Do you think in 50 years that...

1. Drugs legislation will be overhauled? (as in partial/mass legalisation)

2. The fossil fuel crisis will be solved?

3. The way Israel is treated in the international, non-arab, community will be changed?

4. America will still be the world's leading superpower?

The answer to all four questions is JEWS.

1: Partial legalisation. Drugs that really fuck you up like heroine and meth will still be illegal, while largely inconsequential drugs like marijuana and LSD will be legal and highly regulated.
2: Peak coal is over 100 years away, peak oil will make us poorer but the sky won't fall. 3rd world countries will have to stop overpopulating if they want to survive this.
3: I don't have a clue. Most likely Israel will still be a round and the middle east will be a little more open as it economically develops, though it's also possible some event will destabilise the entire region in the next 50 years, possibly aggravated by peak oil.
4: A 1st world China would in theory be more powerful than America, though peak oil will probably stunt their industrial growth and America has more space for population growth. America will probably still be at the #1 spot, especially if the NAU goes through, with Europe and China will be close behind and Russia still swinging it's dick around in the background.

>>3
Do you support mass legalisation?

>>4
I don't get why people who smoke weed think heroine should be legal aswell. Do you even realise how fucking retarded that argument is and how much it hurts your attempts to legalise cannabis?

>>5
1. I never said I wanted to legalize weed.
2. I never said I smoke weed.
2. Instead of calling the argument ``reatarded'' why don't you actually refute it?

1.) Partial legalization with heavy regulation.  This might have the side effect of emptying the prisons a bit.
2.) No.  Hopefully the U.S. big coal and big oil lobbies will have been defeated, however, and we'll be gearing up with nuclear power and electric cars.  The developing world is fucked.
3.) Yes, but ascendant China, recovering Russia, and the competent EU will all command the respect people like President Chimp weren't keen on giving.

I'm gunna go with probably, not likely, keep dreaming and fat chance.

>>6
Keep huffing that pot, hippy.

>>9
He could have a libertarian view on weed and illicit drugs in general. I personally find the stuff repugnant, but I feel that people have the right and the liberty to consume and/or put whatever they like and they are responsible for their own body.

>>10

>>6 here, you have echoed my views entirely.

>>10
>>11
So you admit you believe all drugs should be legal, thereby proving my prejudgement was right.

>>12
Yet again I have never said I want weed legalized. My view is somewhat more complex than that. And you called me a pot huffing hippy. I dont smoke weed. So instead commenting on people comment on the arguments.

>>12
(>>10 here)
So you admit you believe all drugs should be legal
That should be left up to the individual states. The Federal government should be out of it completely IMO. The drug war is largely a failure more or less. Though in my personal view, distributing drugs should still be considered an illegal thing to do, though if someone is doing drugs behind closed doors and not hurting or bothering anybody else, then I couldn't care less about it.

thereby proving my prejudgement was right.
No. I've already stated that I find that stuff more or less repugnant, and I don't do drugs myself. Hell, I barely even drink alcohol. Of course you can believe whatever you want to believe.

Humans are going to destroy the surface of the Earth within fifty years. My prediction for World War 3 is biological and weather weapon destruction of the main landmass, with the elite abandoning the America's post-war.

If somehow, America maintains control of anything similar to this system:
1) Weed will never be legal, everything else will. This is because cannabis cannot kill you, and is the greatest plant on the face of the Earth.
2) No, it is in the interst of the current system to make everything as expensive as possible. This will allow for a better control grid.
3) Unless a religious schism occurs, what else could happen?
4) Within fifty years, at its current pace, China will absolutely dominate.

>>15
Wat, China's growth rates are due to it closing the technology gap, even under ideal circumstances it will slow down as it's gdp per capita approaches 1st world. In reality it's economy will be hit hard by peak oil and a government that is very large, very determined and very informed about the plight of other authoritarian regimes as they have to appease a growing middle class.

>>16
I can't understand you.

>>17
What's so difficult to understand about "closing the technology gap"? Are you fucking dense?

>>18
No you speak like a retard.

>>19
Why? Because I said "wat"? Cry me a river.

bump past spam

Just want to make a comment on 1.

Heroin was first produced commercially in Germany a century ago as a substitute for morphine in pain relief and also used to help chronic alcoholics and insomniacs. It is highly addictive and while the drug itself does not cause inevitable mental or physical deterioration, the user is subject to host of associated problems. In the early 1970s we followed the US and introduced the failed methods of prohibition, treating a medical and sociological problem as a legal one. We were misled into believing that heroin addiction is curable and within the control of a user who sincerely wants to change. We should revisit our traditional system of heroin maintenance since the psychological and physiological imperatives of addiction rule out the idea of a 'drug free' world.

>>22
So we should execute anyone associated with providing heroine for the purposes of causing people to become addicted to it?

>>23
Well, that wouldn't really work either. It would make an example out of them, but then we might as well become a totalitarian regime.

>>24
Not really, many democracies execute people with no ill political effects.

>>25
Well, so called "terrorists" that "hate our freedom" *rolls eyes*. Heh, if we're now a totalitarian regime, we're doing a shitty job of being one.

1.Yes.
 Weed will be decriminalized on a nationwide scale within the next ten years. It will be regulated and taxed just like tobacco and be under ATF domain. Other drugs may be decriminalized in small amounts, although personally I think we'll be lucky enough to get weed and that's good enough for me.
2.Yes.
I'll give this one fifty to sixty years. As soon as the international community can come to an agreement on climate change and set global standards for emissions and environmental safeguards we'll finally be on the right track. The rich countries would also have to agree to pay some kind of reparations to developing countries for the damage they caused them from past pollution and both developed and developing countries would have to agree to adhere to these standards and punish those who do not. Also, while however painful these may be, there should be a tax levied on the consumption of oil, natural gas, coal, gasoline, and any other kind of fuel that when burned has the potential to cause pollution. This kind of self-imposed economic sanction will drive the development of more sustainable forms of energy, which when developed will put an end to the "oil crisis".
3.Yes.
If Israel wants the continued support of it's American and European allies and the respect of it's neighbors in the Middle East it will have to make peace with Palestine and agree to a two-state policy with a shared Jerusalem.That would mean no more new settlement building that encroaches upon Palestinian communities and agreeing to let Palestine be an autonomous state separate from Israel. It would also help if Israel were a little more secular, because it seems that the only thing standing in the way of peace talks now are the Jewish fundamentalist in power.
4.Yes, hopefully.
I say yes, because I think America is the most competent and has the most capacity economically, the most expertise security wise, and at least sixty years worth of experience of leading the world of states. Two necessary elements super power wise.
I say hopefully, because I fear that the EU or China would not be very capable superpowers. I feel the EU is too divided and meek to steer the course of international relations. I feel that should conflict ever break out somewhere they would bicker about what to do and by the time they arrive at a decision it would be two little to late. The countries in the EU have too many differing opinions on how to govern that a consensus would be hard to build. China, I fear, would be the exact opposite. They seem to have a tendency to micromanage everything that falls under their domain. They would make no concessions to other countries and try to remake the rules in their favor. It seems to be their habit thus far. They would make enemies quick and further embitter East/West relations, which helps no one.

>>16 btw, i do agree with your theory on China, so I don't think we have much to worry about from them

63