What do you guys think of the Star Wars system?

[Big Blue Machine]

Thoughts, opinions?

[Black Dog]

Highly overrated. I thought Mark Hammil was awful and the special effects certainly don't stand the test of time.

[Reverend Blair]

Actually I think the movies are more realistic than Georgie's little scheme.

What do I think of it? It's expensive, it doesn't work for its stated purpose, it already started a new arms race, and when it is done it is as likely to be used as an offensive weapon as a defensive one.

If Martin or Harper signs on to this thing it is because they are short-sighted morons and full of greed...just like their political master in Washington.

[Stoker]

What do I think of it? It's expensive, it doesn't work for its stated purpose, it already started a new arms race, and when it is done it is as likely to be used as an offensive weapon as a defensive one.

Back in 1903 these two crazy brothers made this thing-a-ma-jig that looked like a kite...........ahh it would never work

As for starting a new arms race, what the hell are you talking about.......the race never bloody well ended..would you please outline the NDP plan to "put the nuclear genie back into the bottle"?

I'm sorry, I live on the west coast and it's now debatable whether or not North Korea has missiles that can reach the west coast of North America and even if the lower mainland and the Island were not targeted in an attack, we would sure as shit feel the effects of fallout if a missile attack was launched on Seattle or nearby nuclear missile sub bases........And even until the have the kinks worked out (which they will), I would feel a might bit safer knowing there was a 50/50 chance that the ABM defence network was there to atleast try and protect me and opposed to the Socialist's plan

If Martin or Harper signs on to this thing it is because they are short-sighted morons and full of greed...just like their political master in Washington

So ABM is now a money making plot?

[Reverend Blair]

Back in 1903 these two crazy brothers made this thing-a-ma-jig that looked like a kite...........ahh it would never work

Yesterday I told a photographer that his basic set-up was wrong and the shot wouldn't work that way because of the way light travels. He did it anyway. Today he is re-shooting it.

The thing is that he thought he could over-ride the laws of physics.

The Canadian physicists have, as a group, come out against Star Wars. The laws of physics make it too difficult to carry out.

As for starting a new arms race, what the hell are you talking about.......the race never bloody well ended

The Chinese and the Russians have stated that they are currently working on weapons systems that would be less susceptible to a working missile defence system. They weren't doing that before Georgie started walking away from treaties so he could have some new toys.

This system doesn't make you more safe, Stoker. The chances of North Korea committing nuclear suicide by launching a missile at North America is much lower than somebody floatig a nuke into a port and setting it off. Star Wars takes money away from port security, and everything else, because it is massively expensive. In the end it makes you more, not less, vulnerable.

So ABM is now a money making plot?

The military-industrial complex stands to profit hugely from this, but that isn't really what I meant in this case.

Martin and Harper are both afraid to stand up to the US on anything because, they argue, the US could Canada financially. Given their respective positions and connections in the corporate world I would say they are more concerned about their personal pocketbooks than Canada.

[Stoker]

The Canadian physicists have, as a group, come out against Star Wars. The laws of physics make it too difficult to carry out.

Since we are not part of the ABM program, I wonder how Canadian physicists are privy to all the workings of ABM...

Can Canadian physicists pick the lotto numbers?

The Chinese and the Russians have stated that they are currently working on weapons systems that would be less susceptible to a working missile defence system. They weren't doing that before Georgie started walking away from treaties so he could have some new toys.

The Chinese and the Russians are not as of yet the main threat and reason for ABM defence......as for their new "uber weapons", well a has happened since man lived in caves, you get a big club, I'll get a bigger club..

This system doesn't make you more safe, Stoker. The chances of North Korea committing nuclear suicide by launching a missile at North America is much lower than somebody floatig a nuke into a port and setting it off. Star Wars takes money away from port security, and everything else, because it is massively expensive. In the end it makes you more, not less, vulnerable.

Or, it allows the west the option of disarming North Korea without the threat of North Korean nuclear retaliation. Then with a disarmed North Korea, their is less of a threat of a terror group "floating a nuke into a port".......

With that said, ABM has never promised or even been suggested to defend against terror groups.......kinda like getting your lawn mower to do your dishes I've also never heard that the ABM defence and homeland serucrity was an either or issue.

Martin and Harper are both afraid to stand up to the US on anything because, they argue, the US could Canada financially. Given their respective positions and connections in the corporate world I would say they are more concerned about their personal pocketbooks than Canada.

