For some reason the past couple of days I've been in this bleak apocalyptic mood. I've been frequenting YouTube watching videos of nuclear explosions and wiki-ing odd subjects like World War III and the Doomsday Clock.
Yea, I don't know why I am either.
If I learned anything from being a history major for the past 4 years, I know one thing. No one wants nuclear war. Think of all the rough times since 1945 the presidents and generals and prime ministers could've just picked up the red telephone but instead played it cool. We're all still here aren't we? The leaders of countries and some of the people who fight for them would rather invade and occupy then have a sweaty person in a suit turn a key and push a button.
Nuclear armaments are the Aces in a poker game where even a royal flush couldn't beat. No one intends on using them (we hope), but it feels good to have one in your hand in case push comes to shove. The United States doesn't want Iran to have nuclear weapons. As a diplomat would you want a country that has called for the destruction of Israel to have one? Most would say hell no. It would be like giving a bully a piece of paper and a spit rocket and not expecting him to blow one at the nerd next to him.
Vladimir Putin made some scary remarks back in October, referring to the renewal of the arms race, the modernization of Russia's military... the good ole days? Well Vlad's term expires on the 7th of May, but don't worry his dummy successor Dmitry Medvedev will do whatever the Czar wants. Noticed I used some incriminating words there? Dummy? Czar? That's what Mother Russia is coming to be again. Communist? Probably not. Red is no longer the color of Russia. A Democracy? Sadly no, these elections were rigged pretty bad. Almost as bad as the United States 2000 presidential election.
Sorry if I smell like a conspiracy theorist. I'm not. I just thought it was common knowledge that our great republic was thrusted under the control of a new dictator.
Back to the new Cold War... why does the United States have to have a missile defense shield in Europe? I have yet to get that question answered. If the communism in the Russia has been smashed and the Cold War is over, why do we have to have a technological wall to protect ourselves from them? Maybe I'm too trusting? Maybe I have too much faith in my country's technological development to be able to intercept any errant rocket or ballistic missile from a location closer to the United States or at least in our territory? We have miles of ocean under our jurisdiction, we can't have an anti-missile defense shield floating miles off shore? I don't know all the logistics of a missile defense shield, maybe it's necessary to have a missile defense program tens of thousands of miles away from the land it's actually shielding.
If I was one of the scientists in Chicago, I would nudge the doomsday clock a couple minutes forward. We're at 11:55 right now. Putting it at 11:58 and citing these heating exchanges between the United States and the Russian Federation should cause some people to stand up and call for diplomacy. That's all the clock is good for by the way. While there is a semi-scientific formula to moving the clock forward or backward, it is mostly a tool to cause attention to the issues, and this is an issue.
Let's face some global facts. Pre-Iraq war, the United States for the most part had a good image. Bush was no Marcus Aurelius (minus Germanic wars), but he wasn't seen as this imperialist dictator that would tarnish the image of the United States and bring the world down with it. I don't believe Bush understood that at the time, whatever the United States did would have an effect on virtually every other developed country in the world. He used the outpouring of sympathy following 9/11 creating coalitions of the willing, and axis of evil, World War-esque terms. He used countries for his global wars on terror and for the spread of democracy. Who has sympathy for the United States anymore? Bush's use of Spain almost brought them to civil war. Many countries came to the middle east in aid of United States, and pretty soon they'll be the only ones left at the "party". The US death toll is quietly creeping towards 4,000. The majority of the country wants out of Iraq. The casualty rates don't reflect that of Vietnam, but it sure reminds the Vietnam veterans I talk to of the conflict. Even Iraqi's are starting to question if it has been worth it. When the war is over and all the men and women come home we must have ticker tape parades. We can't blame the troops because their leaders are inept. The United States is rich in military history. And although when they are marching down the streets of New York with defeat in their minds, they must be acclaimed as the heroes they are. They put their life on the line, forced to do a job most didn't want to do. Would you do it?
