NationStates Jolt Archive

If you had control of a large, powerful army. Whom would you use it against for the betterment(is that a word?) of all society and humanity at large? or is war even an option? Can there be peaceful solutions to this please chose I want to know? And If war isn't an option what is?


I would personally chose Zimbabwe myself, or North Korea.

Adanac!

Sudan, no question. I'd like to try and actually stop a genocide instead of letting it happen then invading years later.

Sudan, no question. I'd like to try and actually stop a genocide instead of letting it happen then invading years later.
ahh good point..

If I had a large, powerful army:

1) I would sign the discharge sheets for all the soldiers
2) I would pay them adequately
3) I would dismiss them and let them go home
4) I would let someone else solve the world's problems and go home to play NationStates.

Honestly...

If you had control of a large, powerful army. Whom would you use it against for the betterment(is that a word?) of all society and humanity at large? or is war even an option? Can there be peaceful solutions to this please chose I want to know? And If war isn't an option what is?


I would personally chose Zimbabwe myself, or North Korea.

Adanac!
Iran.

If I had a large, powerful army:

1) I would sign the discharge sheets for all the soldiers
2) I would pay them adequately
3) I would dismiss them and let them go home
4) I would let someone else solve the world's problems and go home to play NationStates.

Honestly...
But what if you had no choice, you had the army what would you do?, Peace or war and if you chose war who?

If I had a large, powerful army:

1) I would sign the discharge sheets for all the soldiers
2) I would pay them adequately
3) I would dismiss them and let them go home
4) I would let someone else solve the world's problems and go home to play NationStates.

Honestly...
And a couple of years down the road your children would be dead.

Iran.
They are going to reform

If you had control of a large, powerful army. Whom would you use it against for the betterment(is that a word?) of all society and humanity at large? or is war even an option? Can there be peaceful solutions to this please chose I want to know? And If war isn't an option what is?


I would personally chose Zimbabwe myself, or North Korea.

Adanac!

yes, betterment is a proper word.

North Korea, hands down. They are the most likely to try to bomb a place.

But i wouldn't provoke it. I would buid defences (like a missle shield) and wait for a good reason to attack. If North Korea doesn't want a war, then neither do I, but if they will provoke it, then bye-bye NK

yes, betterment is a proper word.
Yes!, I don't ever feel like using spellcheck as some of you may notice from my earlier posts....

North Korea, hands down. They are the most likely to try to bomb a place.

But i wouldn't provoke it. I would buid defences (like a missle shield) and wait for a good reason to attack. If North Korea doesn't want a war, then neither do I, but if they will provoke it, then bye-bye NK
But what about the people suffering there, the point of the post is if you had power would you use it to save others?

But what about the people suffering there, the point of the post is if you had power would you use it to save others?
;) Depends on whether or not they want it

;) Depends on whether or not they want it
Ahh good point, but if your ruler is burning down your village and killing everyone that is left handed wouldn't they want it and even if they don't they should...

I voted for peaceful solution, but Sudan seems a right "target".

Yes!, I don't ever feel like using spellcheck as some of you may notice from my earlier posts....

i'm fairly anal-retentive when it comes to the English language (American form)... I prefer the American Heritage Dictionary to Webster's in that AH is more of a guide, while Webster's is more of a mirror.

But what if you had no choice, you had the army what would you do?, Peace or war and if you chose war who?I'd establish peace, by smashing them all to death. Really! :D

(I might be the only person left in the world afterwards...but who cares... I'd be the most important!)

Ahh good point, but if your ruler is burning down your village and killing everyone that is left handed wouldn't they want it and even if they don't they should...
Honestly, that's not likely going to happen........

They are going to reform
Bullshit. I'll believe it when I see it.

Zimbabwe.

'Cos that Mugabe chancer is stealing all of Idi Amin's riffs!

Bitch.

I'd establish peace, by smashing them all to death. Really! :D

(I might be the only person left in the world afterwards...but who cares... I'd be the most important!)
LOL
I see we have a humanity hater here

China isn't an option so I would go to North Korea instead.