Who are Harper's corporate connections?

As for worrying about upseting Canada's "economic apple cart", wouldn't a North Korean nuke strike in the middle of downtown Vancouver also damage our economy?

[August1991]

The US president is charged with upholding the Constitution and "watching over" the security of the Republic. In this era, US presidents have taken this role very seriously. (In Canada, the equivalent might be the Quebec premier's basic task to ensure the French fact in North America.)

When some scientists come along and say that they can devise an anti-missile shield to protect America, the US president will listen and give them a couple of billion to see what they come up with. It's cheap insurance. (The equivalent might be buying a couple of smoke alarms.) Even Clinton kept up research on this.

In the original scheme as defense against the USSR with multiple warheads attacking simultaneously, the idea was ludicrous but I can see why Reagan went along with it; and not only as a bargaining chip.

Bush Jnr has gone back to this because the threat now is one warhead from North Korea (or some other source).

Given the "small" cost and even the small risk of large devastation, I think Bush Jnr has a fair argument. I don't know what Kerry's position is but I suspect he'll pursue research.

Should Canada participate? Well, the US apparently will go ahead with this anyway so Canada should participate and at least know what is going on. We should make it plain to the US that we will put no money into it (or as little as necessary). Our participation should be limited to giving them access to our territory.

[Michael Hardner]

I agree.

I'm a pacifist, and I believe an anti-missile space net would truly be a defensive weapon that could save lives.

I'm sorry, I live on the west coast and it's now debatable whether or not North Korea has missiles that can reach the west coast of North America and even if the lower mainland and the Island were not targeted in an attack, we would sure as shit feel the effects of fallout if a missile attack was launched on Seattle or nearby nuclear missile sub bases

It's not debatable. North Korea has launched test missiles that have landed on outer Alaskan Islands.

This is the kind of cold war we need - not a buildup of missiles but of shields.

I think the NDP should be behind this, rather than just taking their standard fallback position against the US.

[Big Blue Machine]

I liked Star Wars 4-6, the new ones suck. LOL.

I think we don't need Star Wars. The only reason it came into the world was Ronald Reagen was afraid of two things. The Commies and aliens invading earth.

And who has all these missles they are talking about?

[KrustyKidd]

It's not debatable. North Korea has launched test missiles that have landed on outer Alaskan Islands.

See, they are attacking already! Did the US send some 'test' missiles back?

I wonder if we took all the money we put into the gun registry and used it for this in a more sedentary way, would NK allow us to register their missiles? That should make the Liberals feel better.

[Reverend Blair]

Nobody they are worried about has missiles, Mike. Korea has a couple of ICBMs. China has a peck or two. Russia has a passle and then some.

Wht has kept us safe until now, and I grew up with the sure knowledge that I could be vapourised at any minute, is MAD...Mutually Assured Destruction. That's what keeps North Korea from blowing up Seattle and kept Andropov from killing Droolin' Ronnie Rayguns, and Krueschev from doing any more than whacking his shoe on the table at the UN. George Bush has upset that balance.

The present US position is the same insanely stupid gunboat diplomacy and crap that caused the original 9-11 (Chile, 1972) and the rise of the Ayotollah and the power of Saddam and the continued reign of Islam Karimov.

Let's not piss around. There is no difference between missile defence and every other bad idea to come out of the US.

[idealisttotheend]

Even the most insane third world despot would have to realize that launching an ICBM against America is suicide. America is either just doling out pork to defence contractors or they are gearing up for an arms race with China. In either case it is stupid as the Rev is right that MAD would be a better system with a real second superpower like China. If Kim wants to send an nuclear bomb it would come in a shipping container where it would be harder to trace and more likely to be successful not via a trackable and traceble ICBM.

Star Wars is fighting the last war and is a massive waste of money and could be a de- stabilizing influence if America lost it's status as sole super power.

[Stoker]

Nobody they are worried about has missiles, Mike. Korea has a couple of ICBMs. China has a peck or two. Russia has a passle and then some.

North Korea only has a couple? Of the folling cities, you pick two that North America can do without:

Juneau

Vancouver

Seattle

Portland

San Francisco

Las Vegas

Los Angles

San Diego

I'm waiting.

Wht has kept us safe until now, and I grew up with the sure knowledge that I could be vapourised at any minute, is MAD...Mutually Assured Destruction. That's what keeps North Korea from blowing up Seattle and kept Andropov from killing Droolin' Ronnie Rayguns, and Krueschev from doing any more than whacking his shoe on the table at the UN. George Bush has upset that balance.

