Talk:Rogue state

message: "Rogue state is a controversial term applied by some international theorists to states they consider threatening to the world's peace."
Well, I live in Europe in the free world, while you Americans are a retarded and manipulated nation promoting capital punishment and torture. America perfectly well fits into this definition, no other nation has started more illegal wars than the USA during the last 50 years. May I ask a question: why does a government create such a term, a government, which is by most civilized and democatic countries (e.g. Canada, France, South Africa, New Zealand) considered to be the worst threat to world peace in our times?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.193.74.251 (talk) 14:15, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Definition

message: We should address how the term rogue state is used in fiction also, not just about the US's use of it.  This also digresses somewhat into talk about the US outside of the scope of rogue state... also, is there anyway to reference when presidents have called what states rogue when? because I don't think Iraq is considered a rogue state by the government now... gren 07:00, 31 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Official criticism of any subject covered by Wikipedia should and must be provided, especially when it is made by well-known authors in published articles or books. If there is any praise or counter-criticism, it should be provided too. We're building a wiki not a propaganda part; too bad if there is a truckload of criticism associated to a concept. It's not about balancing ideas, but about a fair representation of reality. If we ever have to weight the pros and cons of a term such as "Rogue State", then a quantitative analysis of the first 100 references returned by google could be considered fair enough. The best reference could be the Vietnam War: protests were widely covered by the medias, and thus, the subject itself is often dwarfed by its criticism. Hugo Dufort 06:27, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stuff 

message: The map is complicated because more than a handful of nations are at odds with America.  I tried out the same map in Axis of Evil, Rogue State, and Outposts of Tyranny to illustrate the fact the certain nations can be declared enemies of America for varying reasons and that one nation can be grouped in more than one designation.  Furthermore, by showing where the countries are located on a map, the uniformed will be readily able to recognize that although nations may belong to the same classifications this does not mean that these countries are bound together in some organization or alliance as most do not share similar geography, culture, religion and politics.  Additionally, the original maps (by another individual) I felt where not perfect as they were.  For example, the font was not easy to read (for myself) and the colours used did not properly contrast (using large fills of red and blue alone is very difficult for the eye to focus on).  Also, Vancouver Island was indicated as an American possession! If the maps I have created are also found to be lacking, or wrong, perhaps readers can suggest ways to improve it.  I should think though that my original idea of one map for three articles was flawed; I will create three separate maps in the future. I ask that TJLive, who evidently has some issues with the maps inform me next time when they delete the map what they find wrong with it, instead of just simply writing revert.  In this way, what is perceived as a small ‘revert war’ can come to an end.--RPlunk 20:28, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Map 

message: While most experts seem to agree on definition of a "rogue state", there are considerable differences when it comes to categorizing actual states. What point of view should we consider when building this list? The US, the UN, the EU, France, China? Each country or block would come up with a different list, according to their recent military ventures, to their natural allies and to their geopolitical motivations. Hense, it would be better if we keep the definition of "Rogue State" on this page, and any list of "Rogue States from country X's point of view as of year XXXX" on another linked page. This would guarantee POV validity for this wiki page. Hugo Dufort 06:22, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV-Specific and ever-changing list 

