4 ms·

> There is another path though: Disarmament though international treaties I sleep better with a big deterrence arsenal than with a treaty that gets ignored the

> There is another path though: Disarmament though international treaties I sleep better with a big deterrence arsenal than with a treaty that gets ignored the moment it becomes inconvenient. > The cold war was about (some form of) capitalism vs (some form of) communism The soviets didn't buck elite exploitation. Not for long and not by much. If you think native elites are exploitative, I have news about foreign elites who have conquered you.

vkou 6y ago
Regardless of who exploits whom under which regime, you'd have to have the mindset of a suicide bomber to prefer being dead than red - when you also unilaterally make that choice for hundreds of millions of people, many of whom entirely uninvolved in your conflict. If they've reached the point where they actually have to use nuclear weapons in a MAD scenario, that political leader in question has failed at doing their job utterly, and completely irredeemably. It's a complete and utter betrayal of both their constituents, and the responsibility the world entrusted in them.
- WillPostForFood 6y ago
  If they've reached the point where they actually have to use nuclear weapons in a MAD scenario, that political leader in question has failed at doing their job utterly, and completely irredeemably. It's a complete and utter betrayal of both their constituents, and the responsibility the world entrusted in them. Why preface this with an "if" like it is a hypothetical where we don't know what happened? It is history now and we know how it turned out. MAD worked, there was never a nuclear war or major conflict between superpowers. Political leaders didn't fail and have been redeemed. Their constituents weren't betrayed, and the world moves on.
  - cycomanic 6y ago
    That we did not have a world war does not imply that MAD works. Moreover the world came incredibly close to total destruction a number of times, and in part it is just look that we are still alive. For example, imagine a different president than Kennedy in power during the Cuban missile crisis.
blackrock 6y ago
When did foreign elites ever conquer America? Isn’t the opposite true? That American elites conquered the rest of the world.

vkou 6y ago

Regardless of who exploits whom under which regime, you'd have to have the mindset of a suicide bomber to prefer being dead than red - when you also unilaterally make that choice for hundreds of millions of people, many of whom entirely uninvolved in your conflict. If they've reached the point where they actually have to use nuclear weapons in a MAD scenario, that political leader in question has failed at doing their job utterly, and completely irredeemably. It's a complete and utter betrayal of both their constituents, and the responsibility the world entrusted in them.

WillPostForFood 6y ago
If they've reached the point where they actually have to use nuclear weapons in a MAD scenario, that political leader in question has failed at doing their job utterly, and completely irredeemably. It's a complete and utter betrayal of both their constituents, and the responsibility the world entrusted in them. Why preface this with an "if" like it is a hypothetical where we don't know what happened? It is history now and we know how it turned out. MAD worked, there was never a nuclear war or major conflict between superpowers. Political leaders didn't fail and have been redeemed. Their constituents weren't betrayed, and the world moves on.
- cycomanic 6y ago
  That we did not have a world war does not imply that MAD works. Moreover the world came incredibly close to total destruction a number of times, and in part it is just look that we are still alive. For example, imagine a different president than Kennedy in power during the Cuban missile crisis.

blackrock 6y ago

When did foreign elites ever conquer America? Isn’t the opposite true? That American elites conquered the rest of the world.