Why do you think North Korea built and is building nuclear weapons and ICBMs? Could it be so they can "level" the playing field a tad with the United States? Now should a country like North Korea be aloud to "play" on this field?

Let's not piss around. There is no difference between missile defence and every other bad idea to come out of the US.

Whats wrong with putting the odds in your favor?

Even the most insane third world despot would have to realize that launching an ICBM against America is suicide. America is either just doling out pork to defence contractors or they are gearing up for an arms race with China. In either case it is stupid as the Rev is right that MAD would be a better system with a real second superpower like China.

Whats wrong with getting ready for another cold war with the worlds next superpower?

If Kim wants to send an nuclear bomb it would come in a shipping container where it would be harder to trace and more likely to be successful not via a trackable and traceble ICBM.

Ahh, so thats why he is building ICBMs

[KrustyKidd]

If Kim wants to send an nuclear bomb it would come in a shipping container where it would be harder to trace and more likely to be successful not via a trackable and traceble ICBM.

The 'X' Prize

The private industry space race is on!

BTW, MADD assumes that the other paty values life just as much as you do. If OBL had acess to delivery systems (above) would MADD stop him from tackling this logistics problem?

you pick two that North America can do without:

Winnipeg and Knoxville. Real armpits. From the list, Seattle and Portland without a doubt.

[Reverend Blair]

North Korea only has a couple? Of the folling cities, you pick two that North America can do without:

Juneau

Vancouver

Seattle

Portland

San Francisco

Las Vegas

Los Angles

San Diego

I'm waiting.

I dunno...which are you in?

Now should a country like North Korea be aloud to "play" on this field?

Should a country like the US? Korea does not have a recent record of invoading sovereign states against the will of UN.

Whats wrong with putting the odds in your favor?

Nothing wrong with it at all. The US starting a new arms race and Canada joining in does not put the odds in my favour though. It wastes my money and makes me a target.

Whats wrong with getting ready for another cold war with the worlds next superpower?

Nothing at all if you are too dim to have learned anything from the last Cold War.

I'm a pacifist, and I believe an anti-missile space net would truly be a defensive weapon that could save lives.

It is far more likely to be used for "pre-emptive" attacks on nations that won't bow to the US.

Since we are not part of the ABM program, I wonder how Canadian physicists are privy to all the workings of ABM...

Can Canadian physicists pick the lotto numbers?

The laws of physics still apply, Stoker. You are talking about shooting a bullet out of the air. They aren't saying that it's impossible, just that we lack the technology and would need a huge breakthrough and buckets and busckets of cash to make it work.

The Canadian physicists are smarter than either Harper of Martin, BTW.

[takeanumber]

Shooting a bullet out of the air is really, really tough.

There was a frontline special about the Patriot Missle, the fact that during the first Gulf War, it didn't work.

So yeh. It's hard to do.

And will require buckets of cash.

I think there are more important things ATM.

[Big Blue Machine]

I saw that Patriot Missle system. I thought after that, "O GOD".

[idealisttotheend]

I heard that the Patriot system failed over 50% of the time even with multiple projectiles launched. Even if the Americans figured out how to do it with any degree of statistical accuracy (I don't think they can do it now even when the interceptor knows the exact course of the incoming missile) surely someone else could find a counter if they can build ICBMs. In fact I don't see why you couldn't use the American's own GPS system combined with a decent FLIR to fly in under the radar and make interception very difficult. SO another wasteful arms race is born.

In any case if the American's want to be successful in their agenda in the 21st century they have to learn how to fight in Afghanistan not refight the cold war.

[Stoker]

I dunno...which are you in?

Thats......funny?

Should a country like the US? Korea does not have a recent record of invoading sovereign states against the will of UN.

And why doesn't North Korea have a record of invading states? Could it be US deterrence? What happens when North Korea can use deterrence to deter the United States?

Nothing wrong with it at all. The US starting a new arms race and Canada joining in does not put the odds in my favour though. It wastes my money and makes me a target.

Let's transplant your logic into that of a pe4rson that is purchasing car insurance..........By me buying car insurance

from ICBC, I'm infact wasting my money because I've never been in a car crash? Also, by me purchasing car insurance, I'm infact making myself more likely to be involved in a crash?

