US concern over Russia&#x27;s rockets

Surely China is also concerned about the aiming of US ICBMs in its general direction?

Reply 22

The UNHCR is pleased to see that whilst people are subjected to torture, starvation and genocide the countries that can help them are involved in a ballistic penis measuring contest.

Reply 23

Craghyrax

17

lodzinski

Surely China is also concerned about the aiming of US ICBMs in its general direction?

Of course we are ^o)

Reply 24

let's think about it - North Korea has no nuclear capability, and Iran has admitted it could hit europe let alone the US - so WHY is the US siteing rockets in europe, pointed towards central asia and the middle east.

Russia expresses mild amusement at the UNHCR's comments.

Reply 25

Craghyrax

17

China has no idea why the US would do such a thing :flute:

Reply 26

OP

lodzinski

let's think about it - North Korea has no nuclear capability, and Iran has admitted it could hit europe let alone the US - so WHY is the US siteing rockets in europe, pointed towards central asia and the middle east.

Russia expresses mild amusement at the UNHCR's comments.

North Korea is one of the worst dictatorships in the world (alongside Sudan, Zimbabwe, Iran and Syria). It has expressed its interest in developing nuclear weapons, and it has previously attempted to test them. The United States will secure its security alongside its European allies.

This is not an extension of the Cold War; the United States has good relations with Russia and China and does not consider them enemies. Although we have a "complex" relationship and history, with many "strong disagreements"; it is ludricrous to suggest the recent defenses are in any way threats toward Russia or China.

The Russian delegate's argument for the US' reason not to be in Europe is flawed, because it assumes that Iranian foreign office is telling the truth.

This is coming from the same state which expressed its desire to wipe Israel off the map, one of our stanch allies; and thus it can be seen that they are not a dependent source of information.

The defense sites will remain there, and further installment will be decided by the appropriate personnel in the Whitehouse. This present administration is not overturning President Nixon's or Ford's missile agreements with Russia; we are securing our position worldwide.

Reply 27

As a legal point the US isn't a democracy either.

Reply 28

OP

The United States is the world's oldest surviving federation, a representative democracy.

Not specifically a 'direct' or 'pure' democracy, but a democracy nevertheless.

Reply 29

The people do not have suffrage to decide the president. It isn't democratic

Reply 30

The attitude of the Russian Federation to this is clear - if the US sees that it needs to place missile bases in continental Europe to ensure its security, then to ensure an even spread of power, and to ensure the security of our people and allies, we will site nuclear capability strategically in order to counteract any threats.

Reply 31

OP

Ethereal

The people do not have suffrage to decide the president. It isn't democratic

In contemporary western usage, the term "democracy" usually refers to a government chosen by the people, whether it is direct or representative. The term "republic" has many different meanings but today often refers to a representative democracy with an elected head of state, such as a President.

In historical usages and especially when considering the works of the Founding Fathers of the United States, the word "democracy" refers solely to direct democracy, while a representative democracy where representatives of the people are elected and whose power to govern is limited by laws enshrined in a constitution is referred to as a constitutional republic.

See the definition and check Point 3:

http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/democracy

Reply 32

prufrock

In contemporary western usage, the term "democracy" usually refers to a government chosen by the people, whether it is direct or representative. The term "republic" has many different meanings but today often refers to a representative democracy with an elected head of state, such as a President.

In historical usages and especially when considering the works of the Founding Fathers of the United States, the word "democracy" refers solely to direct democracy, while a representative democracy where representatives of the people are elected and whose power to govern is limited by laws enshrined in a constitution is referred to as a constitutional republic.

See the definition and check Point 3:

http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/democracy

I'm sorry, which bit of this diatribe deals with the fact the American people do not elect their head of state?

Reply 33

OP

lodzinski

to ensure an even spread of power, and to ensure the security of our people and allies

Here is the crux of the disagreement.

The Russian delegate must have faith in the United States statement which thoroughly states that the rockets are for American defense, for European defense and for international defense. They are not their offensively against Russia.

If you wish to pursue the situation using this fallacious argument, there could be serious consequences if Russia takes offensive action.

Reply 34

prufrock

Here is the crux of the disagreement.

The Russian delegate must have faith in the United States statement which thoroughly states that the rockets are for American defense, for European defense and for international defense. They are not their offensively against Russia.

Seems dubious when read in light of

If you wish to pursue the situation using this fallacious argument, there could be serious consequences if Russia takes offensive action.

Reply 35

ukebert

13

prufrock

The Russian delegate must have faith in the United States statement which thoroughly states that the rockets are for American defense, for European defense and for international defense. They are not their offensively against Russia.

So what's the problem with Russia developing new weoponry? Have Faith!

Reply 36

OP

It should be *there*.

If Russia wishes to threaten the United States with nuclear weapons, based upon a misunderstanding (one of which the US has tried to point out, time and time again); then the United States shall not look favourably upon it.

We not succumb to inflammatory rhetoric and we shall defend our interests and security if threatened by any nation.

Reply 37

OP

Ethereal

I'm sorry, which bit of this diatribe deals with the fact the American people do not elect their head of state?

In contemporary western usage, the term "democracy" usually refers to a government chosen by the people, whether it is direct or representative. The term "republic" has many different meanings but today often refers to a representative democracy with an elected head of state, such as a President.

In historical usages and especially when considering the works of the Founding Fathers of the United States, the word "democracy" refers solely to direct democracy, while a representative democracy where representatives of the people are elected and whose power to govern is limited by laws enshrined in a constitution is referred to as a constitutional republic.

---

1. The United States is a republic and a REPRESENTATIVE (not direct) democracy.

2. REPRESENTATIVE democracy is a form of democracy.

3. Ergo, the United States is a democracy.

---

[ooc]

This is off-topic, and I'm fairly sure the UNCHR would not be challenging the US regarding its fundamental structure of government; thus it is also OOC.

[/ooc]

Reply 38

Russia has made no formal threats towards the USA. Your policy is that it is vital to your nation's defence and security to put in place this defence shield system. In a similar vein our government and president sees it vital for Russia's defence against aggressor nations to develop new technologies, and to site these systems in strategically viable areas.

It is worth reminding the assembly that the USA already has around 400 tactical warheads in Europe, across the UK, Italy, Germany, the Netherlands, Belgium and Turkey, a figure that I see as sufficient to ensure security without building entirely new bases.

Reply 39