- Jan 4, 2015
- Reaction score
We also need to start dumping more money into our educational system as well as creating new jobs. That will help to get us back on a our financial feet again.
I absolutely agree with you, it is really ironic. This means that the USA only wants to decrease the amount of nuclear weapons if they will still be the undisputed world leader, but if other countries produce weapons the USA are getting immediately in "danger". And the media is telling to us every day again and again that the USA wants only to keep the world safe. The really strange thing is that the most people in the western European countries are believing in that.Now this is what I find ironic about America. Wasn't it against nuclear proliferation some decades ago? I see the tides have changed and they're back in the game. Perhaps thanks to ISIS, Russia and those elements creating a ruckus in various parts of the world. Well personally I see no problem with that. If nuclear is the answer to eliminating the existence of terrorists and racial fanatics. My only concern is that you can't control nuclear weapons once they blow up. They'll erase everything in their way. Obama has to think of a better plan where innocent lives won't be sacrificed meaninglessly.
Regarding your last sentence about another choice than the two given president candidates, I would say that this will not happen soon. It would be nice and the rest of the world is following the elections every time they occur, but to say the truth nobody believes in such a scenario. Maybe the Americans do not trust “unknown” candidates or they have not enough media an money behind them.You have to remember though.... the US is not the only country with this mentality and they are not the only ones with a large arsenal. There are 3 major countries... the US, UK, and Russia. My personal feelings on this is that I like the idea of only the three of us having a large arsenal.... it has already been proven time and time again that many of the other countries having it could be fatal. Can you image (or would you even want to) Africa, China, or God forbid Iraq having an increase in theirs. I don't want to even think on that..... Now as for the US wanting this??? Think on the statement.... OBAMA wants it. Obama is not the US. Obama maybe our President for the time being, but he does not speak for the entire US. If you watch our politics you will notice that a large portion of the US is against Obama and his "desires" unfortunately at the moment, his supporters have more money then those against him AND there are just enough of them on his side to keep him in office. One more year and he is gone. I just hope we have better choices this coming election. Obama has been the lesser of two evils all this time, we need better choices. I wonder if the rest of the US remember that they don't actually have to vote on the choices on the ballot? If they get enough support they can stall the election and put different candidates on the ballot?
|Thread starter||Similar threads||Forum||Replies||Date|
|Regional Social Norms and Michelle Obama||World Affairs||0|
|Obama to go to India, Indian Army Prepares||Americas Defense Forum||0|
|Obama Invites a Symbol of Emotion-Driven Gun Control to His SOTU Address||Americas||3|
|Obama Sides With Cameron In Encryption Fight||World Affairs||1|
|Obama vows U.S. response to North Korea over Sony cyber attack||Americas||22|