Page 1 of Which Country do you think poses the greatest threat to mankind??

I`m in a quandry over this question.

Any country with weapons and a motive can be a threat to anyone else in the world. Some countries scare me - North Korea have not got a good record and Nuclear Weapons worry me in this part of the world. Obvoiusly Iraq is a problem for general lawlessness and the infiltration by Islamic Militant organisations.

But the country which scares me the most - is the U.S.A.

If Churchill hadn`t spoken out against the rise of Nazism before WW2 we would all be speaking German and going on about how great Wagner was. So if a threat is detected we should definately act, but it seems to me that the U.S on it`s own agenda has created the threat to establish it`s own base in the middle east - maybe to eventually control oil prices.

The problem arises when you antagonise a large group of people for hardly any justification add extremists into the mix and you end up in the very volatile situation we are in at the moment.

My generation generally have had a very peaceful time - the wars during the last 30 years have been controlled and national call-ups are now a thing of the past. My grandparents had to live through WW1 and WW2 - fearing they were going to be bombed for half a decade. Even my parents had the threat of all out Nuclear War during the Missile Crisis. So I suppose it`s our turn to get the rough end of history. I just can`t help feeling that our so-called reprasentatives are bringing doom on us all.

Your opinions on this subject are welcomed.

As Ever,

North Korea are pretty dangerous, considering they`re basically shut off to the rest of the world. Though I think they`re more likely to go for South Korea before anything else.

The US are a threat, I agree, so just be thankful we`re allies at the moment! :o :D

I think the world is a lot safer with nuclear weapons then without...I think they call it M.A.D , and it works thats why no one will start a nuclear war, ...I hope. :) :) :)

Threat to the world,easy the Middle East and the BBC licence fee! :) :)

The threat from America is, for me, more insidious. The slow infiltration in the World of their way-of-life. The British (and Australian) workplace is now modelled on the American plan. We are influenced by their movies, coffee bars, food outlets and so on. This gets under my skin a bit, the slow but sure ingraining.
A more immediate and overt threat is from the Middle East I feel. My neighbour is Iranian and recently went back for a visit. They never will again. For some reason (they never spoke a word about what is going on) they were appalled and terrified. So Iran might be a threat in the near future?
Interesting thread, by the way. Good one!

Wales.

Too many Welsh scaring the s*** out of our sheep.

Better to die fighting for freedom than to be a prisoner all the days of your life

Quote:
I think the world is a lot safer with nuclear weapons then without...

Try telling that to the residents of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Oh and by the way! the country that dropped those two bombs were..................................

The two biggest acts of barbarism the world has ever seen.

Interesting mentions of Iran and North Korea in a thread which asks which country is the greatest threat to mankind . At most, North Korea is a threat to South Korea and Japan - hardly a global threat. North Korea may or may not have nuclear weapons which would almost certainly only be used if and when it is attacked; it is unlikely to attack China which is the country most sympathetic to it so any retaliation would be against U.S. interests i.e. its troop presence in South Korea and Japan.

Similarily, Iran may have nuclear ambitions but would never use them on a `first strike` basis as it would be annihilated either by the U.S. or Israel. Iran may be a vile theocracy guilty of numerous human rights violations, but a threat to mankind it is not.

The U.S. on the other hand, has established itself as the global hegemon with ambitions to control the world by force; the National Security Strategy of the U.S. makes scary reading. As well as its military might which it is willing and able to use in preventative (not preemptive) attacks all across the globe, it is a huge polluter and user of fossil fuels - this may prove to be a bigger threat to mankind than global terrorism or the current Pax Americana.

In addition to all this, a long term threat may come from China or even Russia which has some 20,000 nuclear warheads which are old and poorly guarded. Vladimir Putin is busy centralising Russian politics to a state not seen since the USSR existed. If Putin`s current policies continue, Russia may once again become a strong and powerful nation under a highly centralised and brutal political structure with the long term aim of challenging the current U.S. hegemony. For the moment though, the U.S. is the global boss and the greatest threat to life on this earth.

This item was edited on Wednesday, 22nd September 2004, 16:25

I think India, Pakistan or some ex Soviet state are the biggest threats with their nuclear capabilities. Its easy to have a go at the U.S because they are the one true superpower around today, but I would rather have them than communism which would have been the alternative if U.S forces hadn`t been based in large numbers in western europe during the cold war.

You say smaller countries can`t start a global war - think again!

Archduke Franz Ferdinand was shot and it started WW1. Like Dominoes all the countries picked their sides and bam.

This item was edited on Wednesday, 22nd September 2004, 15:16

Quote:
I think the world is a lot safer with nuclear weapons then without...Kenneth Waltz (the renowned international relations theorist) would certainly agree, pointing to the fact that no two nuclear armed states have ever gone to war. This is particularly valid in the case of India and Pakistan as some would argue that the fact that both states have nuclear weapons is the only reason why the tensions between the two states have never escalated into a full blown conflict. It is also possible to argue that the U.S. invaded Iraq last year safe in the knowledge that it had no WMD with which to retaliate.

However, it only takes one nuclear bomb to malfunction or fall into the wrong hands and millions may die.