Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Kagus]

Mother Teresa

Well, to be fair, Mother Teresa was a horrid old sadist. Can't speak for her legacy, but she and her institutions in India were dreadful forces of pain and suffering.

Also, Yasser Arafat's name tends to get mentioned a bit in discussions about the Peace Prize, so now it's been mentioned. So, really, the institution has been silly for a long time.

Sanders is a big girl

*Gasp!* Fat-shaming! Stop bullying poor Sarah, you fiend!

[Dunamisdeos]

This is a very silly tangent, all in all.

[Il Palazzo]

I read all current discussions referring to Sanders as if it was about Bernie.

[Shazbot]

Bernie transitioned, didn't you get the tweet?

[Il Palazzo]

I can't follow tweets. The words are too bigly.

[Dunamisdeos]

Bernita Sanders. It's a multifaceted transition, you see.

[Max™]

Bernita Sanders. It's a multifaceted transition, you see.

I read Vernita and was like wait, wasn't that Dolezal chick the one that was secretly a black woman, but I guess old jewish socialist white guy turns into hypercapitalist douchebag defending black woman is a better twist.

[Starver]

Another recent Nobel PP Laureate who deserves mention: Aung San Suu Kyi¹

Got the award back in '91 after her political suppression and stance against oppression, but turns out that in 'power' (insomuch as she is, being directly barred from being President, still) she either cannot or will not do anything to prevent what's happening to the Rohingya.

Almost as if everyone is flawed (but some are more obviously flawed than others).


¹ Also had thought of mentioning her in the whole "Dorfs should have family names" thread, coincidentally.

[Maximum Spin]

From a certain perspective, threatening armageddon through MAD doctrine has kept peace for about 60 years. But if anyone deserved a peace prize for that sort of strategy it should probably be Robert McNamara. And that particular thought would be just about the only thing more absurd than Trump getting one.

I mean, I would support that. MAD has been the best source of peace the world has known since the Roman empire.

[Egan_BW]

With only a minor risk of vaporizing a bunch of huge cities in a matter of hours, then either setting back human civilization a few hundred years or merely permanently making everyone too paranoid about getting nuked to maintain this nice global communication system that we're using?

[Maximum Spin]

With only a minor risk of vaporizing a bunch of huge cities in a matter of hours, then either setting back human civilization a few hundred years or merely permanently making everyone too paranoid about getting nuked to maintain this nice global communication system that we're using?

I mean, sure, but what's your alternative, given that nuclear weapons exist and aren't going to stop existing?

[Dunamisdeos]

With only a minor risk of vaporizing a bunch of huge cities in a matter of hours, then either setting back human civilization a few hundred years or merely permanently making everyone too paranoid about getting nuked to maintain this nice global communication system that we're using?

I mean, sure, but what's your alternative, given that nuclear weapons exist and aren't going to stop existing?

Do they stop existing once detonated? Or do they simply exist over a larger area?

[Egan_BW]

With only a minor risk of vaporizing a bunch of huge cities in a matter of hours, then either setting back human civilization a few hundred years or merely permanently making everyone too paranoid about getting nuked to maintain this nice global communication system that we're using?

I mean, sure, but what's your alternative, given that nuclear weapons exist and aren't going to stop existing?

An alternative isn't possible. The things exist, and humanity is a thing with too much chaos and momentum behind it to choose anything other than to continue having them. Once the knowledge that it's possible exists, it becomes very hard to prevent a population as large as ours from actually making the thing. And that applies to far more than nukes.
Yes, this is the reality that we live in, and we can't escape it. All I can do is comment.

[Maximum Spin]

Do they stop existing once detonated? Or do they simply exist over a larger area?

That's deep. My only defense here is that I actually meant the concept, not the individual weapons, as in "even if you dismantle (or detonate I guess) all of them more will still be made".

fake edit:

An alternative isn't possible. The things exist, and humanity is a thing with too much chaos and momentum behind it to choose anything other than to continue having them. Once the knowledge that it's possible exists, it becomes very hard to prevent a population as large as ours from actually making the thing. And that applies to far more than nukes.
Yes, this is the reality that we live in, and we can't escape it. All I can do is comment.

Ah, so it's just a fatalistic response. Fair enough. My natural reaction to that kind of scenario is optimistic acceptance, hence "hey, it might technically be under threat of nuclear armageddon, but at least there's peace!"

[Egan_BW]

Fair enough. My natural reaction to that kind of scenario is optimistic acceptance, hence "hey, it might technically be under threat of nuclear armageddon, but at least there's peace!"

AKA "how I learned to stop worrying and love the bomb."