Nothing at all if you are too dim to have learned anything from the last Cold War

Perhaps you are too dim to realize that having an adversary that has something worth losing is a better situation then being up against those that don't.......

The laws of physics still apply, Stoker. You are talking about shooting a bullet out of the air. They aren't saying that it's impossible, just that we lack the technology and would need a huge breakthrough and buckets and busckets of cash to make it work.

Huh

Not having the technology?

What are they building right now in Alaska and California?

Shooting a bullet out of the air is really, really tough.

There was a frontline special about the Patriot Missle, the fact that during the first Gulf War, it didn't work.

So yeh. It's hard to do.

And will require buckets of cash.

I think there are more important things ATM.

That was the first Gulf War, go read up about the recent war......12 years makes quite the difference.

I heard that the Patriot system failed over 50% of the time even with multiple projectiles launched. Even if the Americans figured out how to do it with any degree of statistical accuracy (I don't think they can do it now even when the interceptor knows the exact course of the incoming missile) surely someone else could find a counter if they can build ICBMs.

Thats was the first Gulf War, and it was under 50%.

In fact I don't see why you couldn't use the American's own GPS system combined with a decent FLIR to fly in under the radar and make interception very difficult. SO another wasteful arms race is born.

The Americans can pick and choose who has access to GPS........and if need be, cut-off an existing user.

In any case if the American's want to be successful in their agenda in the 21st century they have to learn how to fight in Afghanistan not refight the cold war.

The Americans plan to be able to fight all types of wars.....and I'd rather they be perpaired to fight the next cold war that is coming whether we like it or not.

[Reverend Blair]

Thats......funny?

Nope, just trying to find something real to base my decision on.

And why doesn't North Korea have a record of invading states? Could it be US deterrence? What happens when North Korea can use deterrence to deter the United States?

The US already has all of the deterrence they need. A power with the ability to deter the US wouldn't be a bad thing right about now. I'd prefer that wasn't North Korea but, since NK lacks the funding to do that, it is not really an issue.

By me buying car insurance

from ICBC, I'm infact wasting my money because I've never been in a car crash?

That's just silly. Having insurance is unlikely to cause other drivers to aim at you. Supporting weapons systems makes us a target and, since those weapons systems offer no real value, endanger our safety.

Perhaps you are too dim to realize that having an adversary that has something worth losing is a better situation then being up against those that don't.......

You miss the fact that the adversaries of the US already have much to lose.

Huh

Not having the technology?

What are they building right now in Alaska and California?

By most accounts they are building a pig in a poke. You are suggesting that we stand there with our wallets open throwing money at them before either the pig or the poke is complete.

That was the first Gulf War, go read up about the recent war......12 years makes quite the difference.

I've done a lot of reading on the latest war. I am disgusted by the actions of the United States.

The Americans can pick and choose who has access to GPS........and if need be, cut-off an existing user.

And the US has vociferously opposed any other country or group of countries installing comparable technology, even their allies. Part of Star Wars is keeping other powers from gaining technology that the US does not control.

The Americans plan to be able to fight all types of wars.....and I'd rather they be perpaired to fight the next cold war that is coming whether we like it or not.

The Americans are on the verge of bankruptcy. Go look up their debt. Look up the money guys who are getting extremely nervous about the collapse of the US economy due to massive spending. Will they be able to protect you when they are in the same financial position as Venezuela?

[Stoker]

Nope, just trying to find something real to base my decision on.

So you would be willing to sacrifice a handful of North American cities to save some money? I found it funny at times as how the Left-Wing paints the Right-Wing as cold.

The US already has all of the deterrence they need. A power with the ability to deter the US wouldn't be a bad thing right about now. I'd prefer that wasn't North Korea but, since NK lacks the funding to do that, it is not really an issue.

You don't think the threat of a nuclear strike on western seaboard cities as a deterrence towards the United States? And since this is a deterrence towards the United States, it restricts their ability to "control" North Korea...

That's just silly. Having insurance is unlikely to cause other drivers to aim at you. Supporting weapons systems makes us a target and, since those weapons systems offer no real value, endanger our safety.

Hey, I'm using your logic...........You are saying that if the United States builds ABM defence, more nations are going to be out to get them (and us).....

You miss the fact that the adversaries of the US already have much to lose

Ahh, like all the stuff Saddam had to lose eh? Or OBL? Or the 19 hijackers? Or any PLO suicided bomber?

