Even a couple years after I watched "The Day After" wehn I was 6 years old I remember waking up my family in the middle of the night crying and making them assure me that "The Day After isn't going to happen". The last 2 night I've had reoccuring dreams that have been something like a mix of that and War of the Worlds; for no particular reason that I can think of. Not the ridiculous kind of dreams, but the kind where you can think normally about waht's going on and for a plit second after you wake up you're still kinda flushed with the beliefs and the fear. The point is: It Sucked.
Now concidering everything that's happening.. I am now wondering if it is all but assured that we will see a nuclear holocost in our lifetimes. We cannot stop countries from developing. The power to destroy yourself is a natural step in the progress of a society(no?). Though we may be able to stall it... we will not stop it.
The one thing that we can stop is from people hating us. How this is possible seems more and more like a fantasy as days go by and hatred spreads. Everyone seems to be willing to defend this and defend that and yet have no willingness to deal with the reson that you are being attacked. We are nothing but ships passing in the night to one another as nations of the Earth and seem unable to share the ocean.
Yes. The way things are going I think that this is going to happen, and I am afraid. I am afraid for those that I love. Now I may go on day to day and live my nice normal life and pretend that I do not believe this... but it gets kind of hard wehn I see the type of people that are in charge of keeping it from happening.
How do you people deal with this? just put it out of your mind? oops
·Theme
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- Nuclear holocost an ineviability?
Nuclear holocost an ineviability?Follow
oh for fu[Aqua][/Aqua]cks sake
I don't know how much a holocaust is going to cost, but I'm sure it would be more than the price of a spelling lesson...
Totem
Totem
don't look at me, look at the American public education system.
If it happens hopefully, I will die on impact.
It's not going to happen. The U.S. has WAY too many nukes in its ******** We may not be able to stop "rogue" countries from developing nuclear weapons, but we can certainly make sure they develop no more than just a handful -- and weak ones at that. We have the economic upperhand at the very least. Making nukes is EXPENSIVE.
And if someday, for some reason, any of the scant countries in the world with a meaningful nuclear ******* is dumb enough to essentially kill themselves by launching missles at us, we will by then probably have the ability to shoot a good number of theirs down with lasers or some ****.
So in summary, yes I just put it out of my mind and pretend like everything will be just fine.
Edited, Thu Apr 13 19:22:38 2006 by Jawbox
And if someday, for some reason, any of the scant countries in the world with a meaningful nuclear ******* is dumb enough to essentially kill themselves by launching missles at us, we will by then probably have the ability to shoot a good number of theirs down with lasers or some ****.
So in summary, yes I just put it out of my mind and pretend like everything will be just fine.
Edited, Thu Apr 13 19:22:38 2006 by Jawbox
To the OP.
Yes.
If someone invented a 6 Bajillion dollar llama-*** powered ***** exploder, there'd always be at least one nerd determined to see if it works.
My money's on Syria.
Yes.
If someone invented a 6 Bajillion dollar llama-*** powered ***** exploder, there'd always be at least one nerd determined to see if it works.
My money's on Syria.
"I started out with nothin' and I still got most of it left" - Seasick Steve
32 posts
It will newer happen.
Jack Bauer will come and save the day.
Jack Bauer will come and save the day.
WarMaverick the Charming wrote:
It's the end of the world as we know it.
It's the end of the world as we know it.
It's the end of the world as we know it and I feel fine
It's the end of the world as we know it.
It's the end of the world as we know it and I feel fine
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
If you spend your life worrying about the end of the world you will inevitably miss alot. And to what end? You can't change whatever is going to happen anyway. The stress of worrying will eat away your immune system and you will die from that. No one survives life. Not saying it is easy to shake those kind of dreams, they are awful no doubt. There is just no healthy reason to hang on to them.
Seamy
Seamy
I hope we wont, but I am scared that we may. If not then I'll be side kick in the husbands MR2 when we drive it off a cliff when he's 75 and I'm 70.
