'India Left Successfully Rejects US, Keeps India Sovereign'

[zubin]

[indian_blues]

u have to loose something to gain something.

[zubin]

yeah, participating in currupt politics and preventing inevitable human progress is a gain

[indian_blues]

lol got hot dude? i didnt said we did right.. did i? this is inevitable from our point of view. We are people of 1 billion we can't afford to depend on energy resources from other countries and we badly needed to avoid the isolation in nuclear technology.... yeah we are selfish i know that but to save the same human progress.

[zubin]

I'm sympathezing with your reasoning: it's due to practical circumstances. I'm simply stating that this mode of interaction is not a gain for anyone. It's in fact the prevention for anyone in the world to really gain, as gain can only come through justice. Justice is the last resort, its the only thing left. That's the only thing that can save this planet, and everyone understands it: its practical. Its that justice is being completely distracted with these very interactions. I'm not blaming India. In fact, to me its clear that the essence of Indian culture is heavily pressured and undermined due to the depraved international political order. I solely want to lay emphasis on the very idea of gain, and though in one sense it might make sense, I think the international context justifies abhorrance of the interaction. I wouldn't say its a "necessary evil" in order to make sense of the idea of gain. In other words, the gain is also a loss.

Anyway, this wasn't to hound on your comment. Its just a discussion. My purpose of posting this was to discuss the depravaty of the situation, get the elephant out the room so to speak. Speaking of elephants... Hari, do you have any elephant stories? India is known for their elephants, and I love elephants. Can you adopt a baby elephant in India?

Cheers,

Ramin

[indian_blues]

Ramin its nice to know that you that u like elephants i too love it... Gentle Giant's ... i don't think a individual can adopt an elephant these days.... and i don't remember any elephant stories as of now.

back to topic... yes u r right with general aspects of current politics... but can u tell me when the golden age existed where depravation doesn't existed in politics? .... politics gives power... always human tendency is to abuse power. the so called Good World never going to come forever .... well started to believe "Strongest will survive".

[zubin]

Ramin its nice to know that you that u like elephants i too love it... Gentle Giant's ... i don't think a individual can adopt an elephant these days.... and i don't remember any elephant stories as of now.

back to topic... yes u r right with general aspects of current politics... but can u tell me when the golden age existed where depravation doesn't existed in politics? .... politics gives power... always human tendency is to abuse power. the so called Good World never going to come forever .... well started to believe "Strongest will survive".

past doesn't predict the future. conditions change, and there is no single "human nature". there's the basic starting point with the fallacy of that arguments. In fact, conditions show that currently there is a bigger interest is getting things right, through logic and honestly, as THAT seems to be the greatest natural commodity right now. People want results, answers, they want to trust others, speak honestly and logically. The "market" is there, and curruption is out-dated. That's the idea.

[zubin]

or should I say that's the fact?

[indian_blues]

i really contradict what you said sir. i don't see that situations are changing really. Maybe past doesn't predict future but it taught lots of lesson, but im afraid that we are bad students. Yes people want answers but which people you are talking abt... i will take them as poor and helpless one's who cant make changes... they always want answers but they never got what they wanted... they dont have the power of decision making. sorry to say this even though im not a pessimist the future is pathetic.

well i will welcome if u present your facts.

[zubin]

facts and logic together. The fact is that once human beings are done exploring the earth, they can't run and hide or kill each other as easily. The only place left to explore is under water, but humans can't live underwater. So they're forced to get along, and it benefits everyone.

The basic, very self-evident logic here is first that the past doesn't predict the future, second that current conditions are unique in comparison to any other time in history.

The more difficult thing is to see cultural progress coming out of current conditions, and this is where you're having problems. I agree: it could go either way. The world may get involved in a nuclear war and sustain abject poverty. But that's not the point... The point is that first, it is not necessariliy so. Second, it is in our hands to prevent this from happening. If you accept the basic idea of a market force, then you will agree that if "peace" is "hot", then that is what will be bought. It is up to us to make peace hot.

But to make this argument convincing, there is one more fact (and a couple of cousin facts) that need to be stated. But it seals the deal. They are: 1) people do not have a negative human nature by design. Why? Because people are capable of being good or bad, again depending on what's hot for them. 2) People benefit from peace, cooperation, honesty and justice. Only a minority of people "lose", but even they win... This establishes that peace, cooperation, honesty and justice are easily marketable and capable of being hot. 3) These things are already expressed and exposed. Its the tipping point: Which way will it go? It could go either way, so the idea is to strengthen the way that is better for everyone instead of strengthening that way that everyone will regret. People are doing this already and its a very strong force in the world right now, and likely to expand to prevent war, etc.

So my claim is that: There is the likelihood for a just, honest, cooperative and peaceful global order.

It is proven by the chain in logic from the following facts:

1) People are not good or bad by "nature"
2) Past conditions enabled benefits through conquering and exploration
3) In current conditions, due to the exhausting of space, the retaliative force of individuals and societies, and the importance of reputation for long term sustainability of power and trust, it benefits everyone, and most people don't lose anything at all, for peace and cooperation
4) This benefit is something that is already argued and is a strong force, in addition working with human logic, sense of morality, and sense of regret
5) Conclusion: It can be made stronger and cause a tipping point from the point of no return

As you can see, the argument is valid. It follows from the premises that the conclusion is true. You'll notice that the conclusion isn't absolute however: "It can be made...".

