The Riddler:
"I never said that we were going to touch Iran. I simply stated that Obama has never stated we would NEVER hit them."

It doesn't matter what he's directly stated. Nobody is looking only at his direct statements for any purpose, ever. He's made it very clear he's not going to bomb Iran to prevent them from acquiring nuclear arms. You can quibble over what he's directly stated, but nobody cares what he's directly stated. Israel's getting tattled on and Iran knows the US isn't planning a strike with them or on its own. That Iran knows we're not going to bomb them in the 6 months is all that matters, not whether or not Obama has explicitly said anything.

"That possibility is of course out there but Obama does not wish to have it happen so he is taking steps to avoid it."

That's right: He's politically isolated himself from any Israeli attack. Because he sure as hell isn't going to attack and wants political protection from an Israeli attack if it happens. This fits well with our knowledge that he's certainly not going to attack.

"I said they COULD and SHOULD [police the world]."

I don't entirely disagree with you. I think there are terrible tragedies going on across the globe and some are so horrendous and clear-cut that it's even more a tragedy to sit back and watch when we could help. But, in reality, I don't think anyone in charge is remotely capable of making such decisions responsibly or carrying out the assistance morally.

I'm watching the US assist radicals to gain power in the Middle East currently. It's nothing new. Half of the time we're making things worse. Net gain: 0.

Xeno the crack-addicted space alien on hallucinogens (a LOT of hallucinogens):
"We elect people into office who we feel have somehow transcended their natural tendency for their own self-interest and greed and will act first and foremost in the best interest of the people."

The US government is set up with the corruptible human being in mind. The mechanic to defend the citizenry from such corrupt politicians is the voting booth, with checks and balances to keep things in order in the time between elections.

"We are, of course, perpetually disappointed when we discover our candidates are driven by their own self-interest and greed as much as anyone else."

It's our duty to remove such people from office and put genuine, honest, intelligent, competent, compassionate human beings in their place. If we fail to do this, that is our failing.

" Yet, again and again, because we believe in democracy, because we believe in liberty, goodness, and the possibility that a few can overcome their natures, we continue to put our trust in candidates who present themselves as having transcended their self-interest and greed.   Inevitably, however, we end up voting for the best liar."

Again, the failing is ours. You have the internet: read some history. We didn't always fail so much as we are today.

And you go on to rage and rant about how we're all [playing games] and it's nobody's fault. Democratic society is at fault, UNLESS it's socialistic; then it's okay. Which is bizarre, because there's no inherent connection between the tyrannical wealth distribution you advocate (aka slavery) and people being more educated, aware, wise voters.

You have to be the best troll ever, or in need of some serious medication. Where are the autonomous robots you were talking about years ago? Did GE kill the patent holders and lock away the technology with the car that runs on water? How should we develop the space-age technology? Government funding? Is that moral, while people starve and don't have the luxuries you have? Ancient Greece is your best example of a direct democracy, yet its population and space was a tiny fraction the size of any state today so that's funny.

That people should be slaves is obvious to you, too ignorant to know that many fascists are socialists, because "obviously" if communists pretend to want people equal and you pretend fascists like people unequal, then magically people should not be free and should be kinda equal!

Seriously, lay off the drugs. Those are some of the dumbest, most incoherent, totally unexplained ideas I've ever been exposed to and I'm thinking about suing you for damages. Not only are they off-topic, they're bizarre, based on massively rewritten history contradicting many known facts (ie, every presumption you base a thought on is crazy), and completely unexplained.

In human history the development of weapons is a central element of our cultural evolution. Over time and trade weapon technology is always spreading around the planet. It was only a matter of time until regional powers would build nuclear weapons. "Yesterday" it was Pakistan, "today" it is Iran and "tommorrow" it will be Saudi Arabia.
The whole matter is only because of Israel that complicated atm. That tiny country in the desert took the world as hostage, but tries to tell the people that instead Iran took the world as hostage. Israel is a nuclear power with retaliation capabilities due german submarines with rocket launchers for nuclear warheads. After decades of isolation due aggressive foreign policy and a turn to radical religious ideas, politicans in Israel got so paranoid, that they believed in their own propanganda of an suicidal attack by Iran. Now Israel has only two real "friends" left: The US and Germany. While the US supports Israel for political reasons in the US and in the middle east, Germany on the other side is kept because of the Nazi crimes. A few days ago Germany sold another high-tech submarine to Israel. With that they have not only retaliation capabilities, now they have a reserve for defence and offence. Instead of Iran we should worry about Israel.

> Xeno wrote:

> Capitalism is the exploitation of man by man. Yes? Well socialism is exactly the reverse.

Ooooh! Clever...I like it.

Since we're sharing famous quotes, I'll contribute as well:

"Vision without action is a dream; action without vision is a nightmare."

EDIT: typo

"as voters could directly vote on issues of concern"

So you want to go to a poll everytime a decision needs to be made? Also, who comes up with the decisions put forward? Do we simply go "well, we have a problem with immigration from Mexico, what do we do?" and have everyone sumbit their solution? Also, how do you keep on top of all the infrastructure (ie. Transport, emergency services, essential services, welfare, or even the budget)? Furthermore, everyone will still act in their own best interests, you are just putting more work on the system and burdening everyone when a decision needs to be made. You mentioned that people are uninformed as it is, and you want to cut out the middle man (whose job it is to be informed) so that you can have completely uninformed people directly having their input (This is mean to be a joke, but I wonder how many Americans would try and solve the debt problem by simply printing more money?). Local representatives are elected to be informed of the situation and act in the interest of the electorate. Simply because everyone else votes for someone that you disagree with, doesn't mean that the system and the people are corrupt.

EDIT: Also, I am aware that most of this is off-topic, and as such, I moved the Space colonisation comments to a new thread.

No no, you are not taking what I am saying to mean something else. I am saying that noone is possibly able to come to an educated decision regarding EVERY political decision to make. For example, I am not educated in advanced economics, so me trying to come to a decision on the budget would be ridiculously stupid! I am not saying that voters are completely ignorant, and in the US system, voters have to go out and register, so they have already shown an interest in politics so one would imagine that they do get educated regarding policies anyway. I am saying that putting EVERY decision back to the citizens to vote is ridiculously long and painfully annoying for the voters, and I would much rather appoint my local representative to act on my behalf (and my local representative is actually approachable by his electorate, and that is his job). I also live in another country other than my own, and I would be VERY annoyed to have to fly to Beijing everytime a decision needed to be made.

I am also noticing that the political structure of world government is getting off topic (Iran, war possibly imminent!), so lets get back on topic and if you want to continue, we can open up another thread....

> Justinian I wrote:

> Xeno,

Capitalism is not a zero-sum game.

Obviously, Justinian, under the current financial system framework, it is a negative sum game.

> xeno syndicated wrote:

Obviously, Justinian, under the current financial system framework, it is a negative sum game.>

That's what we call "crony 'capitalism'"

Justinian, regarding your comment on Ancient Greece, do you feel it was more or less egalitarian in its wealth distribution than it is today?

Starting a new thread regarding this.