Ukraine

The_Alchemist

Super Anarchist
3,213
1,765
USA
Read it again. You missed a lot.
No I didn't.

Your premise was so ridiculous that it didn't make the point that you wanted.

The original argument was if Putin ordered a nuclear strike, would it be carried out by the individuals that have to press the button and fly the planes. I said no. I think there are individuals along the line that would realize they would be destroying the world. All of their families, grandchildren, parents, civilization, etc.. There are too many obvious way out of the situation without going to that extreme.

And, as I pointed out before, there is an actual example of where the US had checks and balances in place to stop a crazy US leader from making such orders. These types of orders would only happen if it was the only alternative, with no other way out of the situation.

As for your premise, the idea that Texas was on the verge of destroying a large US force assumes that the US would send in a large force to "take back" Texas. The parts of Texas that prospers is because it is a part of the US and not because it is Texas. The economies and cultures within the US all succeed because they have the universal consumer base of the US. No states out side of California or possibly NY have a large enough "independent" economic base to be able to possibly survive on their own.
 

Mark_K

Super Anarchist
No I didn't.

Your premise was so ridiculous that it didn't make the point that you wanted.

The original argument was if Putin ordered a nuclear strike, would it be carried out by the individuals that have to press the button and fly the planes. I said no. I think there are individuals along the line that would realize they would be destroying the world. All of their families, grandchildren, parents, civilization, etc.. There are too many obvious way out of the situation without going to that extreme.

And, as I pointed out before, there is an actual example of where the US had checks and balances in place to stop a crazy US leader from making such orders. These types of orders would only happen if it was the only alternative, with no other way out of the situation.

As for your premise, the idea that Texas was on the verge of destroying a large US force assumes that the US would send in a large force to "take back" Texas. The parts of Texas that prospers is because it is a part of the US and not because it is Texas. The economies and cultures within the US all succeed because they have the universal consumer base of the US. No states out side of California or possibly NY have a large enough "independent" economic base to be able to possibly survive on their own.
You missed the point because you are unable to imagine the US being in anything like the condition I described, or are unable to discern the difference between an imaginary scenario and an analysis of the existing conditions.

If you think we might not be desperate enough to do just about anything if a clearly superior power was involving itself on wars on borders, how do you account for the Cuban Missile Crisis?
 

estarzinger

Super Anarchist
7,791
1,221
No states out side of California or possibly NY have a large enough "independent" economic base to be able to possibly survive on their own.
mmmm . . . . texas GDP would place it as the 8th or 9th country in the world. And oil and tech are rather easy to sell on the world market.

It does ofc prosper in large part because of its connection to the rest of the US, but it is possible (for some with an extreme viewpoint) to imagine it maintaining a sufficient economic connection while being politically separate - much like brexit was imagined by its supporters.

In actual practice OFC that would be extremely hard to pull off smoothly and peacefully. And there is a rather good chance inho that it would draw a significant federal government response if it ever went beyond the idle chatter stage.
 
Last edited:

barfy

Super Anarchist
5,449
1,591
Not a good analogy at all. Nor worth exploring. This is Putin’s doing, in the end.
I couldn't find the purple button.
And the fact that you mention the war was/is the result of one large ego and empire building...well in that light it could happen anywhere. The right kind of nationalist/fascist in the US could decide taking a resource rich country would be a good idea. Even if it hadn't worked well in the past.
 

Ishmael

Granfalloon
58,669
16,452
Fuctifino
I couldn't find the purple button.
And the fact that you mention the war was/is the result of one large ego and empire building...well in that light it could happen anywhere. The right kind of nationalist/fascist in the US could decide taking a resource rich country would be a good idea. Even if it hadn't worked well in the past.
Iraq 2.0?
 

The_Alchemist

Super Anarchist
3,213
1,765
USA
You missed the point because you are unable to imagine the US being in anything like the condition I described, or are unable to discern the difference between an imaginary scenario and an analysis of the existing conditions.

If you think we might not be desperate enough to do just about anything if a clearly superior power was involving itself on wars on borders, how do you account for the Cuban Missile Crisis?
Your whole analysis was imaginary based upon ridiculous assumptions. I started to write an in depth rebuttal, but it isn't worth it.
 

The_Alchemist

Super Anarchist
3,213
1,765
USA
I couldn't find the purple button.
And the fact that you mention the war was/is the result of one large ego and empire building...well in that light it could happen anywhere. The right kind of nationalist/fascist in the US could decide taking a resource rich country would be a good idea. Even if it hadn't worked well in the past.
I think and hope this whole fascist fade that is spreading around the world is fading quickly.
 
Top