Why Korea?

The people are completely impoverished just so some asshole can pretend to have a glorious army just because he got the short end of the stick in life. Not to mention that the country is as close to a "rogue" nation as one can get. Recklessly persuing nukes, launching missiles over Japan (1998 I believe is when it happened). The country is lead by a Stalinesque dictator. History has proven that that is one unstable combination.

It's time that Korea was reunited and the North Koreans stop suffering by the hands of a despot.

Honestly, that's not likely going to happen........
SUDAN!!!! ZIMBABWE!!!!! NORTH KOREa!!, nazi germany!!!, IT HAS happened and it could happend again(sorry for the caps, cap lock was on)... But the point is that it COULD happen again and WHAT IF it did? thats all I want to know...

China isn't an option so I would go to North Korea instead.

Why Korea?

The people are completely impoverished just so some asshole can pretend to have a glorious army just because he got the short end of the stick in life. Not to mention that the country is as close to a "rogue" nation as one can get. Recklessly persuing nukes, launching missiles over Japan (1998 I believe is when it happened). The country is lead by a Stalinesque dictator. History has proven that that is one unstable combination.

It's time that Korea was reunited and the North Koreans stop suffering by the hands of a despot.
Erm, the situation in NK is pretty similar to the one in China, and it's not as extreme as the way you put it.....

China isn't an option so I would go to North Korea instead.

Why Korea?

The people are completely impoverished just so some asshole can pretend to have a glorious army just because he got the short end of the stick in life. Not to mention that the country is as close to a "rogue" nation as one can get. Recklessly persuing nukes, launching missiles over Japan (1998 I believe is when it happened). The country is lead by a Stalinesque dictator. History has proven that that is one unstable combination.

It's time that Korea was reunited and the North Koreans stop suffering by the hands of a despot.

Thats why Korea is on the poll not china.....

SUDAN!!!! ZIMBABWE!!!!! NORTH KOREa!!, nazi germany!!!, IT HAS happened and it could happend again(sorry for the caps, cap lock was on)... But the point is that it COULD happen again and WHAT IF it did? thats all I want to know...
If you cause a war even more people in that country would die; so i would suggest taking out the government using assassins

If you cause a war even more people in that country would die; so i would suggest taking out the government using assassins


Okay we kill Bob the evil leader of EvilStan(he kills people and his government makes stalin look weak) so what happens next? His son, his general take over? We kill them next? okay their dead... we kill their entire gov... what next? chaos?

Come on People Sudan is a very big problem..... (oh I didn't vote for it though)

Turky, and I'd rename it chicken for humanity.

At the end of my time based in Rwanda for genocide trials, the mugabe regime was taking over zimbabwe and i would personally be glad for a few people to enter mugabes residence and wipe out him and his warlord cronies. Then move on to the next dictator, and so on.

Okay we kill Bob the evil leader of EvilStan(he kills people and his government makes stalin look weak) so what happens next? His son, his general take over? We kill them next? okay their dead... we kill their entire gov... what next? chaos?
OK fine. Say we start a war with that nation: considering the kind of weapons we use now, massive civilian deaths cannot be helped. So that's not really helping at all.

If we use assassins :sniper: and take out the ENTIRE CORRUPTED government, we can then let the people decide for themselves who to vote, with supervision of military, of course.

At the end of my time based in Rwanda for genocide trials, the mugabe regime was taking over zimbabwe and i would personally be glad for a few people to enter mugabes residence and wipe out him and his warlord cronies. Then move on to the next dictator, and so on.

Ahh only if we could kill all the asshole dictators

OK fine. Say we start a war with that nation: considering the kind of weapons we use now, massive civilian deaths cannot be helped. So that's not really helping at all.

If we use assassins :sniper: and take out the ENTIRE CORRUPTED government, we can then let the people decide for themselves who to vote, with supervision of military, of course.

Whose military?,

At the end of my time based in Rwanda for genocide trials, the mugabe regime was taking over zimbabwe and i would personally be glad for a few people to enter mugabes residence and wipe out him and his warlord cronies. Then move on to the next dictator, and so on.
Exactly, although you need more than just to wipe out one person (all his followers should at least be arrested too).