Quote:
It will newer happen.
Chuck_Norris will come and save the day.
Chuck_Norris will come and save the day.
FTFY
Edited, Fri Apr 14 04:04:45 2006 by PackyMcStout
As soon as oil becomes a seriously precious resource it will happen. China will invade Alaska, America will annex Canada and the European nations will just fall into disarray.
Then it will happen, nobody knows who struck first. Only a few million escaped to the vaults in time.
Oh noes the waterchip.
Officially plays too much Fallout.
Then it will happen, nobody knows who struck first. Only a few million escaped to the vaults in time.
Oh noes the waterchip.
Officially plays too much Fallout.
Quote:
As soon as oil becomes a seriously precious resource it will happen. China will invade Alaska, America will annex Canada and the European nations will just fall into disarray.
Ever wonder why companies like Shell own so much farmland?
What do you mean by 'holocaust'? Hundreds or thousands or nuclear warheads being launched and landing? I'd say that's very low probability. A single city being leveled by a nuclear bomb? I'd say there's a decent probability of witnessing this in our lifetimes.
"The power to destroy yourself is a natural step in the progress of society" is pure bunk. What society is and why society exists is the antithesis of violence and destruction toward other human beings. The power to destroy is a natural step in the reoccurence of BARBARIANISM (raping, pillaging, murdering), not SOCIETY. Society only exists (to the extent it does) by voluntary means (irrefutably so -- say goodbye to Rouseau, Hobbes, Plato, Marx and any other anthropomorphicist social philospohers) because people benefit, are enormously better off materially with the division of labor and free voluntary trade. Illusions of society are temporarily blinding with the use of violence and coercion.
"The power to destroy yourself is a natural step in the progress of society" is pure bunk. What society is and why society exists is the antithesis of violence and destruction toward other human beings. The power to destroy is a natural step in the reoccurence of BARBARIANISM (raping, pillaging, murdering), not SOCIETY. Society only exists (to the extent it does) by voluntary means (irrefutably so -- say goodbye to Rouseau, Hobbes, Plato, Marx and any other anthropomorphicist social philospohers) because people benefit, are enormously better off materially with the division of labor and free voluntary trade. Illusions of society are temporarily blinding with the use of violence and coercion.
What you describe is the theroy of society. In practice, the power of self destruction of one form or another has been the step in every society on earth so far.
I would say it is not mere "theory". It's existence versus non-existence, either-or, consuming all possibilities. This is simple correct classification. Destruction is a barbarous act. Trade is a societal act. Plus, the power of destruction is not dependent upon the existence of society or the non-existence of society. The power of destruction exists in every isolated individual, whether they live in a modern metropolis or are isolated on a deserted island. The existence of society does not create a free will possibility of destruction that the non-existence of society does not already entail. And that's key. The existence of society, in actuality (and in "theory"), by definition entails voluntary cooperative action. Destruction by definition entails a-social action, barbaric, violence and destruction.
Quote:
by definition entails voluntary cooperative action. Destruction by definition entails a-social action, barbaric, violence and destruction.
The developement of a nuclear bomb requires the utmost of coorperative action does it not?
and I don't particularly think the actions that it would take to "set off" of nuclear war would nccesrily be "a-social or barbaric" as you put it...
after all, was it not in the name of peace and civility that America exploded two atomic bombs over INNCOCENT Japanese cities?
The power for an entire society to destroy itself relies on more that a mere individualistic power of desctruction. It also requires trade, and power acquisition. It is through this acquisition that a society develops the power to destory itself.
In practice, it is that individualistic power of descruction that evolves into society-wide destruction,
You say that destruction is a barborous act, it is also a societal act. Destruction of a society does not always indicate physical destruction. Societal desctruction can be through a degredation of laws, or an assimilation by a larger entity.
