You obviously don't understand why the UN exists or how it works. The UN exists as a forum where nations are able to openly discuss things. The UN itself won't be able to stop Russia invading Ukraine (they haven't invaded yet btw, they annexed an area after a referendum, which in the eyes of international law (the UN) is perfectly fine) however, the UN will be the place that nations discuss the issue and try to come to a resolution. Also, the UN technically is elected by the people. You elect your government, they pick a ambassador to represent the nation at the UN. The UN can't tell any country what to do, it just exits as a place where other countries can tell other countries what they should be doing.
And then they sacrificed ~30 million lives to end the war. Also note that America supplied Japan with all of its oil needs until they realized the oil was being used to drive Japanese armies around to conquer east Asia.
1) So is nuclear fusion 2) Fusion is a pretty good idea (see point 3) 3) Fusion has a lot less waste and radioactive reach than fission Will you please actually post something with sense? Like Deadmaster98 said; if keep posting about how you love your 'freedom' and keep being so patriotic to not understand reason, then we just think you're even more idiotic. How do you expect us to take you seriously, when you're not posting something valid for your side of the argument.
Talk about peace, democracy, human rights, civil rights - but behave like and support dictatorship, imperialism, war, ...? The hate likely doubles when there is substantial hypocrisy. We hate any child molester, but when a cleric or a teacher is a child molester, we hate him or her double. Look also at how much suffering and hate did communist dictatorships produce, with mouth full of freedom, equality, brotherhood, fairness and peace. I don't hate any country, and i pray for US - and the parts of my family there. I'm just at times afraid that some awful parts of the history might come again. That's also why I would rather like to have high human civilization standards and try to make and live an example in any community, also any on-line community. Do the majority in US actually like democracy and support human and civil rights?
I know I am late to this party, but... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AAFWeIp8JT0 There are many options for low waste, high energy output, and highly safe nuclear power. The reason why we have just been sitting on our rumps in relation to nuclear power is because whenever progression talks begin, fear campaigns begin as well. As long as we are not desperate, the fear campaigns will likely win.
Dictatorships don't "work", they may bring a period of stability, but eventually they fall and leave the cluster we see in many Middle Eastern countries right now. And they definitely don't keep everyone happy. Dictatorships oppress both minorities and anyone with an opposing viewpoint. The whole point of the Arab Spring is that it was a grassroots movement. Some western countries got involved after the initial overthrowing but from Tunisia (where it started) to Libya to Syria to Egypt there was a lot of initial support from the populace that led to these dictators being overthrown. Iran has been meddling in other country's politics for a very long time, and is a definite state sponsor of terrorism. It largely deserves its treatment.
Tony Blair has (as far as I know) nothing to do with Iranian instability. I'm not sure if he was old enough to vote when the Shah was put in power and later overthrown. I was talking about Iran, which overthrew it's decently oppressive, modernizing king and replaced him with a fully oppressive Theocracy.
Russia hasn't invaded Ukraine like Clinton didn't have relations with Lewinsky -- only if you have a very, very conservative definition of "invasion". Also, by all accounts that referendum was completely botched. My government, yes, but the UN also represents countries that are by all means undemocratic. It has also done some pretty nasty things -- like helping China implement it's One Child policy.
Would you rather have people starving in China? Seriously, we were never meant to have 7 Billion people... They already have 1.5 Billion people there, I don't think they need more.
The one child policy was a good idea. The Earth is becoming exhausted of all its resources and to have hundreds of millions of people reproducing will speed it up.
Forcing women to have abortions? That's a good idea? How about the fact that the evidence suggesting it even was necessary being shaky? How about the side effect of severely distorting the ratio of men/women in society?
In a country like China: yes, it is. The Earth can only sustain less than 2 billion (the population of China alone is almost that) people (with how we live now, anyway) without having a massive overpopulation crisis like we're about to have. China is eating up massive amounts of resources and accelerating the whole overpopulation problem. I think it would be slightly better to just fine them for every other child they have if they have more than one child instead of forcing a women to have an abortion against her will. That stuff isn't even the worst of what China does, though.
