Manofnofaith wrote:Okay. About this:
RPizzle wrote:As far as powers...I do not believe that the President should have any power to send troops without Congressional authority.
1) What if there's a quickly developing military situation and Congress is out of session? And even if they were to be assembled, couldn't the debates take a long time if there was a particularly fast-moving situation that was changing hourly?
I indeed screwed up by using an absolute. I really don't know how to respond to this though, because Bush basically started an entire war on his own by using the temporary Presidential action, then Congress followed suit. I'd say at the very least have an on call committee which must authorize any temporary action. This question would require significantly more pondering though.[/quote]
2) What do you think of other mostly modern and responsible countries having good, technologically advanced and extensive military forces, so that they can deal with things like failed states, sort out civil wars, and perform regional defense?
Honestly, I'm not really big into unilaterally stepping into others' affairs. I believe that a military is necessary for the protection of an individual nation. This would likely extend to the UN as their mission is generally peacekeeping. This does bring up a large question of areas like Sudan, Myanmar, and other countries/regions which are killing their own people. I do not claim to have a way to fix this without starting additional wars across the globe, so I must be inclined to say that the people must rise up on their own. This is not a 'good' solution by any means to me.
3) Will civilization survive this century better off, or are we basically fucked?
This is actually a difficult question. I have very serious reservations about the spread of Radical Islam and its increasing militancy. In fact, I would say that my personal concerns align well with Hitchens viewpoint, without being a War Hawk. I don't see a resolution in the near future, but I also doubt that anyone is going to be willing to press the button. However, I don't know how much I really worry about this, because in that case I'll probably be dead, and whatever is left of humanity will be back in the stone age. In reality, I'd say survive is more probable, but that fucked is very close behind.
4) What do you think of a world government; and if you think it's a bad thing, then how else could we sort out international issues where everyone is passing the ball and no-one's really taking responsibility for?
A world government is a very pretty idea. However, it is just that, wishful thinking. This would simply end up as the largest cliques trying to vie control from each other. I do wish I were more idealistic, but any government has flaws; many governments combined would simply compound that issue.
I guess maybe my sample size is too small.
WHAT? Chess is the best game in history, and the fact that you write it off as boring means that the one you mention probably isn't any good and is about as entertaining as pokemon. I'll try to remember it for the "don't bother" list that I carry in memory. 
