News Stories

[Cyrus17]

Originally Posted by Vexx

"Russia enemy of US" is old Soviet Cold War nonsense and no longer applicable.

I totally agree. Russia just can't allow itself to be US' enemy.

But US is still enemy of Russia. Even under Obama.

[LynnieS]

Originally Posted by Autumn Demon

It would be applicable if John McCain were president.

Is this a personal sentiment, or did he make a candid quote somewhere outside of a political rally?

JMvS, IMHO, is right in claiming the relationship is primarily that of rivals. Russia, esp. these days, does appear to be trying to go back to its glory days - if not those of the USSR, then to the times of the czars. Not entirely sure how well that's going, though. Alcohol - among other things - is taking a rather severe toll on its people, and the divide between the haves and the havenots looks to be wider there than in the U.S. - at least for now. Russia's naval ability is also poor these days when compared to the old USSR's.

[SaintessHeart]

Originally Posted by LynnieS

Is this a personal sentiment, or did he make a candid quote somewhere outside of a political rally?

JMvS, IMHO, is right in claiming the relationship is primarily that of rivals. Russia, esp. these days, does appear to be trying to go back to its glory days - if not those of the USSR, then to the times of the czars. Not entirely sure how well that's going, though. Alcohol - among other things - is taking a rather severe toll on its people, and the divide between the haves and the havenots looks to be wider there than in the U.S. - at least for now. Russia's naval ability is also poor these days when compared to the old USSR's.

Actually their navy is still more powerful compared to China's or NK's, it is just that the ships are sitting in the shipyards without anyone to man them.

[Jinto]

Originally Posted by Cyrus17

I totally agree. Russia just can't allow itself to be US' enemy.

But US is still enemy of Russia. Even under Obama.

It is more like both behave like world powers (which causes tensions of'course).

[Shadow Kira01]

Japan, China defense heads agree on more exchanges

"One of the things we agreed on was to conduct high-level exchanges over the next year," Kitazawa said. "It demonstrates great progress in our bilateral relations that we have agreed to conduct our first joint maneuvers."

Tokyo has also expressed deep concerns over China's growing military strength and swelling defense budget. China's navy, in particular, is improving rapidly and encounters between ships from the countries are growing more frequent.

Kitazawa said Tokyo sees relations with Beijing as crucial and said Japan will try to develop greater trust with its giant neighbor, on both the security and economic fronts.

Liang said the two ministers also discussed regional security issues and said they "have a great deal in common."

"We intend to continue strengthening our ties," he said. "Our relations are very important, as is our mutual growth and prosperity."

Hatoyama, Okinawa governor to meet over U.S. airfield relocation

Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama and Okinawa Gov. Hirokazu Nakaima will hold talks Monday in Tokyo over the relocation of a U.S. military airfield in Okinawa Prefecture, which has become a major sticking point in U.S.-Japan ties, prefectural officials said Friday.

Iran's Ahmadinejad, Venezuela's Chavez Denounce US 'Imperialism'

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has ended a visit to Venezuela in which he and his Venezuelan counterpart Hugo Chavez denounced what they call U.S. "imperialism."

Mr. Chavez also denounced U.S. ally Israel as a "murderous arm of the Yankee empire," in his words. He rebuked Israel's president for predicting Venezuelans and Iranians will make their leaders disappear. Mr. Chavez said he views Shimon Peres' recent comment as a threat.

The Venezuelan president also said Cuba's ailing former President Fidel Castro had asked him to deliver a "hug" to Mr. Ahmadinejad. Mr. Chavez said he met briefly with Mr. Castro in Cuba on Tuesday.

[Autumn Demon]

Some members of the RNC are proposing a litmus test for Republican Party candidates standing in the 2010 Congressional elections. Candidates who fail to agree with 8 of the 10 principles would not receive funding from the RNC.

(1) We support smaller government, smaller national debt, lower deficits and lower taxes by opposing bills like Obama’s “stimulus” bill;
(2) We support market-based health care reform and oppose Obama-style government run healthcare;
(3) We support market-based energy reforms by opposing cap and trade legislation;
(4) We support workers’ right to secret ballot by opposing card check;
(5) We support legal immigration and assimilation into American society by opposing amnesty for illegal immigrants;
(6) We support victory in Iraq and Afghanistan by supporting military-recommended troop surges;
(7) We support containment of Iran and North Korea, particularly effective action to eliminate their nuclear weapons threat;
(8) We support retention of the Defense of Marriage Act;
(9) We support protecting the lives of vulnerable persons by opposing health care rationing and denial of health care and government funding of abortion; and
(10) We support the right to keep and bear arms by opposing government restrictions on gun ownership;

Full text of the proposal (WARNING: Ronald Reagan's name mentioned more often than at a Republican primary debate.)