Hated is a strong word and although I am responding I don't hate America. However, I do have a strong dislike for the things they do and have done in the past. Now, a small disclaimer needs to be put in place because I am going to summarize some of the things which seriously bugged me about the US and I realize like no other how that may look like. No, this isn't hatred. But still a serious dislike. SO lets start with something which has caused devastation throughout the Netherlands: the shot down MH17 flight of British Airways above the Ukraine. There is a huge propaganda machine out there who is convinced that it was the Russians who did it. A propaganda machine which has deep ties into the US. Moving back to that same US: Iran Air Flight 655, 1988. A Iranian passenger airplane flying over Iranian airspace (not even close to any war or conflict zones) and it got shot down by a US ship using surface to air missiles. Up until now the US didn't even have the sheer decency to apologize for it. I'm from the Netherlands, Europe. If I want to visit the US for longer than 90 days I need a visa. Otherwise I need to check in with ESTA. At the moment this boils down to the US administration doing checks on my persona with my government. However, at one time the US has made serious requests to be allowed access to all bank accounts from every "Visa Waiver Program country" citizens who wanted to apply to visit the US. Of course all hell broke lose when certain countries started to suggest that they'd consider doing the same for US citizens. Lets move this a little more global. Iraq? Dozens of experts, including US experts, have warned the Bush administration time and time again that invading Iraq was about the worst thing one could do. Overthrowing the Iraqi regime is one thing, making sure to fill up the power vacuum is something else. Even so the US raised a false flag operation, blatantly lied to the UN about weapons of mass destruction (even Powell has admitted to this, and at this time all present photographs have been deemed not even close as being valid as evidence). And now Europe, as being the closed towards the conflict zone, has to cope with ISIS. Thank you very much indeed. And that's only a sneer coming from a Dutch citizen who is pretty much safe anyway. Don't even get me started on those poor Iraqi people who went from a pretty stable society back to a country suffering from raging power struggles between local warlords who are now trying to seize control over specific regions. No worries: the confiscated oil fields are well protected, if not constantly sabotaged by local militia who'd rather see the US "occupiers" (that's how many, if not most, Iraqi people consider the US) leave the day before yesterday. Afghanistan perhaps? When the Taliban (former Mujahideen, and former ally of the West. They're even featured / mentioned in a James Bond movie) didn't find Bin Laden quickly enough - according to the US obviously - they got overthrown. Once again: power vacuum, one which got quickly filled up by local warlords and tribes. Small detail: after that act of power it took the US, even with their advanced technology and massive agencies, twice as long in comparison to find Bin Laden. If a 1st world and highly sophisticated country can't find one man within 6 years, how reasonable is it to demand that a 2nd / 3rd world country without any of that modern technology finds that man in only a quarter of that same time period? But that's not my point here. When it comes to Afghanistan we have wise history lessons to content with. The former Soviet Union, a massive military power, has tried to conquer Afghanistan several times too. And never succeeded. "He who controls Kabul controls... Kabul.". The US didn't even bother to look into history and hasn't fared any better either. In fact: as of right now Afghanistan has become a huge problem for Europe were narcotics are concerned. That's what you get if you counter act against local farmers who are aiding war lords who you don't like. Because you can't do anything legally you just burn their fields and crops down (with the major support of opposing war lords I might add). Result? Isn't it obvious enough? How do you think those farmers are to make a living if you destroy their whole seasons work? Narcotics obviously, they grow them and get paid for it, the warlords distribute it, export it, and the money which this gets them is used for weaponry and other ways to ensure their safety. I call that shooting yourself in the foot, but according to the US this is a proven strategy in order to stabilize things, or so I read somewhere. And now we're nearing that sensitive subject, lets get it out in the open: Guantanomo Bay? Easy to abduct people and just try to torture confessions out of them without having to worry about those "pesky" laws. You know, those things which were meant to uphold democracy and peace and justice for all. And before anyone cries out: "You need to deal with terrorists in a different way" then please explain me this: a majority of the people who got abducted have also been released over time because, as it turned out, they were actually innocent. You talk about hating America. Here's something to worry about: how do you think those former 'gitmo inmates' think about the US at this time? Make no mistake about this here: some of them were local farmers, simple citizens who (in some cases) only made the mistake of supporting the "wrong" local warlord. Some of them weren't terrorists before, its a proven fact, but now? I'd be seriously surprised if they haven't become terrorists. After their whole lives got destroyed, all under a false flag operation, what else is left for them to come back to? I've lived for 45 years and I've seen many US operations from a Dutch perspective. And to be honest... Most of the international operations I've witnessed have only made things worse than it was before. Which is the main problem here: when the operation is finished ("we got 'm") most people stop caring, and thus are blind for the severe backlash which often occurs. I don't hate the US, but I also don't like many things it has done. However, I can see where some of the hate comes from. As usual; just my 2 cents.
They aren't forced to have abortions. They can have another child but it isn't supported by the state.
