Philosophy Now Forum

promethean75 wrote: ↑Sun Apr 17, 2022 12:40 pm I am not at liberty to offer an opinion on this matter at the moment. For it would be ill-advised to pass judgement on such an organization without also considering and having comprehensive knowledge of its actions elsewhere in the world and to what advantage, and for whom, the organization worked.

So what planet have you been living on since 1949?

A strong point you make nonetheless. NATO might end up being a useless organization that was never really needed, but kept around because it created jobs.

Since the reason for it construction ended with Gorbachev one has to ask what sort of inertia has led it to persist beyond its remit?
Sadly its continued existence has allowed successive Russian leaders to see the West as a continuing threat and helped them justify a persistent suspicion of the West.
The tragedy here is the loss and a massive opportunity for cordial relations and an end to the cantankerous and obdurate nastiness of the Old Men at the Zoo, which has condemned any real chance of peace for the upcoming generation of Europeans.

I can imagine an alternate history in which NATO didn't exist, and affairs carried on more or less the same. Military conflicts around the world were resolved some other way, and nobody was ever heard to say 'damn there should be a NATO or something to handle stuff like this '

I can imagine that Keira Knightly really does love me, and wants to give herself to me as a sex slave.

You wanna see a difficult decision?

Keira Knightly or Natalie Portman (in their primes).

Tell me that ain't the hardest decision you would ever have to make.

Sculptor wrote: ↑Sun Apr 17, 2022 12:52 pm
I can imagine that Keira Knightly really does love me, and wants to give herself to me as a sex slave.

TMI

Alright i looked over all the good google images of each and it would have to be Portman... but lemme tell ya that wasn't easy. Knightley's quite the stunner in the right pics. Ultimately her features are too sharp tho.

I wonder what it feels like to be blown to pieces by shrapnel ..I wonder why anyone would want to live in a world where that possibility happens.

Are we just obliged to go along with living in a world where we harm ourselves and others...are we ok with that?

What the fucking hell is wrong with humanity?

promethean75 wrote: ↑Sun Apr 17, 2022 1:17 pm You wanna see a difficult decision?

Keira Knightly or Natalie Portman (in their primes).

Tell me that ain't the hardest decision you would ever have to make.

Tricky!!!

My decision: Both.
They are practically twins..

But probably better now than in "their primes" - experience counts for a lot, and who'd want to give instructions - might break the flow.

vegetariantaxidermy wrote: ↑Sat Apr 16, 2022 1:37 am

Walker wrote: ↑Sat Apr 16, 2022 12:46 am

vegetariantaxidermy wrote: ↑Fri Apr 15, 2022 11:02 pm Think about it. If EVERYONE refused then what could they do?

Lose.

There are implications.

Everyone means everyone, idiot.

You're not making any sense.

If it was everyone, who would be refused?
Who would the refusal be directed towards?
All the other refusers, who have nothing to refuse and thus are not refusing?

War is a physical attack.
Calling someone an idiot, who is not an idiot, is a verbal attack.
What if everyone refused to attack verbally, and physically?
What if just one person refuses.

Think about it.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Thu Apr 14, 2022 1:59 pm Nations do not need to feel threatened by other nations.

Do you think Ukrainians feel threatened, because they need to feel threatened.

If they don't, they need to wake up and smell the cordite.

Walker wrote: ↑Mon Apr 18, 2022 9:38 am

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Thu Apr 14, 2022 1:59 pm Nations do not need to feel threatened by other nations.

Do you think Ukrainians feel threatened, because they need to.

No idea what you mean by that, but in response...I'll say...The feeling that one's neigbour is a threat to them..is not a need, it's a perception appearing real, which is not real, not until the intention to harm actually happens in realtime.

There's no need to feel threatened when it's not known whether the threat is real or not.

Between individuals, threatening violence is a crime, although the action of violence is not real until it happens.

Walker wrote: ↑Mon Apr 18, 2022 9:38 am

If they don't, they need to wake up and smell the cordite.

I'm sorry...but, we just do not NEED cordite in our lives, really, how absurd to think we need cordite.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Mon Apr 18, 2022 9:49 am

Walker wrote: ↑Mon Apr 18, 2022 9:38 am

If they don't, they need to wake up and smell the cordite.

I'm sorry...but, we just do not NEED cordite in our lives, really, how absurd to think we need cordite.

They need to smell the cordite if it's there.

If they don't smell it, and it's there, they are as delusional as you.

Or maybe they have that Covid that's going around.

Walker wrote: ↑Mon Apr 18, 2022 9:48 am Between individuals, threatening violence is a crime, although the action of violence is not real until it happens.

That's right, violence against another is not real until there is a deliberate intention to make the violence an actual event in realtime.

Walker wrote: ↑Mon Apr 18, 2022 9:51 am They need to smell the cordite if it's there.

But it's not there, until it's deliberately put there by intention. So ask yourselves..why would you deliberately cause harm to others.

Walker wrote: ↑Mon Apr 18, 2022 9:51 amIf they don't smell it, and it's there, they are as delusional as you.

But it's not there, until it's deliberately put there by intention. So ask yourselves..why would you deliberately cause harm to others.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Mon Apr 18, 2022 9:53 am

Walker wrote: ↑Mon Apr 18, 2022 9:48 am Between individuals, threatening violence is a crime, although the action of violence is not real until it happens.

That's right, violence against another is not real until there is a deliberate intention to make the violence an actual event in realtime.

The threat is the declaration of intent.