Jack Scratch's Case For War

Posted by Herb7734 2 months, 2 weeks ago to Philosophy
23 comments | Share | Best of... | Flag

"The world is a much safer place when the powerful actually use their power and much less safer when they don't." -- David Baldacci

The USA could wipe out the problem in the Middle East in days. Certainly, there would be innocents who would die, but what was the difference between millions killed in ten minutes or in ten years?They'd still be dead and you will have avoided a decade of misery and uncertainty. There are many of my acolytes who would gladly provide every weapon needed to extinguish savages. Think of the employment possibilities. Isn't it always about us versus them? Only the strong survive. The weak always die. It is the natural order.

Put the big boys in control and you get mutually assured destruction, or MAD which is a term used from the cold war and the subject of much fear, all of it misplaced. MAD was actually the greatest stabilizing force in history, but because so many people were ignorant of how the world really functioned, they would be appalled by such a statement. MAD provided certainty, predictability, and perhaps annihilation of certain aspects of humanity for the greater good.


Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by term2 2 months, 1 week ago
    The other idea would be to concentrate on impeneterable defense, and not war unless necessary for defense.
    Why mess with the middle east unless you want to take over their oil fields from them (which is what we wanted I think). As to islam, keep it out of this country since it is an intolerant and evil religion that we dont have to allow in the name of freedom (since THEY dont want that).
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by jsw225 2 months, 1 week ago
      Ask the French how their impenetrable Magineaux Line worked out for them.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by term2 2 months, 1 week ago
        not too well. maybe we can do better with star wars shoot em out of the sky. MAD defense worked well for a lot of years with Russia actually

        This attacking other countries to "keep us safe" doesnt seem to work very well unless we are willing to just take over the countries and kill all the people who dont knuckle under like the dictators do. I dont remember any terror incidents while Saddam was ruling Iraq.

        If N Korea attacks us, we should level their country for the next 100 years until the radioactivity dissipates and be SERIOUS about doing just that. I suspect fat boy would not want to attack us if he was convinced he would be dead and his whole country destroyed.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by 2 months, 1 week ago
        In the 21st century war there is nothing "impenetrable." The only thing impenetrable is the brains of the warring parties.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by Dobrien 2 months, 1 week ago
          So true Herb7734. I say you must be the worlds foremost authority on identifying numb skills and
          The reality of power. Witness Trumps specific no nonsense warning to the inbred N. Korean rocketman.
          Far to long we have funded a military to handle just about any threat only to find the greatest threat is the self imposed restrictions to act on the soldier on the ground .
          .
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by 2 months, 1 week ago
            Reminds me of the old joke, about the flea wanting to have sex with the elephant..After crawling up it's leg for half an hour it finally gets in place and starts going at it..At a certain point the elephant trumpets loudly whereupon the flea looks up around the enormous flank and says, "did I hurt you, baby?" A case of ego surpassing ability.Change the scenario to a wasp instead of a flea and you have a closer analogy.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Owlsrayne 2 months, 1 week ago
    Instead of going nuclear on N. Korea or Iran, scientists should invent a gas that would kill the people who are evil and the good take a nice nap. What I'm talking about is the imaginary gas used in HG Wells movie "Things to Come". Maybe in this age it might be possible.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  Olduglycarl 2 months, 2 weeks ago
    When I was 16, I thought that way, but not for the greater good, I was more worried about my own, my family and friends survival.

    I worried for mankind but I didn't understand why...today, I do, but my apprehensions are for Conscious man and those that might become so.
    There is still a part of me that might quietly agree but I wonder how the future left, all things being cyclical, would torture us with that history.

