You are wrong ybgirp

Most other small South and Central Pacific Island nations and territories, which importantly have Never had Nuclear Tests, heavily depend on foreign aid. They also rely on their younger, more educated workers travelling to such places as NZ and the US and then remitting money back to their islands.

The Marshalls would still rely on aid and remittances nuclear tests or not.

THE MARSHALLS HAVE IT BETTER THAN MOST

In addition to sizable US aid and remittances the US has a base on the Marshalls that is a big money earner for Marshallese.

* Note: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marshall_Islands#Foreign_assistance :

US government assistance is the mainstay of the economy. Under terms of the Amended Compact of Free Association, the U.S. is committed to provide US$57.7 million per year in assistance to the Marshall Islands (RMI) through 2013, and then US$62.7 million through 2023, at which time a trust fund, made up of U.S. and RMI contributions, will begin perpetual annual payouts.

The US Army maintains the Ronald Reagan Ballistic Missile Defense Test Site on Kwajalein Atoll. Marshallese land owners receive rent for the base, and a large number of Marshallese work there.

CONCLUSION

The whole matter of the article looks like an opportunistic attempted court case in which the highly dependent aid recipients, Marshall Islands, will embarrass even more aid out of the US.* This is the settle out of court method.

It would be interesting to know what percentage of lawyers representing the Marshall Islands are actually Marshallese. I venture that they are mainly US lawyers looking to pad out their career reputations and get piece of the the actions from the US Treasury (converting from pro bono to fee status).

I don't think the Marshallese are really expecting any country other than the US to pay up.

Plantagenet, I realise you are writing about the present situation, and it is irritating to consider historical reasons for this, however it is instructive to see that actions have consequences. You are correct in stating that "most other small South and Central Pacific Island nations and territories, which importantly have Never had Nuclear Tests, heavily depend on foreign aid. They also rely on their younger, more educated workers travelling to such places as NZ and the US and then remitting money back to their islands." This is a direct result of the invasion and occupation by Europeans, with predictable social upheaval. War, which is an evolutionary imperative for humans, is the direct cause of all the problems that now face us, including the rise in so-called terrorism. Destroy a country and you'll get retribution. A physical response is impossible for tiny island states, but good luck to them in their quest for economic redress...they have little of use left of their former homelands.

ybgirp

I said there were no major world wars.

You misrepresented me as saying there were no wars.

I told you to read what I wrote.

You misrepresented me as saying there were no major wars.

Grow up. If you want to discuss it, then stop misrepresenting me at every turn. And if you think, to quote your example, that the war in Bosnia in 1998 qualifies as a "major world war" compared with the first or second world wars, then there's nothing to talk about.

Yes any war is major for those who are in it. Yes I agree with you about American military imperialism. However my point is only that, without nuclear weapons, it is possible and even probable that the major powers of the world would have been up to more of the kinds of wars of which WWI and WWII were examples, which would have been much more destructive given that they haven't actually warred with nuclear weapons since 1945.

The relevance of statism is that if one thinks giving more power to the state is the solution to the problem, it's no advance on the original problem.

G'day ybgirp

Yes certainly the islanders all over the Pacific should have been quarantined from the big bad civilised world.

This includes the Maoris in New Zealand.

Ship's passing these islands since the 1500s http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferdinand_Magellan should have magically just kept on going.

The islanders could continue to live on sweet potato, rats and fish - dying at the hunter-gatherer age of 40.

Cheers

Thanks JK.J I apologise for irritating you.
My point, Plantagenet, was that because of the way the pacific islands were colonised they deserve compensation. It isn't necessary to destroy cultures in order to trade with them.

I began reading ybgirp's post and it began...

"J K J. The U.S.A has been at war with the world for over a century,"

Another loony tune. I stopped reading.