Whose military?,
Forces from nations that are neutral to the country in chaos

Exactly, although you need more than just to wipe out one person (all his followers should at least be arrested too).

Good point and that should happen, my point is what happens next?

Forces from nations that are neutral to the country in chaos
But they are in chaos, warlordism and such, do you think that they are just going to let an army in? Your looking at a war my friend.... although some nations it could work, depending on the population.

Bleh, I'd rather much invade Amerika than any of those.

Bleh, I'd rather much invade Amerika than any of those.
oh look a moron.... sorry to insult your intelligence but lets try to avoide a flame war here... Think before you type please

But they are in chaos, warlordism and such, do you think that they are just going to let an army in? Your looking at a war my friend.... although some nations it could work, depending on the population.
That's why it's necessary to send in army that won't take sides: it shall oversee a referendum, which will let people vote for whatever form of government they want, and then we can help establish that government (as long as the government doesn't have an unacceptable agenda).

As for the warlords, easy, crush them! :mp5:

Bleh, I'd rather much invade Amerika than any of those.
I'd like to see you try :D

That's why it's necessary to send in army that won't take sides: it shall oversee a referendum, which will let people vote for whatever form of government they want, and then we can help establish that government (as long as the government doesn't have an unacceptable agenda).

As for the warlords, easy, crush them! :mp5:

in a perfect world yes that will work, but the world isn't perfect. OK lets say I live in EVILsTAN and someone assainates everyone in the gov. warlords take over(they got large armies and don't want to give up power, and the people support them because they are A. not as evil as the last gov. yet B. they give them protection) Now I am not saying that this will happen 100% of the time but you are looking at a war, a much larger one than before.. becuase instead as being seen as liberators you seen as the people who messed up their lives worse than before and are trying to control them, but like I said not 100% of the time...

in a perfect world yes that will work, but the world isn't perfect. OK lets say I live in EVILsTAN and someone assainates everyone in the gov. warlords take over(they got large armies and don't want to give up power, and the people support them because they are A. not as evil as the last gov. yet B. they give them protection) Now I am not saying that this will happen 100% of the time but you are looking at a war, a much larger one than before.. becuase instead as being seen as liberators you seen as the people who messed up their lives worse than before and are trying to control them, but like I said not 100% of the time...
Hey, if their people support the warlords, i say we get the fuck out!!!

Hey, if their people support the warlords, i say we get the fuck out!!!
What i meant was the military... sorry about the people,,,

Wow N.K and peace are neck to neck...

What i meant was the military... sorry about the people,,,
If the military supports the warlords, then (a) you go to war with that coutnry and kill innocent people, or (b)you try to find a peaceful solution while the citizens of EVILStan suffers.

Either way, you lose. There's no good solution to this problem.

Wow N.K and peace are neck to neck...
U really surprised by that? Would you want to risk your life trying to save NK?

If the military supports the warlords, then (a) you go to war with that coutnry and kill innocent people, or (b)you try to find a peaceful solution while the citizens of EVILStan suffers.

Either way, you lose. There's no good solution to this problem.
But which is morally right? At least moving into the country and stoping the killing as best you can or stand aside... Zimbabwe....

U really surprised by that? Would you want to risk your life trying to save NK?
YES

It's the government of Iran that hates the west, not the people.

I think North Korea is the biggest threat. Kim Jong-Il has a Stalin complex and keeps expanding his army while most of the people starve. A nighttime satellite photo showed North Korea with one small group of lights in Pyongyang but nowhere else in the country.

I think that we should wait until Kim Jong-Il dies and then try something.

It's the government of Iran that hates the west, not the people.

I think North Korea is the biggest threat. Kim Jong-Il has a Stalin complex and keeps expanding his army while most of the people starve. A nighttime satellite photo showed North Korea with one small group of lights in Pyongyang but nowhere else in the country.

I think that we should wait until Kim Jong-Il dies and then try something.
Thats what we said about his father though....

