political question

there is a very uneasy peace betwen both countries. since independence there have been three wars between them. even when not officialy at war there was constant shooting at the disputed border region of Kashmir. with the recent earthquake there has been a increasing coopertion between India an Pakistan. there is however no reason to believe that the tensions have disappeared. it would be quite easy for a government to stir up nationalist furvor to draw attention away from domestic issues, however with both counties now being acknoleged nuclear powers, a war between both countries would definitely not be in their best interests. as long as the leaderships in both countries recognize this a major war between them should not occur.

twist wrote:

pakistan jordan iraq iran

With the exception of Jordan these are all powder keg nations. I am suprised Pakistan has lasted this long without a revolution. I still would not want to live in any of those nations except maybe Jordan. I'll take the strip clubs and no Santa or Jesus in schools.

well in Pakistan there was a military coup not that long ago. the current government there is still closely allied to the military, just precicly to prevent any sort of revolution. the government there has a hard time on keeping a lid on the revolutionaries there, so who knows what will happen there in the future, but given what happened in Afgahnistan, a revolution in Pakistan is currently very unlikely.

twist wrote: India: The world's largest democracy that the the US ignored for years. I think both nations believe that a war between them would be very counterproductive.

sometimes they feel this way. my friend fiona wrote her PhD thesis on the threat of a nuclear war between india and pakistan and she believes that they will go at it someday unless the kashmir issue is decided soon. i believe this is one case where a nuclear war can remain tactical--probably the only case because i doubt the other nuclear powers will dare risk global nuclear war over these two nations. and there's nothing the IAEA can do as neither india nor pakistan is a party to the NPT.

AgentWood wrote:

twist wrote: India: The world's largest democracy that the the US ignored for years. I think both nations believe that a war between them would be very counterproductive.

sometimes they feel this way. my friend fiona wrote her PhD thesis on the threat of a nuclear war between india and pakistan and she believes that they will go at it someday unless the kashmir issue is decided soon. i believe this is one case where a nuclear war can remain tactical--probably the only case because i doubt the other nuclear powers will dare risk global nuclear war over these two nations. and there's nothing the IAEA can do as neither india nor pakistan is a party to the NPT.

i just hope that it doesn't come to a nuclear war between india and pakistan, and that the nuclear weapons they have exist purely for deterrence purposes. i e to prevent a war between them. however now that they have them, if there should be a war, the temptation to go nuclear would be huge.

Gnu Odor wrote:

404 error wrote: The US seems to be run by a coalition of rich plutocrats and not-so-rich Christian fundies. The former get to enrich themselves and benefit from the ever-increasing economic inequality, while the latter get to beat up gays, women who want abortions and anyone who propounds evolution.

I must say I'm intrigued to see how long this can last. The two groups interests aren't ultimately compatible it seems to me.

How can one have a modern scientific nation, and so maximise profits, while banning teaching of evolution?

For the benefit of, well Campo, who thinks I'm typing this in chains from a government prison:

"Beating up gays?" Is that a slang term for "not passing a national amendment to the Constitution to force states to recognize other states' same-sex marriages?" When I was a kid, beating up gays meant beating up gays.

And "banning the teaching of evolution?" WTF, man! That is not in play anywhere. What is being fought in Dover, Pennsylvania is an attempt to include "Intelligent Design" in classrooms alongside teaching of evolution. Is that a ban? Shit, that's just what the rest of the world needs to hear.

And before you get your panties in a bunch, I'm an atheist, I Darwin and think ID is bullshit. But let's be honest about what's actually happening.

For someone who's not a bible-basher you seem fond of literal readings! Obviously I meant it metaphorically, as in politically beating up...perhaps I should have said 'beating up on'? Though when it comes to folk like that preacher who used to hang round the site of Matthew Shepard's murder with a placard declaring he was 'burning in hell' and got what he 'deserved', it may apply literally.

Denying gays equivalent rights to heteros (including pre-emptively banning anti-discrimination laws) qualifies as 'beating up' metaphorically at least.

I'm not aiming this at you personally but it is a fact that a portion of the Republican electoral base are folk who would have homosexuality, abortion and the teaching of evolution banned. The fact that they haven't suceeded in getting their agenda implented is beside the point, or maybe it is the whole point, that those who are using them for electoral support daren't risk giving them too much because their interests aren't ultimately compatible.

And the current ID controversy is hardly the whole story about evolution in the education system, as I'm sure you know.

e.g. a quick google turns up this from the Observer:

"In 1999 Kansas Board of Education voted to block mention of Darwin in its schools but members were voted out and their anti-evolution policy was reversed.

But creationists have been quietly notching up a series of victories elsewhere. The Scientific American survey by Lawrence Lerner, of California State University, shows that in northern states such as Illinois, Ohio and Wisconsin creationism has taken a powerful grip on education at local level, despite each state's strong liberal tradition. Ohio is considering banning evolution teaching, and even New York and Massachusetts are turning against evolution."