message: "In late 1990s U.S. officials considered as "rogue states" North Korea, Pakistan, Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan and Libya."
"Some point to the double standards over Pakistan which has been blatantly breaching nuclear non-proliferation protocols by exporting nuclear weapons technology, yet has not been declared as a "rogue state" by the U.S."
So does the U.S. consider Pakistan a rogue state or not?--Lairor 09:06, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Based on the sources even in State-sponsored terrorism, Pakistan was listed as a sponsor of terrorism in a 1993 US report and was "considered" to be a rogue state too in the 1990s. Post 9/11, the equations changed and after bullying Pakistan to be an ally in the War on Terrorism, US has since changed its stance and PAK is no longer considered by USA as a rogue state. Hence, the "some point to the double standards..." statement link is correct. Historically, and especially in the current scenario, Pakistan has not been declared as a rogue by USA. Though several are calling for it. Idleguy 04:40, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I changed the wording and repeated the part about the alliance in the double standards paragraph. I think this clarifies things enough to remove the contradiction tag. theroachmanTC 20:42, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Some point to the double standards over Pakistan which blatantly breaches nuclear non-proliferation protocols by exporting nuclear weapons technology, yet is no longer considered to be a "rogue state" by the U.S.
I have 2 problems with this
1. Pakistan (like Israel and India) haven't signed the non-proliferation treaty and therefore are not covered by the protocols.
2. Whether Pakistan as a state or merely Abdul Qadeer Khan as an individual exported nuclear weapons technology is a matter of controversy and therefore to assert that Pakistan exported the technology seems inappropriate. Sean.hoyland (talk) 07:27, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Contradiction -- Pakistan

message: Unsurprisingly, someone has felt the need to insert a whole paragraph about Israel into this tiny article:
Various commentators have maintained that Israel is a rogue state.  They cite Israel's  occupation of Palestine, invasions of neighboring countries, its alleged proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, and argue that Israel has a policy of annexation and colonization.  However, contrary to other termed 'rogue states', Israel has been consistently supported by the United States. Additionally, Israel's supporters claim that it is a liberal democracy with a human rights record similar to that of other democracies.  Israel also participates in friendly relations with Western nations unlike other countries with the rogue state label.
Equally unsurprisingly, even after the wildly POV language was somewhat cleaned up, the "rogue state" claims themselves still are not verifiable, as they do not use any reliable sources, are filled with weasel words, and in any case violate the undue weight provisions of WP:NPOV. Who was being quoted? Oh right, noted political scientist Tarek Kapiel, on the noted political academic journal "islamoneline.net". Turns out he's a "Faculty Lecturer Assistant and Researcher at the Botany Department in Cairo University’s Faculty of Science" - amazingly, he seems to have a "M.Sc. in Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology" - no doubt that makes him an expert on "rogue states".  Oh, and there's also the self-appointed Middle East expert "Andy Martin", posting on the blog "Political Gateway". Let's try to make this article encyclopedic, rather than yet another propaganda pamphlet. Jayjg (talk) 18:55, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV, reliable sources 

message: Are the countries sorted somehow? If not, why are they numbered? And why is North Korea not on the 'former' list? Sevcsik (talk) 16:55, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  List 

message: Someone inserted this conspiracy part in the article:
>A common thread between rogue states is that they don't allow their central banks to be owned by international bankers. After the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, central banks have been re-installed (Afghanistan 2002; Iraq 2003). <  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.131.210.162 (talk) 16:23, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Protocols of the learned fiscals of Zion 

message: Hasn't the US Gov ever considered Cuba a "rogue state"? Eritrea's Foreign relations sections says so.
Either that or this article is missing something.
According to BBC, it was added this list of nations, but couldn't find anywhere that they were removed.
However, it seems to me that the latest news are telling us nobody was buying it.
--190.134.166.100 (talk) 23:26, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I have been unable to find information saying it was removed from the list.  If someone can find another source stating it was added (I like having multiple sources for things like this) then I think Cuba should be added to the list Zell Faze (talk) 03:52, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  Cuba has more allies than Washington in the Western Hemisphere. Not a rogue state. As for the US though, that's worth discussing. 108.27.254.68 (talk) 04:15, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  and cuba? 

message: Israel has nukes and other WMD and refuses to declare them. Why are they not considered "rogue"?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 150.226.95.18 (talk) 20:30, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Israel? 

