Hey,

Another hot topic. I bet you're not surprised, but I will fight to the death against the world government they are offering us/working towards now. World government, in theory is necessary. But a world government led by American, or Globalist (if that's more about mind than citizenship) interests seems like it would necessarily have the same problems those governments create now. May be on a much larger scale.

It is not that some of us hate the NWO or World Government, or NA union because it is "the devil". It (for myself) is not based on fear of change, or lack of understanding of the situation. It is a logical and rational reaction when the flaws of the people and systems already in charge are understood. The system must work a LOT better than it does before it's viable as a legitimate world government.

I hope I can show you that it isn't based on whatever mentality you think all Christians have. That for some of us, it is a opinion and choice based on logic and reality. I somehow doubt it will be gotten though. I am just a crazy person who is against modernity! We don't need tress and clean water, we need more people in a greater level of control over ourselves! Yes! I sleep better already.
I think the greatest threat is form people who think other people (for whatever reason) are less human than themselves. The lack of compassion does much more damage than any theology, or lack of theology.

I am afraid to even try anymore,
We'll see,
thanks,
-Pip

I'm for governments working together, but the stuff the conspiracy nuts comes up with about the "New World Order" is a load of crap.

(July 15, 2009 at 3:23 pm)bozo Wrote:

(July 15, 2009 at 3:05 pm)Tiberius Wrote: Precisely why we need to keep nukes as long as our enemies have them. If we go down, we take them with us.

So, despite mutually assured destruction, we are still around. Wait til someone goes for it.

And maybe that is why we are .. because the weapons are too damned powerful to seriously considered being used? Maybe MAD isn't as mad as it sounds.

What makes you think the automatic retaliation to a nuclear strike will be 1 or more nuclear strikes?

And if we do go for it so what? It's not like the Earth will give an flying [expletive deleted] ... it will maybe shake and shiver a bit and then a few million years from now another species will be wondering what the strange race that once lived here was truly like.

Kyu

You know I honestly failed to think about the possible Christian interpretation of a world government. I am also for subdermal identification chips that would be linked to bank accounts, passports, safeway club cards, etc. Why carry around a wallet full of plastic sheets when a subdermal ID could serve the purpose and be linked to everything in a database? My number would be 667, neighbor of the beast .

Pippy,

You post is a pile of sketti again. Worry less about explaining what you DON'T believe. I would suggest you just post what you feel and stop trying to shore up a defense within your post. The meatballs I see are:

You think a world government is bad for some logical reason that you failed to expound on. I'm honestly interested.

If there was a world government is should NOT be run by Americans which I agree with. The world government should be democratically run with an elected head with very little power. All nations should retain some control over their region but submit some power to the world government. I see it as just the next organic step toward social order.

Rhizo

(July 16, 2009 at 10:35 am)Kyuuketsuki Wrote:

(July 15, 2009 at 3:23 pm)bozo Wrote:

(July 15, 2009 at 3:05 pm)Tiberius Wrote: Precisely why we need to keep nukes as long as our enemies have them. If we go down, we take them with us.

So, despite mutually assured destruction, we are still around. Wait til someone goes for it.

And maybe that is why we are .. because the weapons are too damned powerful to seriously considered being used? Maybe MAD isn't as mad as it sounds.

What makes you think the automatic retaliation to a nuclear strike will be 1 or more nuclear strikes?

And if we do go for it so what? It's not like the Earth will give an flying [expletive deleted] ... it will maybe shake and shiver a bit and then a few million years from now another species will be wondering what the strange race that once lived here was truly like.

Kyu

Interesting that you only go so far as to say " maybe "...that's not like you. You show doubt. Progress of sorts.
I think it is more probable that a nuclear strike against a country would produce a retaliatory nuclear strike, either by the retalliating country if it had them or by a support country that did. We are both speculating which is more probable.
So the threat of a nuclear war doesn't worry you? Strange indeed.

(July 16, 2009 at 2:13 pm)bozo Wrote: Interesting that you only go so far as to say " maybe "...that's not like you. You show doubt. Progress of sorts.

Only the completely blind, ignorant or those with an agenda would claim I haven't expressed doubt (on many occasions) before.

