3 ms·
Absolutely not unless you think the very worst most dysfunctional working group you’ve experienced at work should be able to make life-and-death decisions.
by declan_roberts 3y ago
Absolutely not unless you think the very worst most dysfunctional working group you’ve experienced at work should be able to make life-and-death decisions.
- dylan604 3y agoI know I’ve been in meetings where I’ve wished for the sweet relief of death. Would the use of force need to be unaimous, super majority, simple majority, or a unilateral decision?
- euroderf 3y agoMy original comment was tongue-in-cheek, but... Obv such a decision would be a vetoable Security Council authorization. Certainly this would still be less provocative to the world community than a unilateral attack, such as a US sub attacking a plant in the former USSR, or China attacking a plant on the coast of the Gulf of Mexico. And I guess it would be a last resort, after making an offer to fly in the tech and know-how to flare the methane instead. "Get me Red Adair on the hotline NOW!"