mdk

This Star Wars detail just blew my fucking mind

HollywoodMole said
... I think I-I just... So that isn't even an original track>?

They're both original pieces by John Williams. The original is the low, ominous theme used for Emperor Palpatine. The second is a cheerful re-orchestration with children singing and gungan drums and shit -- but it's the same theme, because it's the same character (then-newly-elected Chancellor Palpatine). It's like corruption in reverse. A brooding, terrible evil, masquerading as the people's savior, and everybody falls for it -- even me and I'm guessing like everyone else who saw the movie. It's brilliant and complex, and of course Lucas had almost nothing to do with it -- I mean we all know that John Williams is a genius, and always has been.

Question to all Chinese/British/Americans/French/Russians/Israelis/Indians/Pakistanis

So Boerd said
So if Russia does not nuke London and Paris, but nukes the others, the Anglo-French response should be...My purpose is that people should stop thinking every nuclear war will be a life-extinguishing global extinction event. Such that if Russia or China use tactical nuclear weapons, we should not fear a response in kind. If they and other nuclear states ever get that there is almost nothing save an impending attack on our countries to warrant a nuclear response, they are more likely to step out of line.

We are all safer if we believe the lie that a nuclear weapon's use results in the end of the world. We don't need nuclear bombs to dismantle most rogue-state armies. Nukes don't help against ISIS. All we need are JDAMs, hellfires, and maybe a MOAB or two, just to make a point. There is no reason to pave the road for easier nuking. Nobody wins. Especially when you start talking about China or Russia -- there is *no such thing* as a good reason to nuke China, Russia, or the USA. None.

The idea that we're supposed to employ nukes to keep other nations from 'stepping out of line' is pretty Bond-villain-y. That doesn't make it wrong, per se, but I'm not crazy about it.

This Star Wars detail just blew my fucking mind

The entire prequel cast is dancing and cheering to the themesong of the dark lord of the Sith.

I had sushi for the first time tonight

idlehands said
Tbh, I probably would do that the next time. Was not impressed by sushi.

Try spider roll

Question to all Chinese/British/Americans/French/Russians/Israelis/Indians/Pakistanis

So Boerd said
So Russia nukes Berlin, Rome, London, Paris and Madrid, but makes no preparations for a strike on the US. US strike or no?

Understand that the scenario is virtually impossible -- Yes. Because a nuclear deterrent that doesn't react, isn't a deterrent. In this situation Russia has made the calculation that they can fire nuclear weapons with impunity, a calculation which we must prove catastrophically wrong, for the sake of every human being on the planet. In this situation, we have to destroy not only the Russian government and military, we have to destroy the concept itself that a nation can conduct such a nuclear strike and get away with it.

Question to all Chinese/British/Americans/French/Russians/Israelis/Indians/Pakistanis

So Boerd said Americans, what level of Chinese provocation would warrant a US nuclear strike? How about Russian?

A nuclear strike does not end the world. Nuclear retaliation ends the world. So the only situation in which a nuclear strike is advantageous is one in which there are guarantees that there will be no retaliation. The example I use is, if North Korea were to amass an army and launch a bombardment of Seoul. As long as China gave the okay, we would almost certainly be wise to nuke their army formation, rather than trying to tackle them with conventional forces.

By the same logic, there aren't a lot of scenarios involving nuclear nations (China, Russia, Pakistan, et al) which would make nuclear weapons a smart option, because the only way to ensure zero-retaliation is to ensure that every nuclear option of the enemy is destroyed. That's not something you want to bet the world on. That's why rogue states want nuclear programs in the first place -- it's only MAD if you've got something to shoot back with.

Edit: The other justification would be, obviously, a nuclear or existential provocation. When the circumstances are such that only a nuclear strike can protect your nation and/or countrymen, the military has an obligation to nuke the living shit out of the threat. Fortunately, there's virtually no danger of such a scenario for the foreseeable future.

ISIS in Ciudad Juarez, Mexico

If ISIS is planning an attack against US-Mexico border security, methinks there are plenty of friends to be had in the coyote business.

go for a swim?

I should clarify. Those are sea snakes, one of the most deadly venomous creatures on earth.

ISIS in Ciudad Juarez, Mexico

Thank god we're not sending crates of assault weapons to mexican crime cartels.

.....anymore.....

go for a swim?