But which is morally right? At least moving into the country and stoping the killing as best you can or stand aside... Zimbabwe....
Trying to stop the killing i guess....

I'd like to see you try :D
America has been invaded before.

Why, it was back in the '60s and '70s, if I recall. It was led by Generals Lennon, McCartney, Jagger, Richards, Townsend, Page and Plant. They continue to have a great influence even today on American soil..

Oh, and we're at it again by the way.. *cough*coldplayfranzkaisersfutureheadsblocpartylibertines*cough*

It's the government of Iran that hates the west, not the people.

I think North Korea is the biggest threat. Kim Jong-Il has a Stalin complex and keeps expanding his army while most of the people starve. A nighttime satellite photo showed North Korea with one small group of lights in Pyongyang but nowhere else in the country.

I think that we should wait until Kim Jong-Il dies and then try something.
The most reason NK is poor is because of all the economic sanctions, not communism.

America has been invaded before.

Why, it was back in the '60s and '70s, if I recall. It was led by Generals Lennon, McCartney, Jagger, Richards, Townsend, Page and Plant. They continue to have a great influence even today on American soil..

Oh, and we're at it again by the way.. *cough*coldplayfranzkaisersfutureheadsblocpartylibertines*cough*
Dude, fighting between two factions is a country is called civil war, not invasion.

Thats what we said about his father though....
Totally agree with you on that.

The most reason NK is poor is because of all the economic sanctions, not communism.

Wrong, well somewhat true but misguided,

We offered to trade with him if he gave up nukes... guess what he did
He is expanded his army and giving them most of the food
His military spending is so large they can't afford the proper infrastructure so its not our fault its theres..

We offered to help him but they won't have it...

Dude, fighting between two factions is a country is called civil war, not invasion.

*whispers*
Britain and the US are different countries..

Wrong, well somewhat true but misguided,

We offered to trade with him if he gave up nukes... guess what he did
He is expanded his army and giving them most of the food
His military spending is so large they can't afford the proper infrastructure so its not our fault its theres..

We offered to help him but they won't have it...
We offered to help him IF he gives up all military power. Don't think any communist nations would do that........

*whispers*
Britain and the US are different countries..

you haven't heard of WWIII where we become The United States of Britain and invade the EU....

*whispers*
Britain and the US are different countries..
What century are you in again?

We offered to help him IF he gives up all military power. Don't think any communist nations would do that........

No We offered to help him IF he gave up nukes, japanese and S.K. too offered this.

you haven't heard of WWIII where we become The United States of Britain and invade the EU....
Right........

Right........

What we could win that war! easily.... they wouldn't stand a chance...

No We offered to help him IF he gave up nukes, japanese and S.K. too offered this.
Well, telling him to not have nukes when other nations have it probably doesn't seem right to him. Unless we have total nuclear disarmament, you can't blame Kim Joon-Il for wanting nukes.

Well, telling him to not have nukes when other nations have it probably doesn't seem right to him. Unless we have total nuclear disarmament, you can't blame Kim Joon-Il for wanting nukes.

He wants nukes so he could hold us hostage and demand we give him aid... rather than being peacful and just accepting the aid...

What we could win that war! easily.... they wouldn't stand a chance...
IF AND ONLY IF NO nukes are used. IF nukes are employed, yes we can still win, but i am sure several of our important cities or even states may be lost.

He wants nukes so he could hold us hostage and demand we give him aid... rather than being peacful and just accepting the aid...
Well, he's a dictator, remember???

IF AND ONLY IF NO nukes are used. IF nukes are employed, yes we can still win, but i am sure several of our important cities or even states may be lost.
Yes but we would gain like 30 new states... see it all balances out...

Well, he's a dictator, remember???
and thank you for proving my point...

Yes but we would gain like 30 new states... see it all balances out...
And here you were talking about saving citizens of other countries. If we can't even save our own people, how can we save others?

What century are you in again?
What reality are you in again?