I should really outline these blogs... sorry for the rampant stream of consciousness writing. It's probably convoluted too. I apologize.
I was born in 1986. The Red Menace fell when I was five. I didn't have drills. I didn't have the belief that my school desk could save me from a nuclear blast. Will I have to? That remains to be seen. I would think any modern day philosopher would agree the Final Clash would be a war with the United States and Russia. The American people do not want it. I don't see the Russian citizenry as a bunch of bloodthirsty savages, so I'll assume they don't want war either. Then why would it happen? Looking at world history as a whole one would think it is an inevitability; maybe not in 10 or 30 years from now, maybe not even in 100. We would like to think we live in an age of diplomacy, but are we really?
We know the outcome of the Russian election. November of this year will be an extremely important time for the United States. We can take solace in knowing that George W. Bush will never be calling the shots in the oval office ever again. We do know whoever does take the reigns of this country, republican or democrat, will be cleaning up his mess for years to come. I believe many countries are wanting to see a democrat win. The democrats are more likely to make drastic moves, while the republicans are more likely to assess situations and make long-term timetables. In my opinion taking the troops out quickly and taking the troops out over a period of time will result in the same ending, Iraqi civil war. It is my opinion that democracy and religion do not mix. The high wall theory made famous in the 1700s is obsolete. The only country it has really excelled is Israel, and they've been the outcasts of the region since the late 1940s. What I'm trying to say is, it appears that in that region of the world, they constantly govern with their religion in mind. There will always be warring parties, whether it be the Sunni or the Shiites. It appears they cannot co-exist. So taking out the troops either way would result in a civil war. If the end result is a democracy then the United States can think they taught them something. If it ends back up being a Sunni or Shiite dictatorship, then you're going to have the families of 4,000+ wondering what the past 5 years was all about.
As a sort of epilogue to this blog post. I want to first and foremost say that it was not my intention to offend anyone in any sort of way. I will admit I am not the smartest. I tried not to generalize, and I hope I didn't come off as a know-it-all. Because I don't. This is all stream of consciousness. So please be nice!
Yea, I don't know why I am either.
If I learned anything from being a history major for the past 4 years, I know one thing. No one wants nuclear war. Think of all the rough times since 1945 the presidents and generals and prime ministers could've just picked up the red telephone but instead played it cool. We're all still here aren't we? The leaders of countries and some of the people who fight for them would rather invade and occupy then have a sweaty person in a suit turn a key and push a button.
Nuclear armaments are the Aces in a poker game where even a royal flush couldn't beat. No one intends on using them (we hope), but it feels good to have one in your hand in case push comes to shove. The United States doesn't want Iran to have nuclear weapons. As a diplomat would you want a country that has called for the destruction of Israel to have one? Most would say hell no. It would be like giving a bully a piece of paper and a spit rocket and not expecting him to blow one at the nerd next to him.
Vladimir Putin made some scary remarks back in October, referring to the renewal of the arms race, the modernization of Russia's military... the good ole days? Well Vlad's term expires on the 7th of May, but don't worry his dummy successor Dmitry Medvedev will do whatever the Czar wants. Noticed I used some incriminating words there? Dummy? Czar? That's what Mother Russia is coming to be again. Communist? Probably not. Red is no longer the color of Russia. A Democracy? Sadly no, these elections were rigged pretty bad. Almost as bad as the United States 2000 presidential election.
Sorry if I smell like a conspiracy theorist. I'm not. I just thought it was common knowledge that our great republic was thrusted under the control of a new dictator.
Back to the new Cold War... why does the United States have to have a missile defense shield in Europe? I have yet to get that question answered. If the communism in the Russia has been smashed and the Cold War is over, why do we have to have a technological wall to protect ourselves from them? Maybe I'm too trusting? Maybe I have too much faith in my country's technological development to be able to intercept any errant rocket or ballistic missile from a location closer to the United States or at least in our territory? We have miles of ocean under our jurisdiction, we can't have an anti-missile defense shield floating miles off shore? I don't know all the logistics of a missile defense shield, maybe it's necessary to have a missile defense program tens of thousands of miles away from the land it's actually shielding.
