"I'd suggest doing the same if you don't want the rest of the planet to view you as a nation of 3rd-world savages going around burning witches for stealing your penises and such."
Banning never works because superstition embraces martyrdom!
As an anti-theist, I suggest that exposure, scorn, and treating it with contempt so OTHERS are made comfortable scorning Superstition is the way to go.
There is no excuse for believing religion.
I defy any religionist to PROVE their Sky Fairie exists. Do it NOW, here, or fuck off.
Nonsense should be met with harsh debate and attack, not respect. People who believe in Superstition are generally incurable, but can be exposed as fools easily, so DO THAT, and reduce their number of converts. Slavery to Shamans is no fun, and feel free to point out the MOTIVE of Shamans in wanting to give YOU orders!
If someone attempts to direct your spiritual life, they are betraying you and they are your enemy.
...and promoted as a way to rebel against the dead hand of the "flat earther" Superstitionists.
Teachers can't do this, but if any students are reading this post:
Your conventional authority figures want you to be stupid cattle. They despise reason itself and they want you to be slaves. To them.
The kids in the 1960s were actually right about The Man before most of them sold out and got old and scared.
Science flies you to the moon. Religion flies you into buildings. As you age your physical power and independence will allow you to reject your authority figures as most deserve.
Cultivate a "fuck you" attitude but learn how to mask it lest you be in situations where Bible Thumpers have the power to punish you.
Trust no one. Not me, not anyone.
Learn and use Critical Thinking or you will end up like the retarded fat fucks you see shuffling around Walmart who believe everything Fox News tells them.
Because to many people, "Windows is the computer".
Also, there are plenty of "dumb" Americans using the same OS for the same reason.
"Another one: Be rich and smart enough to have a nuclear research, but not smart enough to roll its own IT infrastructure base on code they can audit?"
"Cities need all kinds of people working at all income levels to work efficiently. Banishing the working poor to the hinterlands drives up costs (commuting)."
There is a solution to that developed to a high degree of effectiveness before we even had automobiles. It's called suburban light rail.
Rail still interconnects large swathes of the Northeast where it was too necessary to get murdered, er "displaced" by competing interests.
Commuting by train can be relaxing. I did it for years in North Jersey. Cities don't need the poor to live in them because that CONCENTRATES the poor which exacerbates their problems.
Disperse the poor while facilitating AFFORDABLE commuting so they can work in areas they can't afford to live in. Commuting by rail is much cheaper than trying to maintain a car, much less hassle than driving a car, and when connected to a good subway system is a great way to get around cities.
My country belongs to me and exclusivity protects my interests while giving away the store does not.
If YOU want to live in a Third World country, you have plenty of other options.
The reasons people want to LEAVE such countries are the same reasons we shouldn't let ALL of them in or we just duplicate the problems they fled in the first place!
"Most certainly, the most efficient way to deal with Germany once and for all in 1945 would have been to massacre them completely - firebombings, artillery, whatever. No people, no problem, right?"
Not at all. The process of BREAKING THEIR WILL TO RESIST being complete, the process of converting and exploiting them for use in (BOTH) sides of the Cold War began almost immediately.
The Allies had the experience of WWI, when there were no great consequences for Germany outside the front. Germans didn't reform and were eager for another war. In WWII, the whole enemy population (the idea that a civilian is different from a soldier in Total War is a convenient fiction of the Nuremburg "victors self-justification ritual" trials) was beaten into submission.
The Nazi people (which Germans essentially were and let's not sugar-coat it) weren't "gently requested" to submit, but beaten and with their Reich in ruins they couldn't pretend they were "stabbed in the back" (Dolchstoss) as in WWI.
Both the Allies and Soviets promptly consolidated their gains, sifted Germany for useful tech (Operation Paperclip etc), and converted their hunks of the Third Reich into modern nations and military allies.
The Soviets, having captured more Nazis than the Allies, sent them off to Gulag to thin the herd before eventually returning the survivors as examples. That, better than liquidation (which would have been deserved since the German people attempted to literally exterminate the Soviet people!), served the expansion of the ComBloc.
"At which point do you say it's enough?"
Never before your ENEMY surrenders and begs mercy and agrees to do your will, or is dead. His choice. The enemy cannot have an option in EXISTENTIAL war other than surrender lest he rise to fight again.
Germany had ALREADY cost the Allies millions dead in WWI. The GERMAN PEOPLE promptly rearmed and gleefully tried it again. The second time, they paid for it and are now remarkably peaceful!
Sorry, dumbshit. The US doesn't depend on Iraqi oil and never did.
Iraq and Iran could cease to exist and the US would still have sufficient oil. Gas rationing is easy enough and has been done successfully in WWII.