And here you were talking about saving citizens of other countries. If we can't even save our own people, how can we save others?
a joke it was and is....

you haven't heard of WWIII where we become The United States of Britain and invade the EU....
Can you imagine the fun we're going to have when we get the presidency next year?

What reality are you in again?
For God's sake! DO YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT THE HELL IS A FREAKING CIVIL WAR?!?!?!?!

Can you imagine the fun we're going to have when we get the presidency next year?
ahh what? Next election(US) is in 08 what are you talking about...

ahh what? Next election(US) is in 08 what are you talking about...
The UK's presidency of the EU.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_war

there is your definition go check it out...

The UK's presidency of the EU.
oh, okay, but isn't the President of EU just an adminstrative position?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_war

there is your definition go check it out...
I think i know what's a civil war, no thank you.

For God's sake! DO YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT THE HELL IS A FREAKING CIVIL WAR?!?!?!?!
Perhaps.
What I don't understand is why you maintain that the US and the UK are the same sovreign state. Stop eating those funny little mushrooms.

oh, okay, but isn't the President of EU just an adminstrative position?
Yeah, but it just gives us a chance to fuck with their heads a bit. For giggles, like..

Perhaps.
What I don't understand is why you maintain that the US and the UK are the same sovreign state. Stop eating those funny little mushrooms.
Since when did i say they were the same state. And please learn to spell.

Just a cynical observation into human stupidity but it seems that the rankings on this poll reflect quite well the frequency each of these countries appears on the news.

Perhaps.
What I don't understand is why you maintain that the US and the UK are the same sovreign state. Stop eating those funny little mushrooms.

you guys are a bit confused... Seperate nations yes, very similar yes, used to be the same nation yes, will be the same nation again when lord adanac takes over the EU and they join forces to stop him........ ahhh yes...

Just a cynical observation into human stupidity but it seems that the rankings on this poll reflect quite well the frequency each of these countries appears on the news.
LOL

Just a cynical observation into human stupidity but it seems that the rankings on this poll reflect quite well the frequency each of these countries appears on the news.
all I know is that war is beating peace... allbeit by a little but still...

Since when did i say they were the same state. And please learn to spell.
Since you implied they were by asking what century I was in when I helpfully pointed out that they are seperate countries.

Learn to reason.

all I know is that war is beating peace... allbeit by a little but still...
It's easier to meet on the battlefield 'cause that way you don't have to think

Since you implied they were by asking what century I was in when I helpfully pointed out that they are seperate countries.

Learn to reason.
OMG, did Britain and US ever had a war after 1850??? Jeez, read a history book please.

It's easier to meet on the battlefield 'cause that way you don't have to think

Yes, but have you ever tried to program a tomahawk to blow up a builing in the middle of a large city withhout blowing anything else up......


The reason why I think war is beating peace right now because many realise for those countries that I listed peace can't work. not saying peace doesn't work, it does but for those countries it has failed them...

OMG, did Britain and US ever had a war after 1850??? Jeez, read a history book please.

We've had wars against other nations, we are like two drunks in a bar, I take your seat we get in a fight, then after the fight we buy eachother a drink.... something like that....

And when i said what century you are in, I am talking about what the hell you were saying when you said that Britain and US had a war in the 60s and 70s.

Please study some history.

And when i said what century you are in, I am talking about what the hell you were saying when you said that Britain and US had a war in the 60s and 70s.

Please study some history.

you could read his post, he was talking about a music war.. I.e. the beatles and such...

We've had wars against other nations, we are like two drunks in a bar, I take your seat we get in a fight, then after the fight we buy eachother a drink.... something like that....
You are funny.

you could read his post, he was talking about a music war.. I.e. the beatles and such...
He didn't explain it well enough. That leads to misunderstanding.

You are funny.
are you being sarcastic or do you really mean it? If I am I shall rule the world! if not your just hurtful.....

And i think we are drifting off topic here......

are you being sarcastic or do you really mean it? If I am I shall rule the world! if not your just hurtful.....
Really you are funny. You should choose to be a comedian....