I scored a 1 with my opposition to card check.

[Cyrus17]

Why is Russia holding on to South Kurils?

If Japan takes over the South Kurils, Russia will lose the ability to control the entry of foreign surface ships and submarines into the Sea of Okhotsk, the combat service area of its Pacific Fleet's strategic submarines. This would give a potential enemy an opportunity to mount equipment to monitor Russian submarines and sink them in case of a military conflict.

[WordShaker]

I heard of the Republican litmus test yesterday, but the 8 out of 10 thing is new. Whoo, these Republicans...

(1) We support smaller government, smaller national debt, lower deficits and lower taxes by opposing bills like Obama’s “stimulus” bill;

I just love how incompatible these ideas are.

(2) We support market-based health care reform and oppose Obama-style government run healthcare

"Market-based" meaning "what's happening now," I assume.

(3) We support market-based energy reforms by opposing cap and trade legislation

DOES NOT COMPUTE.

(4) We support workers’ right to secret ballot by opposing card check

'Cept the EFCA doesn't oppose secret ballots, either, but instead offers card check as an alternative (and inherently fairer) alternative.

(5) We support legal immigration and assimilation into American society by opposing amnesty for illegal immigrants

Republicans do realize how incongruent these ideas are, right?

(6) We support victory in Iraq and Afghanistan by supporting military-recommended troop surges

"We support continuing wars we never should have got in and sacrificing more men for bogus charges."

(7) We support containment of Iran and North Korea, particularly effective action to eliminate their nuclear weapons threat

I wonder if the Republicans will express surprise when these nation start becoming truly belligerent.

(8) We support retention of the Defense of Marriage Act

"...because we really hate equal rights and secularism."

(9) We support protecting the lives of vulnerable persons by opposing health care rationing and denial of health care and government funding of abortion

I can't keep a straight face when I read this.

(10) We support the right to keep and bear arms by opposing government restrictions on gun ownership

Because the annual 10'000 gun homicides is nothing, amirite?

[SaintessHeart]

Regarding the part about guns, I think banning firearms totally is a bad idea.

With so many drug cartels and illegal firearms circulating due to the availability and (declining) international usage of the USD, you can't rely on your local police armed with 9mm's and .45 ACP's to beat a nut with illegal military grade body armor and home-mod assault rifles.

Buy a .50 cal pistol, which is not police-issued, and you might stand a chance. Otherwise, you might want to kevlar plate your walls and install bullet-proof glass.

P.S It has been proven that regular kevlar helmets with ceramic plates installed can barely stop a swiss-army knife being thrown at 20m by an angry madman. Do you feel safe now with a gun, or with body armor?

[WordShaker]

Originally Posted by SaintessHeart

Regarding the part about guns, I think banning firearms totally is a bad idea.

With so many drug cartels and illegal firearms circulating due to the availability and (declining) international usage of the USD, you can't rely on your local police armed with 9mm's and .45 ACP's to beat a nut with illegal military grade body armor and home-mod assault rifles.

Buy a .50 cal pistol, which is not police-issued, and you might stand a chance. Otherwise, you might want to kevlar plate your walls and install bullet-proof glass.

P.S It has been proven that regular kevlar helmets with ceramic plates installed can barely stop a swiss-army knife being thrown at 20m by an angry madman. Do you feel safe now with a gun, or with body armor?

Not to start a huge gun control debate, but I have a hard time believing that said nut would be able to own the rifles to mod in the first place. Where would they get them? I mean, many illegal guns within our continental neighbors have their origins in the US. I imagine it'd be hard for just any nut to find a firearm, you know?

[Anh_Minh]

Originally Posted by SaintessHeart

Regarding the part about guns, I think banning firearms totally is a bad idea.

With so many drug cartels and illegal firearms circulating due to the availability and (declining) international usage of the USD, you can't rely on your local police armed with 9mm's and .45 ACP's to beat a nut with illegal military grade body armor and home-mod assault rifles.

Buy a .50 cal pistol, which is not police-issued, and you might stand a chance. Otherwise, you might want to kevlar plate your walls and install bullet-proof glass.

P.S It has been proven that regular kevlar helmets with ceramic plates installed can barely stop a swiss-army knife being thrown at 20m by an angry madman. Do you feel safe now with a gun, or with body armor?

... What are you saying? That policemen should buy their own big guns? (Instead of having rifles, which are more powerful anyway...) That everyone should go out in armor and heavily armed, and fortify their homes?

[Irenicus]

Originally Posted by SaintessHeart

Regarding the part about guns, I think banning firearms totally is a bad idea.