So if you disagree with the conclusion, you'll have to tell me which premise your disagree with.

[indian_blues]

"The condition of man is already close to satiety and arrogance, and there is danger of destruction of everything in existence."

- a Brahmin to Onesicritus, 327 BC, reported in Strabo's Geography

ok you are optimistic and I'm pessimistic on this thread.

facts and logic together. The fact is that once human beings are done exploring the earth, they can't run and hide or kill each other as easily. The only place left to explore is under water, but humans can't live underwater. So they're forced to get along, and it benefits everyone.

Fact is nearly 99% of earth is been explored and exploited. I don't think human race will extinct by themselves BUT there is enough difference exist between them to send themselves to the verge of extinction. I believe surely they gonna destroy everything they have.

The basic, very self-evident logic here is first that the past doesn't predict the future, second that current conditions are unique in comparison to any other time in history.

you are horribly wrong. how come u can say that the current conditions are unique, i don't think so. Russian nuclear arms can destroy the face of earth for nearly 200 times. Do u think this existed hundred years before? Did Nuclear Holocust word existed in Alexander, Napolean period? surely past wars could inflicted big damage to the human population but in future big scale wars surely gonna "BOOM OUR EARTH".

1) people do not have a negative human nature by design. Why? Because people are capable of being good or bad, again depending on what's hot for them.

2) People benefit from peace, cooperation, honesty and justice. Only a minority of people "lose", but even they win... This establishes that peace, cooperation, honesty and justice are easily marketable and capable of being hot.

3) These things are already expressed and exposed. Its the tipping point: Which way will it go? It could go either way, so the idea is to strengthen the way that is better for everyone instead of strengthening that way that everyone will regret. People are doing this already and its a very strong force in the world right now, and likely to expand to prevent war, etc.

"Human basically is an Animal"

If human is an animal the strongest will survive. Yes its easy to be positive than negative for us but think the negative thinkers have dangerous weapons than positive ones. Do you know how Red indians extincted from america? do u know the numbers of jews killed in the hands of hitler? do u know how many animals and birds are added in the extinction list every year? I'm not too pessimistic but this is reality if we want to survive we have to make sacrifices.... these are sacrifices.

So my claim is that: There is the likelihood for a just, honest, cooperative and peaceful global order.

this is day dream.

1) People are not good or bad by "nature"
2) Past conditions enabled benefits through conquering and exploration
3) In current conditions, due to the exhausting of space, the retaliative force of individuals and societies, and the importance of reputation for long term sustainability of power and trust, it benefits everyone, and most people don't lose anything at all, for peace and cooperation
4) This benefit is something that is already argued and is a strong force, in addition working with human logic, sense of morality, and sense of regret
5) Conclusion: It can be made stronger and cause a tipping point from the point of no return

I agree with first point but they will do anything for their survival for their particular community, race, nation, religion, race and blah blah differences.

yes due to space exhaustion people are forced to live together, just think different kind of people living in a house where food and energy resources in the verge of extinction...its going to be pathetic for them.

you want to be an angel... i dont want to be a devil but an human who is realistic.

[indian_blues]

Ramin i think u love seeing this video.

Charlie Chaplin in the Great dictator

yes we get emotional seeing it but in reality it sounds too absurd isnt?

[mike435]

wow man if he thogh that thene what would he say now

a good complimant to that is
a song by john lenin
were he says
what it would be if there weere no boarders
no relligion
no nationalisom
it was a very popular song

thanks very mch
i had no idea he spoke in any of the movie nice to finaly put a voice on the image i am going to post some stuff about it intresting person
why did he get deported

[zubin]

[B]

ok you are optimistic and I'm pessimistic on this thread.

What do you mean by "optimist"?

you are horribly wrong. how come u can say that the current conditions are unique, i don't think so. Russian nuclear arms can destroy the face of earth for nearly 200 times. Do u think this existed hundred years before? Did Nuclear Holocust word existed in Alexander, Napolean period? surely past wars could inflicted big damage to the human population but in future big scale wars surely gonna "BOOM OUR EARTH".

do you know what unique means?

this is day dream.

This makes no argument as to the reality of the situation.

I agree with first point but they will do anything for their survival for their particular community, race, nation, religion, race and blah blah differences.

yes due to space exhaustion people are forced to live together, just think different kind of people living in a house where food and energy resources in the verge of extinction...its going to be pathetic for them.

Stick to the argument. The validity of an argument is proof of the argument if the premises are correct. You agree with the first point. You don't agree with the next ones? You're saying that sharing food and energy resources does not benefit people or that it does, but people are irrational?

you want to be an angel... i dont want to be a devil but an human who is realistic.

I want to be an angel??? how am I being an "angel"?

[indian_blues]

What do you mean by "optimist"?

A person disposed to take a favourable view of things is an optimist.

do you know what unique means?

I want to be an angel??? how am I being an "angel"?

I seen a white ring above ur head.

i still stick with my view the future doesn't look positive for humans.