Brandon9000 wrote:The idea of this thread was to indicate that the active use of the military to prevent events which are likely, but have not happened yet, is unreasonable. I have given a counter-example, which illustrates that this idea is false.
Sensing that you can't fight my reasoning, you do what people like you usually do - create distractions from the argument. I defy you to explain why the scenario I described would not be a very real danger which would easily justify the use of force if diplomatic efforts failed.
The idea of this thread was to provide some whimsical comic relief, which- although admittedly provided by someone whose views are not in lockstep with those who believe in bombing our way to a lasting peace - made it a welcome breath of fresh air to those of us who weary of the stay the course/cut and run merry-go-round.
Sensing that you are unequipped to relate to this, or any issue on
any level except "I'm-terminally-serious-and-my-opinions-are-of-global-importance", you typically try to keep it on the stifling one-note that you can understand. "This is how reality is, unless you provide unassailable proof of the contrary"