The days of the OPEC embargo are long over and in an extreme emergency the US could not only command domestic reserves but could rapidly built coal gasification plants (just suspend environmental regs) as Germany did during WWII.
We are now, BTW, a net petroleum exporter and it took little time to become that, but don't let reality disturb your delicious conspiracy theories which, like religion/superstition, exalt the believer with Special Insight.
Anyone who has thrown trash with a few beer cans in a burn barrel knows it takes only modest heat to destroy most of the cans and promptly rust the barrel....
"In fact, Soviets could have likely ended the war right there and then if they kept marching on; they just decided to play it safe."
Since the Soviets had lost about TEN MILLION troops and the Germans were fighting desperately to buy time for refugees to evacuate, it wasn't just "playing it safe".
Your priorities are revealing in that your only concern is for Germans.
Germany had killed tens of millions of people. It's not sane to expect the countries they attacked to quibble over collateral damage. The whole premise of "war" is that "enemy" lives are worth less than "own side" lives and that it's absurd to sacrifice yours to save theirs.
Dresden was a legitimate military target. All infrastructure was a legitimate military target and all workers were in effect war workers so they were military targets.
WWII was a serious war, a Total War, not some UN police action designed to fail. It was literally an existential war which made thorough destruction of all Nazi capabilities a duty.
Germany initiated WWII and the population of Germany worked long and hard to prepare for and sustain that war to the bitter end.
Slashdot Mirror
Really? Then destroy Evolution, here, on this forum, NOW, with your proofs.
"I'd suggest doing the same if you don't want the rest of the planet to view you as a nation of 3rd-world savages going around burning witches for stealing your penises and such."
Fair enough, if the witches return my penis.
"If' is shit. Bring EVIDENCE or fuck off.
"Now I have to change my favourite Korea to North Korea."
The Communist reaction to religion was, lest we forget, completely reasonable given the role of superstition in protecting monarchies.
The Norks didn't work out well for NK due to other reasons.
Fred Phelps is a Christian. Anyone who self-defines as a Christian is a Christian.
Banning never works because superstition embraces martyrdom!
As an anti-theist, I suggest that exposure, scorn, and treating it with contempt so OTHERS are made comfortable scorning Superstition is the way to go.
There is no excuse for believing religion.
I defy any religionist to PROVE their Sky Fairie exists. Do it NOW, here, or fuck off.
Nonsense should be met with harsh debate and attack, not respect. People who believe in Superstition are generally incurable, but can be exposed as fools easily, so DO THAT, and reduce their number of converts. Slavery to Shamans is no fun, and feel free to point out the MOTIVE of Shamans in wanting to give YOU orders!
If someone attempts to direct your spiritual life, they are betraying you and they are your enemy.
They could do worse than copying bits of European culture which are beautiful.
After being inspired by Marx and Engels, this is Much Better.
...and promoted as a way to rebel against the dead hand of the "flat earther" Superstitionists.
Teachers can't do this, but if any students are reading this post:
Your conventional authority figures want you to be stupid cattle. They despise reason itself and they want you to be slaves. To them.
The kids in the 1960s were actually right about The Man before most of them sold out and got old and scared.
Science flies you to the moon. Religion flies you into buildings. As you age your physical power and independence will allow you to reject your authority figures as most deserve.
Cultivate a "fuck you" attitude but learn how to mask it lest you be in situations where Bible Thumpers have the power to punish you.
Trust no one. Not me, not anyone.
Learn and use Critical Thinking or you will end up like the retarded fat fucks you see shuffling around Walmart who believe everything Fox News tells them.
You are much more likely to die driving to work. MUCH more likely.
"From each according to their villainy, to each according to their vulnerability."
A Libertarian, I take it?
Because to many people, "Windows is the computer".
Also, there are plenty of "dumb" Americans using the same OS for the same reason.
"Another one: Be rich and smart enough to have a nuclear research, but not smart enough to roll its own IT infrastructure base on code they can audit?"
Uh oh......
"Cities need all kinds of people working at all income levels to work efficiently. Banishing the working poor to the hinterlands drives up costs (commuting)."
There is a solution to that developed to a high degree of effectiveness before we even had automobiles. It's called suburban light rail.
Rail still interconnects large swathes of the Northeast where it was too necessary to get murdered, er "displaced" by competing interests.
Commuting by train can be relaxing. I did it for years in North Jersey.
Cities don't need the poor to live in them because that CONCENTRATES the poor which exacerbates their problems.
Disperse the poor while facilitating AFFORDABLE commuting so they can work in areas they can't afford to live in. Commuting by rail is much cheaper than trying to maintain a car, much less hassle than driving a car, and when connected to a good subway system is a great way to get around cities.
