Asian freedom alliance

[wade]

What was that method again? Scout's honor?

You can't read? Hmmm....

I said what we need to do is impliment sanctions against offenders. But we need to take it a step further than has been done in the past. We need to not only sanction offenders but also those who do not uphold the sanctions. It is the latter which gives the whole thing teeth - but we have to accept that it will entail a little pain on our parts to make it work.

Wade.

 

[wade]

We have gone off topic, we went from a strategy to stop china, to how bad our own economy is, to how facist zhukov is(im not sayin ur a facist). lets assume for arguments sake that chinas economy is too strong, or somthing like that, we cant stop them economically. we have to intimidate them through a military alliance. Lets press the issue!

Zhukov is a self-proclaimed fascist. I didn't call him that, he called himself that in another thread.

Wade.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

You can't read? Hmmm....

I said what we need to do is impliment sanctions against offenders. But we need to take it a step further than has been done in the past. We need to not only sanction offenders but also those who do not uphold the sanctions. It is the latter which gives the whole thing teeth - but we have to accept that it will entail a little pain on our parts to make it work.

Wade.

So. Enforced by the U.N? Make it plain, Socrates.


Layers of useless sanctions are still useless, oh sage one.

 

[wade]

So. Enforced by the U.N? Make it plain, Socrates.

Layers of useless sanctions are still useless, oh sage one.

No, all it takes is getting the right few nations in line. The UN could only be utilized if it is totally revamped - which may happen to some degree given the oil-for-food scandal, but probably not enough.

What has to happen is the USA, Japan, Britian, and a few other nations need to agree on this policy. They need to agree to sanction anyone who does not abide by it, and they need to agree to sanction anyone who does not abide by the sanctions. A "you're either with us or against us" policy.

Exactly how it would be structured -- that is too complex an issue for a message board like this. It is the principal I'm getting at here. Set some world labor and environmental standards and require nations doing business with the West to abide by them - or don't do buisness with those countries.

What is your solution? Just ignore the fact that children are working 18 hours a day 7 days a week for next to nothing so you can wear cheap Nike's and the very few can get very rich? Just ignore the negative impact on our economy, the environment, and human rights in general?

Wade.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

No, all it takes is getting the right few nations in line.

Like a coalition of the willing?

The UN could only be utilized if it is totally revamped - which may happen to some degree given the oil-for-food scandal, but probably not enough.

Right. I'll stick with NOT.

What has to happen is the USA, Japan, Britian, and a few other nations need to agree on this policy.

The "do the right thing" policy? Spike Lee is gonna sue your ass.

They need to agree to sanction anyone who does not abide by it, and they need to agree to sanction anyone who does not abide by the sanctions.

Enforced militarily? What about "world outrage"?

A "you're either with us or against us" policy.

We got ourselves another neocon, maw.

Exactly how it would be structured -- that is too complex an issue for a message board like this. It is the principal I'm getting at here.

Henceforth to be known as the Kum Bah Yah principle?

Set some world labor and environmental standards and require nations doing business with the West to abide by them - or don't do buisness with those countries.

Yep, that's a sanction.

What is your solution? Just ignore the fact that children are working 18 hours a day 7 days a week for next to nothing so you can wear cheap Nike's and the very few can get very rich? Just ignore the negative impact on our economy, the environment, and human rights in general?

Wade.

You forgot about my torturing bunnies and kidnapping Santa proposal.

 

[Zhukov]

I will no longer be repling to your posts.

Sounds good.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

You can't read? Hmmm....

I said what we need to do is impliment sanctions against offenders. But we need to take it a step further than has been done in the past. We need to not only sanction offenders but also those who do not uphold the sanctions. It is the latter which gives the whole thing teeth - but we have to accept that it will entail a little pain on our parts to make it work.

Wade.

You antiamericans love toothless sanctions. Layers of useless sanctions. It's like useless sanction lasagna.

 

[wade]

You really are an idiot aren't you RWA? When you cannot come up with a counter argument - just insult the other party by calling them "anti-american".

Am I'm gonna have to write you off too.

Wade.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

You really are an idiot aren't you RWA? When you cannot come up with a counter argument - just insult the other party by calling them "anti-american".

Am I'm gonna have to write you off too.

Wade.

You are an antiamerican. But my post had more substance than that. You seem to favor a toothless sanction lasagna (layers of unenforced sanctions). That's the meat of my criticism. Can you deal with it?