Let's look at the example of Crazy Kim........If he has so much to lose by going to war with the United States, why does he have one of the worlds largest armies, why is one of the third worlds largest supplier of weapons, and why is he building his own nuclear arsenal?

By most accounts they are building a pig in a poke. You are suggesting that we stand there with our wallets open throwing money at them before either the pig or the poke is complete.

By what accounts? Was the first Airplane a "pig in a poke"? Was the first PC a "pig in a poke"? Was the first frozen dinner a "pig in a poke"? etc...etc....etc.....

I'll also add, I have not heard of the Americans asking us for a cent as of yet......they are building it with or without us..

I've done a lot of reading on the latest war. I am disgusted by the actions of the United States

What does that have to do with the performance of the Patriot missile in the first gulf war, compared to it's most recent performance(s)?

And the US has vociferously opposed any other country or group of countries installing comparable technology, even their allies. Part of Star Wars is keeping other powers from gaining technology that the US does not control.

SO? If you are in a life or death fight, and you happen to find a baseball bat, are you going to wait for your adversary to find one so the fight is even? Then in Canada's case, would it not be prudent to contiune to support the person with the "Baseball bat", as opposed to the person without? Forgoting to mention that the person with the baseball bat lives next store to you and has used it's "baseball bat" for years to protect you......

The Americans are on the verge of bankruptcy. Go look up their debt. Look up the money guys who are getting extremely nervous about the collapse of the US economy due to massive spending. Will they be able to protect you when they are in the same financial position as Venezuela?

bankruptcy Thats why their economy is growing again eh?

[Reverend Blair]

Oh, man...this is just getting silly.

So you would be willing to sacrifice a handful of North American cities to save some money? I found it funny at times as how the Left-Wing paints the Right-Wing as cold.

We don't paint you as cold, we paint you as hot...as in hot-headed. I don't acrifice anything, I look for a better way and point out idiocy.

You don't think the threat of a nuclear strike on western seaboard cities as a deterrence towards the United States? And since this is a deterrence towards the United States, it restricts their ability to "control" North Korea...

I don't think the western seabord is in danger of a nuclear strike from North Korea or anybody else because the retaliation would be massive. The Us already has that capability.

Hey, I'm using your logic...........You are saying that if the United States builds ABM defence, more nations are going to be out to get them (and us).....

No, you are not using any logic at all. I am saying that by supporting the USA's plan that we increasingly leave ourselves open to terrorist attack by other methods.

Ahh, like all the stuff Saddam had to lose eh? Or OBL? Or the 19 hijackers? Or any PLO suicided bomber?

Let's look at the example of Crazy Kim........If he has so much to lose by going to war with the United States, why does he have one of the worlds largest armies, why is one of the third worlds largest supplier of weapons, and why is he building his own nuclear arsenal?

No, those are the actions of an enemy that cannot fight back in a clear and fair manner. Star Wars promotes such actions, does nothing to deter them, takes funding away from measures that might counteract them, and makes us more vulnerable as a result.

By what accounts? Was the first Airplane a "pig in a poke"? Was the first PC a "pig in a poke"? Was the first frozen dinner a "pig in a poke"? etc...etc....etc.....

Those are the result of superior technology, not an argument against it. Thank you for proving my point.

SO? If you are in a life or death fight, and you happen to find a baseball bat, are you going to wait for your adversary to find one so the fight is even? Then in Canada's case, would it not be prudent to contiune to support the person with the "Baseball bat", as opposed to the person without? Forgoting to mention that the person with the baseball bat lives next store to you and has used it's "baseball bat" for years to protect you......

In Canada's case it would be prudent to have a look around and see who deserves to have the "baseball bat." You are ignoring that the US has sought to keep the EU from setting up their own GPS system. The EU is supposed to be an ally of the USA. The US wants complete control and giving it to them would be stupid.

bankruptcy  Thats why their economy is growing again eh?

You might try looking at numbers and facts, my little friend. The US is in serious financial trouble. Either China or the EU could send them into a tailspin just by calling in the debt. The EU has too much to lose to do that, but China could arguably come out as a big winner in one fell swoop...no wars needed.

Let's just give 'em all guns though. Lets encourage them to shoot over our heads. Or maybe that isn't such a good idea.

[Stoker]

I don't think the western seabord is in danger of a nuclear strike from North Korea or anybody else because the retaliation would be massive. The Us already has that capability.

So why would North Korea build ICBMs that can hit North America?