If I was one of the scientists in Chicago, I would nudge the doomsday clock a couple minutes forward. We're at 11:55 right now. Putting it at 11:58 and citing these heating exchanges between the United States and the Russian Federation should cause some people to stand up and call for diplomacy. That's all the clock is good for by the way. While there is a semi-scientific formula to moving the clock forward or backward, it is mostly a tool to cause attention to the issues, and this is an issue.
Let's face some global facts. Pre-Iraq war, the United States for the most part had a good image. Bush was no Marcus Aurelius (minus Germanic wars), but he wasn't seen as this imperialist dictator that would tarnish the image of the United States and bring the world down with it. I don't believe Bush understood that at the time, whatever the United States did would have an effect on virtually every other developed country in the world. He used the outpouring of sympathy following 9/11 creating coalitions of the willing, and axis of evil, World War-esque terms. He used countries for his global wars on terror and for the spread of democracy. Who has sympathy for the United States anymore? Bush's use of Spain almost brought them to civil war. Many countries came to the middle east in aid of United States, and pretty soon they'll be the only ones left at the "party". The US death toll is quietly creeping towards 4,000. The majority of the country wants out of Iraq. The casualty rates don't reflect that of Vietnam, but it sure reminds the Vietnam veterans I talk to of the conflict. Even Iraqi's are starting to question if it has been worth it. When the war is over and all the men and women come home we must have ticker tape parades. We can't blame the troops because their leaders are inept. The United States is rich in military history. And although when they are marching down the streets of New York with defeat in their minds, they must be acclaimed as the heroes they are. They put their life on the line, forced to do a job most didn't want to do. Would you do it?
I should really outline these blogs... sorry for the rampant stream of consciousness writing. It's probably convoluted too. I apologize.
I was born in 1986. The Red Menace fell when I was five. I didn't have drills. I didn't have the belief that my school desk could save me from a nuclear blast. Will I have to? That remains to be seen. I would think any modern day philosopher would agree the Final Clash would be a war with the United States and Russia. The American people do not want it. I don't see the Russian citizenry as a bunch of bloodthirsty savages, so I'll assume they don't want war either. Then why would it happen? Looking at world history as a whole one would think it is an inevitability; maybe not in 10 or 30 years from now, maybe not even in 100. We would like to think we live in an age of diplomacy, but are we really?
We know the outcome of the Russian election. November of this year will be an extremely important time for the United States. We can take solace in knowing that George W. Bush will never be calling the shots in the oval office ever again. We do know whoever does take the reigns of this country, republican or democrat, will be cleaning up his mess for years to come. I believe many countries are wanting to see a democrat win. The democrats are more likely to make drastic moves, while the republicans are more likely to assess situations and make long-term timetables. In my opinion taking the troops out quickly and taking the troops out over a period of time will result in the same ending, Iraqi civil war. It is my opinion that democracy and religion do not mix. The high wall theory made famous in the 1700s is obsolete. The only country it has really excelled is Israel, and they've been the outcasts of the region since the late 1940s. What I'm trying to say is, it appears that in that region of the world, they constantly govern with their religion in mind. There will always be warring parties, whether it be the Sunni or the Shiites. It appears they cannot co-exist. So taking out the troops either way would result in a civil war. If the end result is a democracy then the United States can think they taught them something. If it ends back up being a Sunni or Shiite dictatorship, then you're going to have the families of 4,000+ wondering what the past 5 years was all about.
As a sort of epilogue to this blog post. I want to first and foremost say that it was not my intention to offend anyone in any sort of way. I will admit I am not the smartest. I tried not to generalize, and I hope I didn't come off as a know-it-all. Because I don't. This is all stream of consciousness. So please be nice!