With so many drug cartels and illegal firearms circulating due to the availability and (declining) international usage of the USD, you can't rely on your local police armed with 9mm's and .45 ACP's to beat a nut with illegal military grade body armor and home-mod assault rifles.

Buy a .50 cal pistol, which is not police-issued, and you might stand a chance. Otherwise, you might want to kevlar plate your walls and install bullet-proof glass.

P.S It has been proven that regular kevlar helmets with ceramic plates installed can barely stop a swiss-army knife being thrown at 20m by an angry madman. Do you feel safe now with a gun, or with body armor?

Query: are you serious, master?

[SaintessHeart]

Originally Posted by Anh_Minh

... What are you saying? That policemen should buy their own big guns? (Instead of having rifles, which are more powerful anyway...) That everyone should go out in armor and heavily armed, and fortify their homes?

That would be an extreme view. To clear this up, what I simply meant was, if there is no policeman around, what are you going to protect yourself with against a nut with a gun?

[Ansalem]

Originally Posted by SaintessHeart

That would be an extreme view. To clear this up, what I simply meant was, if there is no policeman around, what are you going to protect yourself with against a nut with a gun?

They've recently instated this new system where you can use a phone and contact emergency services, and they'll actually send the police to you! Quite novel imo.

[JMvS]

The thing about firearms is that them being widely available does not equate necessarily with higher gunshot casualties.

Like in my country, where we probably have more firearms in circulation per inhabitants than everywhere, and where every male citizen is given his very own military assault rifle (some starting as early as 16), we even used to receive a can of rounds with it, but even if this latter measure was canceled recently, we still do our yearly mandatory shooting practice, where procuring ammunition is easy (and anyway those are obtainable in every weapon shop).

Yet "despite" such large availability for the common citizen, our country is one of the safest in the world, most firearms casualties being suicides (which are the major fuel for those who advocate restriction).

[SaintessHeart]

Originally Posted by JMvS

The thing about firearms is that them being widely available does not equate necessarily with higher gunshot casualties.

Like in my country, where we probably have more firearms in circulation per inhabitants than everywhere, and where every male citizen is given his very own military assault rifle (some starting as early as 16), we even used to receive a can of rounds with it, but even if this latter measure was canceled recently, we still do our yearly mandatory shooting practice, where procuring ammunition is easy (and anyway those are obtainable in every weapon shop).

Yet "despite" such large availability for the common citizen, our country is one of the safest in the world, most firearms casualties being suicides (which are the major fuel for those who advocate restriction).

I guess that will equate to personal responsibility. It is quite funny that, at Switzerland, gun ownership is indeed higher than US but there are less gun crimes.

[Ansalem]

Originally Posted by SaintessHeart

I guess that will equate to personal responsibility. It is quite funny that, at Switzerland, gun ownership is indeed higher than US but there are less gun crimes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...ted_death_rate

Even though Switzerland has less gun deaths than the US, they are still near the top of the list. Compared to countries at the bottom which generally have very strict gun control for non-military use. (Japan, South Korea, England)

Edit: I realize that you said crime whereas I linked stats for deaths. I suppose that list is somewhat dependent on whether or not you consider suicide a crime.

[WordShaker]

Originally Posted by JMvS

*snip*

This might seem odd, seeing as I'm not actually part of that country, but eh.

Despite the large number of firearms in Switzerland, aren't the gun control measures far stricter than it generally is in the States? Far as I know, a permit, a clean bill of mental health, and a blank criminal record are all necessary to purchase a firearm. However, getting a permit in the first place requires demonstrating that you're knowledgeable about gun use and gun laws before you can actually apply for the permit. Even then, the permit limits the number of guns an individual can buy. Military rifles are similarly kept under lock and key in the home, etcetera and so forth.

To my knowledge, the US doesn't come close to this amount of regulation, high gun ownership numbers or not.

ETA: Upon further digging, the rate of firearms ownership in Switzerland is 46 to every 100 citizens, as compared to a rate of 90 for every 100 citizens in the United States. Add in the fact that many people own multiple guns, and the percentage of gun owners to the total population in Switzerland might not be all that high.

[yezhanquan]

On gun issues, I believe there is a need for people living in rural areas to have their own firearms. Help may not come in time, given the distance involved. Now, in urban areas, there really is no business for civilians to hold firearms. Not every criminal will get the chance to hold military-grade equipment.

[Anh_Minh]

Originally Posted by SaintessHeart

That would be an extreme view. To clear this up, what I simply meant was, if there is no policeman around, what are you going to protect yourself with against a nut with a gun?

Not much of an issue. And even if it was, I doubt a .50 would be the weapon for me.