"...I'm guessing most here will believe that its mission was one of unmitigated evil."
Damn political polarisation!
I favor Centrist, Mitigated Evil where all Americans can share the benefits.
"I'd love to drive a bomb."
Buy a used Pinto.
My country belongs to me and exclusivity protects my interests while giving away the store does not.
If YOU want to live in a Third World country, you have plenty of other options.
The reasons people want to LEAVE such countries are the same reasons we shouldn't let ALL of them in or we just duplicate the problems they fled in the first place!
Of course that doesn't concern you.
"Most certainly, the most efficient way to deal with Germany once and for all in 1945 would have been to massacre them completely - firebombings, artillery, whatever. No people, no problem, right?"
Not at all. The process of BREAKING THEIR WILL TO RESIST being complete, the process of converting and exploiting them for use in (BOTH) sides of the Cold War began almost immediately.
The Allies had the experience of WWI, when there were no great consequences for Germany outside the front. Germans didn't reform and were eager for another war. In WWII, the whole enemy population (the idea that a civilian is different from a soldier in Total War is a convenient fiction of the Nuremburg "victors self-justification ritual" trials) was beaten into submission.
The Nazi people (which Germans essentially were and let's not sugar-coat it) weren't "gently requested" to submit, but beaten and with their Reich in ruins they couldn't pretend they were "stabbed in the back" (Dolchstoss) as in WWI.
Both the Allies and Soviets promptly consolidated their gains, sifted Germany for useful tech (Operation Paperclip etc), and converted their hunks of the Third Reich into modern nations and military allies.
The Soviets, having captured more Nazis than the Allies, sent them off to Gulag to thin the herd before eventually returning the survivors as examples. That, better than liquidation (which would have been deserved since the German people attempted to literally exterminate the Soviet people!), served the expansion of the ComBloc.
"At which point do you say it's enough?"
Never before your ENEMY surrenders and begs mercy and agrees to do your will, or is dead. His choice. The enemy cannot have an option in EXISTENTIAL war other than surrender lest he rise to fight again.
Germany had ALREADY cost the Allies millions dead in WWI. The GERMAN PEOPLE promptly rearmed and gleefully tried it again. The second time, they paid for it and are now remarkably peaceful!
"otherwise we would be out of oil "
Sorry, dumbshit. The US doesn't depend on Iraqi oil and never did.
Iraq and Iran could cease to exist and the US would still have sufficient oil. Gas rationing is easy enough and has been done successfully in WWII.
The days of the OPEC embargo are long over and in an extreme emergency the US could not only command domestic reserves but could rapidly built coal gasification plants (just suspend environmental regs) as Germany did during WWII.
We are now, BTW, a net petroleum exporter and it took little time to become that, but don't let reality disturb your delicious conspiracy theories which, like religion/superstition, exalt the believer with Special Insight.
"For those snarky folks who say "don't buy it", that doesn't work in practice. "
Works fine in MY practice.
Anyone who has thrown trash with a few beer cans in a burn barrel knows it takes only modest heat to destroy most of the cans and promptly rust the barrel....
"Soooo, the attacks on the Pentagon and WTC were also legitimate targets? "
Yes. Fighting is fighting.
The way to register your objection to an enemy isn't to squall about morals. It is to kill him.
War is for deciding such questions, because force trumps everything else.
"In fact, Soviets could have likely ended the war right there and then if they kept marching on; they just decided to play it safe."
Since the Soviets had lost about TEN MILLION troops and the Germans were fighting desperately to buy time for refugees to evacuate, it wasn't just "playing it safe".
Your priorities are revealing in that your only concern is for Germans.
Germany had killed tens of millions of people. It's not sane to expect the countries they attacked to quibble over collateral damage. The whole premise of "war" is that "enemy" lives are worth less than "own side" lives and that it's absurd to sacrifice yours to save theirs.
"Are they going to use them for watering the crops or something?"
Google "Chemtrails".
Pleasant dreams.
Dresden was a legitimate military target. All infrastructure was a legitimate military target and all workers were in effect war workers so they were military targets.
WWII was a serious war, a Total War, not some UN police action designed to fail. It was literally an existential war which made thorough destruction of all Nazi capabilities a duty.
Germany initiated WWII and the population of Germany worked long and hard to prepare for and sustain that war to the bitter end.
Were it not for the military-industrial complex there would be no NASA or even a space program.
The peaceful world you dream of will never exist and it's completely naive to even want such things.
"... is the abject lack of morality in modern society"
As contrasted with WHICH imaginary "Good Old Days" society where things were supposedly better and please supply citations?