Fun Stuff > CHATTER
Shit, meet fan
doombilly:
How does this thread not tread on the no-no of discussing religion and/or politics?
Patrick:
Don't derail just 'cause you feel like being a whistleblower. It's not like anybody is forcing it on you. A non-political discussion may be found in the hair thread if you feel like this one is too *srs bizniss* for you.
That snarky comment aside, arguing whether bombing Hiroshima or Nagasaki was right or wrong is kindof lame. Nothing you can DO about it, but there's a lot to be learned from it.
The reason Russia has the balls to threaten nuclear attack and all-out war (and why I suspect they might actually do it) is that nobody wants an all-out nuclear war. And even if Russia -does- attack anybody with nuclear weapons, who is seriously going to retaliate and cause an epic shitstorm?
The mutually-assured destruction argument may not be entirely relevant anymore, because when you KNOW retaliation makes the complete annihilation of the planet a serious consideration, you're not going to want to do something like that, now are you? It's just a matter of who makes the first and only strike, and President Bush has got enough of a shit reputation as it is. He doesn't need a pre-emptive nuclear strike on Russia or her allies under his belt.
jhocking:
--- Quote from: KimJongSick on 28 Feb 2008, 13:36 ---A non-political discussion may be found in the hair thread if you feel like this one is too *srs bizniss* for you.
--- End quote ---
And this here is a good example of why we have this rule. Patronizing flames are for no.
People who say "if you don't like this thread then go somewhere else" are just not getting it. The problem isn't that some people are too scared for serious political talk, it's that such threads turn into nasty arguments and the participants start acting more angry in general.
Moreover the logic of the suggestion is quite backwards. It's not that people who dislike political debate should leave the thread, it's that people who seek political debate should find a different forum where that isn't against the rules.
EDIT: Is that word a little clearer?
bbqrocks:
If someone launches a nuclear missile, then you can be damn sure that sometime soon someone will retaliate. And anyways, nuclear war is more of a terrifying proposition to me than to america or russia...You could easily cover britain in bombs.
I just realized I am going on about nothing. Anyways, am I the only person who sees nuclear annihilation as an inevability? As long as they exist, they are eventually going to fall into the wrong hands.
Patrick:
--- Quote from: jhocking on 28 Feb 2008, 13:45 ---The problem isn't that some people are too sensitive for serious political talk, it's that such threads turn into nasty arguments and the participants start acting more angry in general.
--- End quote ---
S.S. Contradiction, ahoy! It's BECAUSE serious political talk is a sensitive topic that things get nasty easily.
That's beside my point though. My point is that it's not against the rules, it's just said that you should tread upon things REALLY FREAKING LIGHTLY unless you want it to get locked and possibly have a temp-b& or permab& set on you.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version