message: Yugoslavia was never rogue state, even though NATO has attacked it militarily. This is reference on google books that explicitly corrects this misinformation: http://books.google.com/books?id=Tpd_ykOXXeUC&pg=PA71&lpg=PA71&dq=yugoslavia+rogue+state&source=bl&ots=WlxOgaBxMb&sig=MbEcLOMgv8aYqay9ZC4IR9RCX3s&hl=en&ei=4PhYToT7IuXT4QSMl8isBQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=7&ved=0CEAQ6AEwBg#v=onepage&q=yugoslavia%20rogue%20state&f=false  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Protect&serve (talk • contribs) 14:04, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wrong, tendentious info 

message: I see that many entries are based on the Encyclopedia of the New American Nation as a reference. Can we consider this as a reliable source? Mikael Häggström (talk) 16:02, 8 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reliability of Encyclopedia of the New American Nation 

message: I have tagged the article for unverifiable speculation because of items such as the infobox claim: 
It's speculative, POV, and lacks source. As of 2014 there are many related problems with this article as well, such as the note on Cuba using POV wording ("fanatic members"). Finnusertop (talk | guestbook | contribs) 16:45, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I have removed the speculation template because that problem has been resolved. Other POV issues might still exist. Finnusertop (talk | guestbook | contribs) 10:11, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Speculation 

message: I propose moving all but the first two paragraphs in the introduction section to a new 'background and timeline' section. Doyna Yar (talk) 21:25, 7 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Introduction section 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Rogue state. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071212034924/http://www.germanlawjournal.com/article.php?id=188 to http://www.germanlawjournal.com/article.php?id=188
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:10, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: During the late years of apartheid ,south africa suffered major sanctions ,including an oil embargo ,had its UN membership suspended and most western nations ,Including USA ,severed its ties with south africa .
South africa even developed an nuclear program and backed white supremacist groups in North america ,south america and Europe and was reffered as rogue state numerous times,both during the jimmy carter government and by the european economic community (whitch would later became the european union)
So i believe that Apartheid-era south africa should be included or mentioned and the 'former rogue states' list. Gregorius deretius (talk) 23:46, 25 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  South africa 

message: The article states: "While most people Ronald Reagan for inventing the term, the United Kingdom used the term to refer to Rhodesia (...) The Carter administration also used the term to refer to Post-revolutionary Iran , Apartheid-era South Africa, and Rhodesia." and "Rhodesia is considered the first country in history to be labelled an "rogue state"". None of the sources cited confirms this information, the sources refer sanctions that these countries experienced during the Cold War.   This is original research and POV. See: Wikipedia:No original research/Noticeboard#Rogue state. --201.1.43.76 (talk) 14:07, 8 January 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Rhodesia was called a rogue state, I'll get some sources when time allows Darkness Shines (talk) 17:40, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Original research 

message: Regarding this edit, The articles  and  are about the types of states described, not the terms used to describe them. This article is not about rogue states as actual things, but about the term rogue state, and how said term is used and received. Per MOS:WORDSASWORDS, I believe that rogue state should therefore be in italics, including in the title, when referring to the term itself. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 22:41, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Title text format 

message: There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Rogue State: A Guide to the World's Only Superpower which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RMCD bot 09:45, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move discussion in progress 

message: Where is Russia in this list?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.133.196.103 (talk) 19:49, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Russia? 

message: This introduction isn't as helpful as might be desired by those who come here after seeing the term "rogue state" and wanting a definition. Might I suggest that it's because the article is too concerned with what states may have been called a rogue state on a given occasion (rightly or wrongly) instead of describing what a rogue state is? Trying to come up with a list is a distraction, since this isn't a list article.
Defining a rogue state as any state that's "threatening to the world's peace" is too broad to be useful (you can threaten peace and stability by being an aggressor state or a failed state), and it isn't related to what the word "rogue" means. Note the difference in how the more fully developed article failed state is constructed; the impulse to list, which so often leads to quibbling, is spun off (such as List of countries by Fragile States Index).
A definition referenced in the talk above has to do with a state disregarding international norms or conventions. "Going rogue" in ordinary language means veering away from a body to which one initially adhered and heading off in a self-determined direction; this can either be an outlaw act or an act of impulsive moral courage. It's likely to be disruptive, destabilizing, and a threat to peace in either case, but that isn't the primary meaning of "rogue."
In the body of the article, there's a quoted reference to"recalcitrant and outlaw states that not only choose to remain outside the family [of democratic nations] but also assault its basic values" (italic mine). It's the choosing to remain outside, the departing from the conventions of international relations, that makes the state rogue; as the construction "but also" indicates, aggression is an enlargement upon that primary meaning. Cynwolfe (talk) 13:21, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  suggestion toward focusing introduction 

