3 ms·

Why attempt it again when it failed every other time and always led to new violence and suffering?

by chrisseaton 4y ago

kcplate 4y ago
Because every other time it avoided worldwide apocalypse.
- chrisseaton 4y ago
  How much of the world do you think we should let him subjugate? When he comes for your family and home are you handing them over without any fuss? Bizarre.
  - kcplate 4y ago
    > How much of the world do you think we should let him subjugate? That phrase assumes that we have the power to stop him without creating a greater loss of life than the death he would create in the areas he wants to subjugate. It also assumes that if we do enter into a worldwide conflict to remove him and we succeed, that whatever and whoever is left will be less tyrannical, less expansionist and less likely to create suffering. And to answer your question…if he comes for my family and home, I will fight for them fiercely, because I will likely have not yet been nuked off the bloody planet by some “well intentioned” warmongering jackass from halfway across the globe who thinks he is doing the world a favor by killing it. For all of human history borders shift, leaders shift, some are tyrants, some are not…however 2022 by engaging in an apocalyptic war over Putin and Ukraine will not resolve the human nature and eliminate suffering.
    - chrisseaton 4y ago
      > if he comes for my family and home, I will fight for them fiercely But why not compromise instead? It’d be less violence for your family.
      - kcplate 4y ago
        You seem to be misunderstanding the scope in my argument. My choices for my family are at a local level, but i would not expect/demand someone in say, Singapore to make a decision that would result in the death of someone in Denmark, on behalf of my family.
        chrisseaton 4y ago
        But if you can understand why you wouldn’t want to compromise, can you not understand why the Ukrainians don’t want to compromise either?
        kcplate 4y ago
        Of course I understand why they don’t want to compromise. Their scope is local, but my scope is global. The problem is the level of sacrifice required in a worldwide conflict that may include nuclear to “take Putin out” only solves the problem of a single man. It doesn’t create a lasting solution because it doesn’t correct human nature. It doesn’t prevent the next worse tyrant. In fact it makes tyranny much more likely because the possibility of many tyrants that will come from the one.

Why attempt it again when it failed every other time and always led to new violence and suffering?

kcplate 4y ago

Because every other time it avoided worldwide apocalypse.

chrisseaton 4y ago
How much of the world do you think we should let him subjugate? When he comes for your family and home are you handing them over without any fuss? Bizarre.
- kcplate 4y ago
  > How much of the world do you think we should let him subjugate? That phrase assumes that we have the power to stop him without creating a greater loss of life than the death he would create in the areas he wants to subjugate. It also assumes that if we do enter into a worldwide conflict to remove him and we succeed, that whatever and whoever is left will be less tyrannical, less expansionist and less likely to create suffering. And to answer your question…if he comes for my family and home, I will fight for them fiercely, because I will likely have not yet been nuked off the bloody planet by some “well intentioned” warmongering jackass from halfway across the globe who thinks he is doing the world a favor by killing it. For all of human history borders shift, leaders shift, some are tyrants, some are not…however 2022 by engaging in an apocalyptic war over Putin and Ukraine will not resolve the human nature and eliminate suffering.
  - chrisseaton 4y ago
    > if he comes for my family and home, I will fight for them fiercely But why not compromise instead? It’d be less violence for your family.
    - kcplate 4y ago
      You seem to be misunderstanding the scope in my argument. My choices for my family are at a local level, but i would not expect/demand someone in say, Singapore to make a decision that would result in the death of someone in Denmark, on behalf of my family.
      - chrisseaton 4y ago
        But if you can understand why you wouldn’t want to compromise, can you not understand why the Ukrainians don’t want to compromise either?
        kcplate 4y ago
        Of course I understand why they don’t want to compromise. Their scope is local, but my scope is global. The problem is the level of sacrifice required in a worldwide conflict that may include nuclear to “take Putin out” only solves the problem of a single man. It doesn’t create a lasting solution because it doesn’t correct human nature. It doesn’t prevent the next worse tyrant. In fact it makes tyranny much more likely because the possibility of many tyrants that will come from the one.