3 ms·

Watch "A Taste of Armageddon" http://www.cbs.com/classics/star_trek/video/video.php?cid=619493214&pid=d4jta0HHzzIp1bwgQ10osYAyZ03XIReJ&play=true http://www.cbs

Watch "A Taste of Armageddon" http://www.cbs.com/classics/star_trek/video/video.php?cid=619493214&pid=d4jta0HHzzIp1bwgQ10osYAyZ03XIReJ&play=true http://www.cbs.com/classics/star_trek/video/video.php?cid=61... http://www.startrek.com/startrek/view/series/TOS/episode/68706.html http://www.startrek.com/startrek/view/series/TOS/episode/687... Many months ago when I first learned that USAF and RAF pilots in Las Vegas, NV were flying armed drones in a war zone "worlds" away I knew we were not far from the scenario presented in that episode. War needs to be painful, it needs to be bloody and costly otherwise there is no reason to stop fighting and no arguments against starting wars and "nuke from orbit" becomes the 1st/easiest/best answer to every problem.

jerf 18y ago
The historical correlation between the in-your-faceness of war, and the amount of war, is negative. (The news fools you; on a per-capita basis, the amount of war is going down. http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/steven_pinker_on_the_myth_of_violence.html http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/steven_pinker_on_the_myth...) There is no actual evidence that making war bloody and costly is an effective strategy for preventing it.