No, you are not using any logic at all. I am saying that by supporting the USA's plan that we increasingly leave ourselves open to terrorist attack by other methods.

How's that? I have not heard anybody saying home land defence and Ballistic missile defence was an either or choice.......as I said, ABM defence was not advertised to defend aganist "other methods"

No, those are the actions of an enemy that cannot fight back in a clear and fair manner. Star Wars promotes such actions, does nothing to deter them, takes funding away from measures that might counteract them, and makes us more vulnerable as a result.

There is nothing fair about war and life in general......so I don't fault anybody that tries to defend themselves on "unfair" terms.

Those are the result of superior technology, not an argument against it. Thank you for proving my point.

What point? In all thoses cases, when the given item was first introduced, it was inferior when compared against what it would later become.......

In Canada's case it would be prudent to have a look around and see who deserves to have the "baseball bat." You are ignoring that the US has sought to keep the EU from setting up their own GPS system. The EU is supposed to be an ally of the USA. The US wants complete control and giving it to them would be stupid.

So you now want Canada to decide who gets the "bat".........You NDPers talk a good game, but come short on laying out how you are going to do achieve what you see as a positive end result.

Yes it would be stupid......have you ever played monopoly?

If not, go figure out how to play and win at the game then get back to me........

You might try looking at numbers and facts, my little friend. The US is in serious financial trouble. Either China or the EU could send them into a tailspin just by calling in the debt. The EU has too much to lose to do that, but China could arguably come out as a big winner in one fell swoop...no wars needed.

What would happen to China's export market if the United States economy collapsed? Now how would China come out a winner? The World's biggest "buyer" stops "buying", how does that translate into on of the world's biggest "sellers" coming out on top? Please explain your Marxist economics to this poor capitalists

pig

Now as I have said, the United States economy is growing

Oh, man...this is just getting silly.

I agree, it's silly how you don't answer my questions/points, even though I answer yours, and might I add, shooting them down like the ABM defence shield will shoot down North Korean ICBMs.........

I don't mind debating, but it's pretty hard when only one side is answering the others questions.......

[Reverend Blair]

So why would North Korea build ICBMs that can hit North America?

Because they can. Because there are many places within range of those missiles. As a deterrent to a conventional invasion.

How's that? I have not heard anybody saying home land defence and Ballistic missile defence was an either or choice.......as I said, ABM defence was not advertised to defend aganist "other methods"

So we have a bottomless bucket of money? Spending put into missile defence is money not available for other programs.

here is nothing fair about war and life in general......so I don't fault anybody that tries to defend themselves on "unfair" terms.

So you agree with terrorism then?

What point? In all thoses cases, when the given item was first introduced, it was inferior when compared against what it would later become.......

Each of those has led to unforseen stresses in other areas. The introduction of technology has repercussions. The repercussions of Star Wars are increased risk of terrorism and a new arms race.

So you now want Canada to decide who gets the "bat".........You NDPers talk a good game, but come short on laying out how you are going to do achieve what you see as a positive end result.

No, I want Canada to stand for something besides helping PNAC take over the planet. We cannot achieve that by backing them up.

Yes it would be stupid......have you ever played monopoly?

If not, go figure out how to play and win at the game then get back to me........

I have played monopoly. One person gets rich while others go broke and are forced out of the game. That's one thing in a board game, but certainly no way to run a country or a planet.

What would happen to China's export market if the United States economy collapsed? Now how would China come out a winner? The World's biggest "buyer" stops "buying", how does that translate into on of the world's biggest "sellers" coming out on top? Please explain your Marxist economics to this poor capitalists

pig

The Chinese domestic market is growing and they are exporting ever more to other markets, so the US is becoming less important all of the time. The leaders of China also do not look at things, even economies, from the western viewpoint. They could well decide that it is politically advantageous to them to call in the debts.

Now as I have said, the United States economy is growing

Is it growth if I produce less income but put more debt on my credit card, especially when those things on my credit card do not produce a financial return?

I agree, it's silly how you don't answer my questions/points, even though I answer yours, and might I add, shooting them down like the ABM defence shield will shoot down North Korean ICBMs.........

I've answered all of your questions and responded to your concerns. That you do not like the answers is not my problem, it is yours.

[The Terrible Sweal]

I think that as long as any state possesses nuclear missiles, it is perfectly rational for any other state to seek nuclear armaments itself and defenses against them, within the context of an overall strategy of peaceful relations.