Category: nuclear weapons

What are some reasons why we would be forced into World Peace?

https://www.quora.com/What-are-some-reasons-why-we-would-be-forced-into-World-Peace/answer/Desmond-Last

https://www.quora.com/profile/Desmond-Last

Peace by World Domination may be more than a fanciful idea. It is highly likely that there those who have the means to force a New World order onto the People.

We have all had enough of weak, ineffective, corrupt and too be honest intellectually challenged Politicians who perceive Government to be nothing more than a collective of self-obsessed ego driven Golden Handshakes of which they can grow old amongst.

I know I have had enough of Governments who seem incapable of working together to solve the problems of the World with new cutting-edge solutions.

However, my solution is to provide New Ideas in the hope that enough people will want to hear my views on the future of our World – which are censored by mainstream media. Perhaps then the people will realise how absolutely incapable of new thought are Governments are and how rotten and corrupt the Media is.

If I feel like that then there must be other who would want a more final and urgent solution. To them democracy has ran its day. The people have been unable to show that they are capable of independent collective thought. Greed and selfishness ruled by apathy have led to the election of ‘give me’ ‘give you’ Politicians.

They have the wealth, the Power, the Military support and I believe the Nuclear Weapons to one day demand their version of World Peace – a sort of modern 1939–1945.

I have put my theory as a warning to those who should have the Intelligence to agree with me but alas it seems we must wait for Armageddon to prove me right.

So there you have the New World Order as I see it and my answer to your question.

Is it worth it to sacrifice one million people to create everlasting world peace?

truth

This is my answer to this Q which is on Quora.

If I were the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, which is a country with nuclear weapons, which you would have to be equipped with in order to answer the question I would state this:

“Nuclear weapons have only one purpose and that is to kill in the millions. The only deterrent they have been is to ensure those Nations with Nuclear Weapons do not make a sudden decision to use them on other Nations with nuclear weapons.

They did not stop Al Qaeda killing 3000 Americans at 911 and they did not stop the Vietnam War or ISIS invading Syria and Iraq. I would use them at the negotiating table to provide a framework with other countries to discuss and achieve a planned and phased reduction in nuclear weapons. Which is a forum much promised but lacking in delivery.

However, if my only option to end an immediate threat to the United Kingdom from a nuclear military force was to use them specifically to bring an immediate end to the threat I would do so. It is highly unlikely that such a threat would involve one million civilians. It is also highly unlikely that such a situation would occur without any of the United Kingdom’s allies being involved. Therefore the question is too hypothetical to consider a more detailed response”.

I would also state that the United Kingdom as an Island is at much more of a risk from a hostile force than the majority of developed Nations. An island is a strategic target and one which is between Europe and the United States even more so. Unless we are able to ensure we know where every Nuclear Weapon in the World is there can never be a complete nuclear disarmament.

Theresa May did not give that answer. Without thinking May said ‘I would’ to the question by Jeremy Corbyn of would she kill 100,000 with a nuclear strike.

Let us hope that Theresa May is able to ‘think’ when faced with a real situation of a ‘United Kingdom under threat’.

Theresa May does not hesitate to say she would kill 100,000 with nuclear strike

There can be no everlasting Peace that comes about with the death of a million people. The deaths of one million people and more occured in 1914–1918 and 1939–1945 with no everlasting Peace.

1.5 million have died in Afghanistan since 1979. A negotiated Peace for the war weary people of Afghanistan is as distant as it has ever been.

If the World wants everlasting Peace then it must begin with the reform of the United Nations. The Security Council must be expanded, the veto dropped and every conflict dealt with by not taking sides.

 

What military options are there for the US on N. Korea and will they all lead to direct conflict with China as well?

truth

This is my answer to this Q on Quora.

The Military Options may exist on paper but it is fair more likely that they will continue to remain in their role as feasible deterrents rather than positive actions.

Kim Jong Un is not a stupid man. He knows that any conflict with the U.S.A will result in the destruction of his fragile economy. Troops need to eat and they need fuel. Neither will be available once a conflict with the U.S begins.

However, Kim Jong Un has decided to take a shortcut to the membership of the World’s SuperStates and in doing so has to ensure that at some point he sits down with President Trump.

There are over 26 million North Koreans and each one has the potential to buy a product or a service from the U.S.

America’s’ Military has never failed in their duty to the U.S and the World but it is America’s Economy that has made America great. President Trump is well aware that Peace has a Profit and War only a loss.

China has continued to ensure that it sits on the fence – as usual. Nikki Haley the American Ambassador the U.N has been right to remind all the members of the Security Council of their legal and moral responsibility in regard to North Korea. China would never get involved in a conflict with the U.S. They know President Trump would stop all exports to the U.S. They have too much to lose. However, that does not mean that they would not use a display of force should it be required.

What is needed now is for President Trump to publicly show that America is ready to engage North Korea in talks which is no doubt happening with the recent reporting of ‘diplomatic speak’.

Nobody will win in any war with North Korea. The North Koreans will fight to the death. The Pacific region needs stability and it is up to China to broker the talks between North Korea and the United States.

Kim Jong Un is on a deadline. He will not be able to use the nuclear big stick for ever – his economy is unable to support such a large military expenditure. His population needs feeding and though they are loyal they will want more than military parades and anti-America rhetoric to satisfy their growing thirst for knowledge and world involvement.

Whoever sits down with Kim Jong Un will be able to ensure the massive expansion of the North Korean Economy, which will follow any negotiated agreement, is of benefit to both sides of the negotiating table

President Trump has to ensure it will be America who benefit and not Russia or China. It could also be President Trump’s worst nightmare – Iran, who engages with North Korea in negotiations to halt his nuclear weapons expansion.

In an ideal World the U.S. Russia and China would all be involved in talks with North Korea. However, as Aleppo, Syria and Climate Change have illustrated our World Leaders are not the brightest kids on the block.