And i think we are drifting off topic here......
this thread is probably dead right now, I didn't let it turn into flame like my last one... someone will pick it up again though..


New thread Idea: United States of Britain vs. EU?

Really you are funny. You should choose to be a comedian....
lol

And when i said what century you are in, I am talking about what the hell you were saying when you said that Britain and US had a war in the 60s and 70s.

Please study some history.
I was referring to the well-known British Invasion bands of the '60s and '70s, like The Beatles, The Rolling Stones, The Who, Led Zeppelin. You have heard of them haven't you?

It was a glib joke that I thought some people might get and have a wee chuckle about, but evidently I massively overestimated the audience's knowledge of reference points.

Sorry sir, it won't happen again
/sarcasm

I was referring to the well-known British Invasion bands of the '60s and '70s, like The Beatles, The Rolling Stones, The Who, Led Zeppelin. You have heard of them haven't you?

It was a glib joke that I thought some people might get and have a wee chuckle about, but evidently I massively overestimated the audience's knowledge of reference points.

Sorry sir, it won't happen again
/sarcasm

ahh hes just new, and so are you there is no need to get all angry like....

this thread is probably dead right now, I didn't let it turn into flame like my last one... someone will pick it up again though..


New thread Idea: United States of Britain vs. EU?
EU wins!!!! By some miracle of natural catastrophe in North America or intervention of alien life forms!!!!

BUt I am afraid some people won't take it as a joke and start flaming.... FUCK it... Look for i am posting it..

I was referring to the well-known British Invasion bands of the '60s and '70s, like The Beatles, The Rolling Stones, The Who, Led Zeppelin. You have heard of them haven't you?

It was a glib joke that I thought some people might get and have a wee chuckle about, but evidently I massively overestimated the audience's knowledge of reference points.

Sorry sir, it won't happen again
/sarcasm
What does music have to do with this thread again????

What does music have to do with this thread again????
take a joke, and the context he was using it in? Someone said" I want to invade america" you said "try" or something similar he said "but we invaded you in the 60's with the beatles" or something similar... take it in context.

take a joke, and the context he was using it in? Someone said" I want to invade america" you said "try" or something similar he said "but we invaded you in the 60's with the beatles" or something similar... take it in context.
Whatever. I am not that interested in music anyways....

Whatever. I am not that interested in music anyways....
lol... how old are you? Judging by how new your name is I would say you just got out of school right?

lol... how old are you? Judging by how new your name is I would say you just got out of school right?
Obviously i am just outta school. And i am not as young as you think....

Obviously i am just outta school. And i am not as young as you think....
No, I don't think you that young.. Either just out of high school or in college and if your in college which one?

Oh well, since this thread is dead, i'll go play some video games....

No, I don't think you that young.. Either just out of high school or in college and if your in college which one?
Haven't received any offers yet...(i think i am kinda screwed)

If you had control of a large, powerful army. Whom would you use it against for the betterment(is that a word?) of all society and humanity at large?

An invasion of the USA would be most significant in the 'betterment' of humanity worldwide, as they are currently the most powerful nation (and today create more negative than positive effects, IMO), but...

is war even an option?

no.

And If war isn't an option what is?

Peace? I know it isn't that simple, but it's rare that anything good comes out of a war. Or, the bad effects usually outweighs the good. With Iraq as an example, sure, they've got more political freedoms and things like that, than before the war. But there's more terrorism, slaughtering, people without homes, etc. now.

If I had the power to control an army, I'd only use it for defence of my nation, or my allies. Not go out on contradicting 'preemptive wars', or the like.

Probably wouldnt do either, but I reckon Zimbabwe needs to be taken out if something has to be done

take a joke, and the context he was using it in? Someone said" I want to invade america" you said "try" or something similar he said "but we invaded you in the 60's with the beatles" or something similar... take it in context.

yah, yesterday someone said something extremely negative about america and I replied that america would piss on them... and i feel badly about it.

but then... I was in a pissy mood, so perhaps my speech simply reflected my state of mind at the moment, which was concentrated on/in my bladder.

hehe

i hope nobody took offense.