3 ms·
> Why would one need this? You'll see! :) (seriously though, even if you are not planning any invasions in the foreseeable future, you need to think like an at
by atemerev 4y ago
> Why would one need this?
You'll see! :)
(seriously though, even if you are not planning any invasions in the foreseeable future, you need to think like an attacker to successfully defend against attackers).
- mfrw 4y agoFair enough :)
- jokethrowaway 4y agoIf you're not invading because you can't, you're not good: you're just useless. You need to be able to invade and not do it to be good.
- harry8 4y agoWhat if you know you /can/ learn how to do that but make a conscious choice not to take on that ability? Then what if you know you can but rank that ability as being too far down the list in terms of its benefit to you, your family, your neighbors and the human race to supplant time spent learning X or doing Y. For whatever you feel are a good values of X & Y? This more "not invading AND you can't" rather than "because." Seems like a reasonable thing to me. "I decline to shoot anyone with a gun and I can't." That seems like a position taken by some large number of pretty reasonable people in a many contexts that seem, at the very least, justifiable.