Science Undecided on Room Temperature Superconductors

[pErvinalia]

But, yet again, the development of the bomb was not down to the isolated effort of "mad scientists", it was a collaborative effort of physicists, engineers, military personal and politicians.

Who never should have been allowed to do so. Anywhere. Ever.

Says the guy who worships the US military and its ability to reign death on anyone anywhere at all times.

And one that, in the context of the times, was perfectly reasonable, IMO... (which is not a "politically correct" comment in this day and age...)

No it wasn't. Not even at the time.

You're so full of shit. You are more than happy to bomb and kill millions of civilians in Syria because you are scared someone from ISIS is going to come and chop your head off.

[Seth]

But, yet again, the development of the bomb was not down to the isolated effort of "mad scientists", it was a collaborative effort of physicists, engineers, military personal and politicians.

Who never should have been allowed to do so. Anywhere. Ever.

Says the guy who worships the US military and its ability to reign death on anyone anywhere at all times.

We have the strength of ten because our cause is just. Gun control is hitting your intended target with lethal effect.

[pErvinalia]

What the fuck are you talking about gun control for?? You were claiming science military and government immoral, yet your moral compass is demonstrably 180 degrees arse about.

[Seth]

What the fuck are you talking about gun control for?? You were claiming science military and government immoral, yet your moral compass is demonstrably 180 degrees arse about.

No, I said invention and development of the atomic bomb was immoral. Somebody else improperly attempted to expand that to all military weapons. You're erecting strawman arguments, as usual.

[pErvinalia]

As usual you totally miss the point. Why was the atomic bomb immoral? Because it led to the deaths of hundreds of thousands of civilians presumably? Yet you advocate murdering millions of innocent civilians in Syria just because ISIS is based there. And you berate government and military for making the bomb, yet in the next post bleat your Merca rah rah rah nonsense that your cause is "just"? Whose fucking cause? Your government's and military's. What is the difference now to then?

[Seth]

As usual you totally miss the point. Why was the atomic bomb immoral? Because it led to the deaths of hundreds of thousands of civilians presumably?

No, the invention and development of the atomic bomb, and the hydrogen bomb, and the neutron bomb was immoral because the specific intended purpose of that invention was to create a weapon of such destructive magnitude that its very existence would dissuade anyone from ever using it on the false premise that humanity would recoil from the very concept. The development of the atomic bomb was a pure terrorist act specifically intended to terrorize people, specifically the Japanese people but eventually every person on earth as nukes proliferated, and its invention and development were therefore utterly immoral and completely unethical.

Yet you advocate murdering millions of innocent civilians in Syria just because ISIS is based there.

You're a liar. I have never advocated doing that. You have however repeatedly erected this false accusation of a strawman.

And you berate government and military for making the bomb,

Yup.

yet in the next post bleat your Merca rah rah rah nonsense that your cause is "just"?

Indeed.

Whose fucking cause?

The American cause of freedom, liberty, and righteousness of course. There is no other just cause.

Your government's and military's. What is the difference now to then?

Killing an enemy soldier in combat is distinguishable from wiping out entire civilizations with nuclear weapons as a terror tactic intended to induce an enemy not to engage in belligerent behavior.

[pErvinalia]

Civilian casualties under the drone program are 10x what they are with conventional bombs. You don't give a fuck about anyone but Americans. And you've repeatedly called for nukes to be used in the middle east. I don't even know why I am doing this for the 4 billionth time. You simply don't understand logic and reasoning, and have no intention of having honest debate.

[pErvinalia]

Yet you advocate murdering millions of innocent civilians in Syria just because ISIS is based there.

You're a liar. I have never advocated doing that. You have however repeatedly erected this false accusation of a strawman.

http://rationalia.com/forum/viewtopic.p ... w#p1631534
http://rationalia.com/forum/viewtopic.p ... w#p1631712

Yes it does, but the problem is that no national leader since Alexander the Great has known how to go to war. When you go to war you unleash the dogs of war and tell them to destroy the enemy utterly, and as quickly and efficiently as possible with a minimum of casualties to themselves and you give them any weapon or tool they need to do so. You destroy the enemy's troops, infrastructure, supply lines, dams, power stations, sewer plants, water plants and anything else the enemy can use. You bring them to their knees so they surrender and then you tell them they'd better behave or you'll bomb them right back into the stone age again and again and again, as many times as it takes, without mercy or quarter.

http://rationalia.com/forum/viewtopic.p ... w#p1631321

[pErvinalia]

Yes, you are definitely the right person to be talking about the morality of war and weapons and civilisation.

[JimC]

Civilian casualties under the drone program are 10x what they are with conventional bombs. You don't give a fuck about anyone but Americans. And you've repeatedly called for nukes to be used in the middle east. I don't even know why I am doing this for the 4 billionth time. You simply don't understand logic and reasoning, and have no intention of having honest debate.

Where do you get that figure from, rEv?

Compare the current Russian bombing campaign in Syria with targeted drone strikes...

Or any other "conventional" bombing campaign of the past...

[pErvinalia]

Some report I saw on Facebook. I'll see if I can find it later.

[pErvinalia]

This isn't the report, but is relevant.

41 men targeted but 1,147 people killed: US drone strikes – the facts on the ground

[JimC]

This isn't the report, but is relevant.

41 men targeted but 1,147 people killed: US drone strikes – the facts on the ground

Sure, particularly in the border of Pakistan and Afghanistan, drone strikes have certainly killed many civilians, and it can be argued that by radicalising the population affected they ultimately do more harm than good.

That, however, was not my point; I was responding to your comparison with conventional bombing. Potentially, at least, drone strikes to take out a single house in a village where terrorists are meeting kills fewer than carpet bombing the same village...

[pErvinalia]

Western airforces don't carpet bomb any more, as far as I am aware. The difference is in the pilot and associated aircraft being able to better assess whether a strike should go ahead. Maybe also a case of different missile technologies too.

[Brian Peacock]

I wonder why the defensive use of nuclear weapons is immoral while the defensive use of combat aircraft, artillery, tanks, ground-forces, or even hand guns isn't (other than just because Seth says so)?