, Qatar. Wipe that off the map. What keeps their monarchy/Oligarchy in place is money just like everywhere else now we ask the question where does that money come from? Oil, natural gas, that’s how they pay the thousands of Thai, Vietnamese, Pakistani modern slaves and manage to keep them under control and their unsustainable cities from collapsing. First martial law after the workers/slaves start revolting the accumulated wealth of these people allows for it however as we know the global markets would begin crashing due to extreme oil prices and so do their investments thus the whole sistem begins falling the different tribes in Arabia Saudi will most likely start infighting. Being such an important country for the middle eastern world I’d guess Iran would pop up as the new dominant power in the Middle East (they’ve always had beef between them). As for the rest of the world let me give you a chart.Bam! 56% of the world’s oil production gone (plus natural gas) it would be the collapse of the system. Oil would be so expensive it would be more efficient to use a horse carriage. Companies such as Repsol, BP etc are the main investors in alternate fuels and alternate energy because they know that once the oil price goes up that much the gig is up.Economically speaking we’d be facing a never seen recession.Europe would most likely try to tap into the massive oil depots under the Pyrenees. However it would be useless because by the time it gets extracted it's already too late.The USA would most likely try to nationalize some of their oil companies ( to no avail)Venezuela would get stinking rich in the first months but would then collapse.It would be interesting if the capitalist doesn't collapse on the spot I think we’d be left with a brighter future. Or I could be wrong and end up chopping every forest down to make ethanol. I dunno.
Why was the USSR so adamant to procur missiles in Cuba in the Cuban missile crisis?
Did it all just boil down to a staredown contest to see what we would do? Why be so stupid to bring the world to the brink of nuclear destruction? What real reason was their purpose? It just seems stupid to me.