message: , you keep adding Syria to the list even though you haven't provided sources. Why is this? Best wishes. --Jamez42 (talk) 11:21, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for the latest source. I don't know if other editors have any objections, so I'll leave this note here. Best wishes. --Jamez42 (talk) 13:43, 9 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Syria 

message: Bolivia Is A Rouge State 175.158.225.247 (talk) 10:44, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 12:59, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 7 May 2019 

message: Could Nazi Germany be considered a historical rogue state?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.237.97.233 (talk) 20:02, 13 March 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: No it can't. Term is somehow recent and that case not inside that scope. 79.101.189.152 (talk) 02:45, 4 September 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  maybe it could, that's not for us to decide.  If you can find smoeone outside of WIkiepdia using that description, feel free to add it to the article.  –DMartin  02:48, 4 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nazi Germany 

message: I removed note from the list about rogue states. Part what I removed is "states considered rogue states by other countries". 
There is one problem about two listed countries, 1. the United States and 2. Turkey. 
Even if that both countries entry is sourced there is no talk about some other country and to some official government or government official accusing that two states about beeng rogue. 
About Turkey it is commentator Robert Ellis what in his opinion says it, and about the US it is mostly internal foreign policy criticism and not some other official government making that qualification. There is big political difference in status and weight about official deisgnation or officials talking about some country and just some criticism from some circles. If some other government or official make some statement about some country it can go to the list otherwise it can make some confusion to readers as it did to me to it is type of official stance by some country.
Also to add, things as huge change of content has to be nicely explained even to be under discussion at talk page before.79.101.189.152 (talk) 02:51, 4 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  List & general content change and lead change

message: Okay, I might just be an idiot but why is turkey highlighted on the map?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by FinnSoThin (talk • contribs) 19:09, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Turkey

message: Why was Sudan a former rouge state? 86.29.173.55 (talk) 06:57, 8 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  What's with Sudan? 

message: Alright, why do we consider words of a political party's spokesman as a state recognition? BerkBerk68 19:15, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Insignificant informations and their representation 

message: 1. Cuba should be colored in dark pink as it is currently designated as a rogue state by the United States.
2. Syria should be in striped colors of dark pink and blue as it is also designated as a rogue state by Turkey.
3. As a country that was formerly designated as a rogue state by the U.S., the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia should include Serbia (with Kosovo) and Montenegro. The map only colors in Serbia (including Kosovo) with light pink, Montenegro should also be colored in light pink and the border between the two countries should be removed.
4. The People’s Democratic Republic of Yemen (South Yemen)  was formerly designated as a rogue state by the U.S. until it unified with the Yemen Arab Republic (North Yemen) into the Republic of Yemen.
So, South Yemen should only be colored in as light pink, instead of the entirety of Yemen. There would also be a border between North and South Yemen as well. Maximations (talk) 17:20, 11 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Changes in Colors and Borders in the Map 

message: Quite a few sources have discussed the theory that Russia is a rogue state, especially since the Russian invasion of Ukraine, although my ability to investigate deeply has been hampered by my doomscrolling problem. Maybe someone could cover for me and it looks like if Russia does get an entry, then statement attribution will be needed since US politics since 1992 is a contentious topic. --Minoa (talk) 09:50, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Russia since 2022