In practice, it is that individualistic power of descruction that evolves into society-wide destruction,
You say that destruction is a barborous act, it is also a societal act. Destruction of a society does not always indicate physical destruction. Societal desctruction can be through a degredation of laws, or an assimilation by a larger entity.
Now you are guilty of anthropomophicism when you state societies act. This is incorrect. Only individuals have the capacity and in actuality act. Society is just an amalgemation of individuals. You, we, did not drop any bombs on Japanese cities. That action was carried out by specific individuals who were ordered to act by other specific individuals. Only individuals can destroy society because only individuals can act. Societies cannot ever by defintion destroy themselves because societies cannot ever even possess the capacity to act by definition.
Sure, the more intricate, elaborate, and technoloigically advanced a society is, the more destructive power which is capable of possibly being used by individuals. But the destructive act is an a-social act.
Absolutely self-defense is not a social act either. It does not involve voluntary cooperation. But self defense is commonly diferentiation from offensive violent action. It's what separates the forces of freedom from the forces of slavery and compelled servitude. Obviously there are gradations of this, but the main point remains destruction is not a social action; destruction is an a-social action committed by individuals which has the effect of destroying/lessening society. Society itself never acts.
Sure, the more intricate, elaborate, and technoloigically advanced a society is, the more destructive power which is capable of possibly being used by individuals. But the destructive act is an a-social act.
Absolutely self-defense is not a social act either. It does not involve voluntary cooperation. But self defense is commonly diferentiation from offensive violent action. It's what separates the forces of freedom from the forces of slavery and compelled servitude. Obviously there are gradations of this, but the main point remains destruction is not a social action; destruction is an a-social action committed by individuals which has the effect of destroying/lessening society. Society itself never acts.
So would you hold the pilots of the Enola Gay as the ones who are soley responsible for The Bombs benig dropped?
and in respect of your other ideas.... about society not existing as a collective entity... then why even concider human a single life-form.... rather than just a comglomeration of many many other life forms?
and in respect of your other ideas.... about society not existing as a collective entity... then why even concider human a single life-form.... rather than just a comglomeration of many many other life forms?
There is a big difference between the philosophy of society, and the question of wether societies of humans are doomed to destruction.
Stop arguing over philosohpy and join the real conversation. Waxing philosophical, while it has it's place, it's not what Kelvy asked.
In practice, every society has destroyed itself one way or another, either by not progressing enough allowing it to be run over, or by acts of hostility. The actions by society (a collection of humans) are what is being discussed, not wether it's possible for a society to have action.
Stop arguing over philosohpy and join the real conversation. Waxing philosophical, while it has it's place, it's not what Kelvy asked.
In practice, every society has destroyed itself one way or another, either by not progressing enough allowing it to be run over, or by acts of hostility. The actions by society (a collection of humans) are what is being discussed, not wether it's possible for a society to have action.
Kelvy: /smack
Pseudo-intellectuals are rampant around here. Do we really need to encourage more?
Pseudo-intellectuals are rampant around here. Do we really need to encourage more?
Quote:
The power to destroy yourself is a natural step in the progress of a society(no?).
I think it all stemmed from this line.. which funny enough.. I worded very carefully...
however.. if you think about it... The abilty to destroy yourself.. is that NOT a state of Progress.. even in evolutionary terms?
I don't know many animals that are capable of "suicide" persay (lemmings don't count.. niether do insects that willingly mate only to be killed) Humans seem to be the only organism that are able to consciously killing themselves.
Not think of a society of a collective consciousness... and viola.. obvsiousy a "society" cannot commit suicide conventionally.. but once that great step of the invention of nuclear weapons is added onto the mix.. BAM, macrocosmic suicide machine!
Quote:
Pseudo-intellectuals are rampant around here. Do we really need to encourage more?
I'd rather encourage psuedo-intellectuals than total-retards.
Edited, Fri Apr 14 11:52:08 2006 by Kelvyquayo
Recent Visitors: 296
All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (296)
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- Nuclear holocost an ineviability?
© 2024 Fanbyte LLC