3 ms·

As opposed to citizens, who ought to just be thrilled their government is gassing them?

• lazide 2y ago
  Nuking a non-nuclear country has less risk of MAD style escalation, yes? Same idea.
  • _heimdall 2y ago
    Is your argument that the use of force should be acceptable as long as you know its asymmetric?
    • lazide 2y ago
      I’m not making an argument, rather an observation. A saying I’ve heard from many folks I know who have been in the US military is ‘fair fights are for idiots’. I think it’s a common mindset in any (successful) military.
      • _heimdall 2y ago
        For sure, I agree with that. How does that link back to having exceptions allowing law enforcement to use tear gas on civilians though?
        • lazide 2y ago
          Because civilians don’t have WMD style chemical weapons, generally? So are not an ‘MAD’ type risk. Unlike potential enemy combatants. Morality has nothing to do with these scenarios (treaty/convention wise) near as I can tell.
          • _heimdall 2y ago
            It seems like you would agree then that the use of force should be acceptable as long as you know its asymmetric. Am I misreading you there?
            • lazide 2y ago
              Clearly yes, you are misreading me. If governments consider it acceptable or not has nothing to do with my opinion. Or yours.