    Maybe we could make "them" do it, since they are the one's concerned about the "Greater Good".
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 2 months, 2 weeks ago
      Satan is clever. Among the ignorant, he uses emotion, for the Gulchers, he uses their rationality against them.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by term2 2 months, 1 week ago
        there is no SATAN, or a GOD. There are only the facts of reality. Emotion is only a physical response to what one thinks and what one observes in the world. Nothing wrong with emotion, except that we should consider its source and investigate what we are thinking.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by 2 months, 1 week ago
          But they make great metaphors and emoticonsI used the term "Jack Scratch which was an old time name for the devil which was the symbol for the personification of evil If the Devil did exist, I'm sure he would not consider himself to be evil, but just like the NAZIs at Nuremberg, just following orders and doing his duty like a good follower of God. In Objectivism, life and death are the ultimate criteria for the judgement of good and evil. Pro life + anti-death =goood. Pro death represents evil if a proposition will ultimately lead to death it is evil.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by term2 2 months, 1 week ago
            you got it. I read a book lately which said that hitler couldnt have done much real evil himself. It took the millions of minions that believed in him and followed his orders to really do the evil. I think this is right. I pay taxes and our government kills thousands of iraqis to "protect me" (at least thats what they say). Without taxpayers funding this nonsense, it would stop.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by  $  Olduglycarl 2 months, 2 weeks ago
        Yes, there are opposing forces in existence and that's as accurate a name for it as any other.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by 2 months, 1 week ago
          What's yin without yang? There can be no light without darknessDoesn't it rend the Universe silly to take sides, one against the other ever since one caveman was given the task of preserving the fire.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by lrshultis 2 months, 1 week ago
            What is silly is the operative concept of "be" in your post. Light can "be" ,i.e., physically exist, but darkness, i.e., the lack of light, is the absence of physical light and thus cannot "be".
            Your tongue and cheek wiping of some of humanity might have gone too far with the removal of evil. It sometimes reminds me of the wiping of humans as vermin as described by Peikoff in his Ominous Parallels dealing with the philosophical source of the German Nazi movement.
            If those alive are considered, there will be a future of millions born, some good and some will turn out evil. If evil is wiped out with just some collateral good dead for some greater good, the future born will be different, just different good and evil. It is generally agreed that slavery was evil and should not have happened. That would have wiped out billions of present day humans because different conditions would exist in most conceptions taking place throughout history as sperm race for ova. Different conditions, different consciousnesses produced. Perhaps even you might not have existed and maybe would have been replaced with some non-Herb7734. One should be happy to be alive because it might have been else wise had the evil never happened. It takes some mental fortitude to accept that one is alive due to past evil. Time travel to the past, which most likely is not possible, would have to prohibit any tinkering with the past, although time travel to the future is what happens now with good and evil persons acting all the way to that future.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  blarman 2 months, 1 week ago
    The first question is who exactly is the enemy: is it a group of people or an ideology? The second question is whether or not it is moral to do so.

    In answer to the first question, we must narrow this down. Are we talking Iran? Israel? Islam? Hinduism? What exactly? In the second, we have to evaluate whether or not we are acting defensively or tyrannically.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by wiggys 2 months, 1 week ago
    Russia was a paper tiger during the period referred to as the cold war. if we were attacked I am positive that we would have had a major influx of men to fight the Russians just like we saw when the arabs attacked us on 9/11. how ever the same would not have been true on the Russian side. why? because we had every thing to fight for and the Russians had nothing to preserve and fight for. the Russians couldn't feed their population how would they feed their army.
    today we have an interesting situation where the US could muster a large army except the powers to be are all politicians including the joint chiefs, they too are politicians, so all that takes place is talk. not a one of those people that we the people put in power give a damn about the country so there will not be a war. notice that we are "guarded" with our return fire when we are attacked. the soldiers in the field get booted out of the military if they do something the actually saves soldiers lives. case in point is Major West.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 2 months, 1 week ago
      We are not referring to individual soldiers, but the use of WMD's which is what this is about, or MAD, Mutually Assured Destruction.. MAD -- a term that kept the cold war in definite balance and would have indefinitely. kept one another from making the first move.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo