RXP
07-18-2005, 07:33 AM
I prolly did the french bit wrong trying to be flarely, but that's me.
Anyway I was googling my name and came across a thread where I had a debate with WCM about the doctrine of mutually assured destruction (MAD) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutually_assured_destruction). My argument was it has kept the world safe, that is nucelar weapons have kept the world safe. And that's the reason why there's been no WW3. I thought everyone accepeted this viewpoint. WCM came back with the fact of worldwide intergreation, European Union, WTO, UN etc.
To quote him
1. You must know how weak a foundation that theory lies on. There is no real practical evidence, it is merely subjective thought that says this. One could also as easily argue that it was the UN which prevented another WW3.1 (http://www.offspring.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-1047.html)
But lets go back to that. I can't possibly understand how people can't accept how the prospect of nuclear war has kept the world a safe place from truly global disasters, not some small terrorist incident. And by small I even mean 9/11 cause that pales in comparason to what we're talking about here.
So yeah when hippies and idoits go "E=MC^2" (where the mind blowing power of nucelar fusion was first understood) is evil and bad. And how superpowers with nuclear bombs are evil/bad. I mean c'mon it's kept the world safe otherwise superpowers would be having wars again.
It's simly self evident to me that leaders would think twice about starting global conflicts if the result was a lobbing nuclear weapons at each other. I mean the reason they kept submaraine collisions (alot happened int eh cold war) secret was that neither side wanted the world media/public opinion to see the other was weak. If a submarine is caught taping phone lines under the ocean it's a blatent taking the piss and in an age of nucelar weapons which neither leader wanted to use they both just kept it quiet. Becuase then neither would be forced to esculate.
So what's your opinon? I think nukes are a good thing for world calm. Sure we *don't* have actual peace but what we have now isn't as bad as a world war.
Anyway I was googling my name and came across a thread where I had a debate with WCM about the doctrine of mutually assured destruction (MAD) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutually_assured_destruction). My argument was it has kept the world safe, that is nucelar weapons have kept the world safe. And that's the reason why there's been no WW3. I thought everyone accepeted this viewpoint. WCM came back with the fact of worldwide intergreation, European Union, WTO, UN etc.
To quote him
1. You must know how weak a foundation that theory lies on. There is no real practical evidence, it is merely subjective thought that says this. One could also as easily argue that it was the UN which prevented another WW3.1 (http://www.offspring.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-1047.html)
But lets go back to that. I can't possibly understand how people can't accept how the prospect of nuclear war has kept the world a safe place from truly global disasters, not some small terrorist incident. And by small I even mean 9/11 cause that pales in comparason to what we're talking about here.
So yeah when hippies and idoits go "E=MC^2" (where the mind blowing power of nucelar fusion was first understood) is evil and bad. And how superpowers with nuclear bombs are evil/bad. I mean c'mon it's kept the world safe otherwise superpowers would be having wars again.
It's simly self evident to me that leaders would think twice about starting global conflicts if the result was a lobbing nuclear weapons at each other. I mean the reason they kept submaraine collisions (alot happened int eh cold war) secret was that neither side wanted the world media/public opinion to see the other was weak. If a submarine is caught taping phone lines under the ocean it's a blatent taking the piss and in an age of nucelar weapons which neither leader wanted to use they both just kept it quiet. Becuase then neither would be forced to esculate.
So what's your opinon? I think nukes are a good thing for world calm. Sure we *don't* have actual peace but what we have now isn't as bad as a world war.