(July 16, 2009 at 2:13 pm)bozo Wrote: I think it is more probable that a nuclear strike against a country would produce a retaliatory nuclear strike, either by the retalliating country if it had them or by a support country that did. We are both speculating which is more probable.

I think it entirely depends on the kind of government ... I think it far less likely that the Europeans, Americans or Russians would immediately retaliate by nuclear strikes. I think they appreciate the gravity of such a move more than some of the newer nuclear nations.

(July 16, 2009 at 2:13 pm)bozo Wrote: So the threat of a nuclear war doesn't worry you? Strange indeed.

When did I say that? I was simply adopting a "philosophical" pose.

Kyu

(July 16, 2009 at 11:41 am)Rhizomorph13 Wrote: I am also for subdermal identification chips that would be linked to bank accounts, passports, safeway club cards, etc. Why carry around a wallet full of plastic sheets when a subdermal ID could serve the purpose and be linked to everything in a database? My number would be 667, neighbor of the beast
Rhizo

Hehe Wicked point

I'd also (seriously) support subdermal chips. Replacing keys would be awesome too.

(July 16, 2009 at 5:35 pm)Kyuuketsuki Wrote:

(July 16, 2009 at 2:13 pm)bozo Wrote: Interesting that you only go so far as to say " maybe "...that's not like you. You show doubt. Progress of sorts.

Only the completely blind, ignorant or those with an agenda would claim I haven't expressed doubt (on many occasions) before.

(July 16, 2009 at 2:13 pm)bozo Wrote: I think it is more probable that a nuclear strike against a country would produce a retaliatory nuclear strike, either by the retalliating country if it had them or by a support country that did. We are both speculating which is more probable.

I think it entirely depends on the kind of government ... I think it far less likely that the Europeans, Americans or Russians would immediately retaliate by nuclear strikes. I think they appreciate the gravity of such a move more than some of the newer nuclear nations.

(July 16, 2009 at 2:13 pm)bozo Wrote: So the threat of a nuclear war doesn't worry you? Strange indeed.

When did I say that? I was simply adopting a "philosophical" pose.

Kyu

You usually are very positive with no room for doubt.You are a know-all with no tolerance for alternative opinions.
You are old enough to have seen Dr. Strangelove.
Nonsense. You said that nuclear destruction doesn't matter cause the world will recover iover time.Not much comfort to the here and now and probably complete bollocks.

Hey,

I am sorry that my post wasn't cleared to you Rhizo. If you are genuinely interested, may I reiterate. As I said in the first paragraph, I assure that a world government created from the dominant governmental culture nowadays would have the same problems as modern government, but on a much larger scale. The level of micro management would be insane, and we would still need municipal level government.

Quote:I am also for subdermal identification chips that would be linked to bank accounts, passports, safeway club cards, etc. Why carry around a wallet full of plastic sheets when a subdermal ID could serve the purpose and be linked to everything in a database?

I don't want to have a chip in my arm, personally. I think that to get away from the wallet, one should just stop carrying plastic cards, that it is unnecessary, and to permanently implant that information is to go in the wrong direction.

You say I failed to expound on why I am not fond of the idea of a modern world government. I tried to make it clear that I understand the necessity of the concept of world government. That we will need it one day, but the way they are doing it now is all wrong. As I said, whatever problems exist now in government would be exasperated.

Quote:The world government should be democratically run with an elected head with very little power. All nations should retain some control over their region but submit some power to the world government. I see it as just the next organic step toward social order.

I think that is much harder than it sounds. America is not cleanly democratically run with a proper elected head and certainly any lack of power. I don't know if government is ever looking to exert "little" power. To set up a "world" democracy is a huge undertaking, when we haven't even got too much good state level democracy around.

If we agree that America should not be in charge, then that is a good reason the the WG concept now forwarded should be firmly rejected.

Hopefully that was clear.
Thanks,
-Pip

One world government?? Who would we fight with? We could de-mobilize militaries and nukes. We could better use our natural resources for peace and better feed the world without national boundries. There would also be a better distribution of wealth. I can see why everyone is afraid. Heck, we might have to give up our guns in my country and be forced to have free health care. Then surely the anti-Christ will rule. Just a terrible idea, go fuck yourself John Lennon.