(quietly) We are all kept enthralled to the myth of a good and clean war, writ in the our sacred remembrance of the victory of WWII, which came about largely through carpet bombing Germany back to the stone age followed by nuking Japan twice.
-
-
-
We like to imagine we can have a clean war, but there is no clean war. The only way we were able to buttress the myth of a clean war was when the media worked in concert with the gov't to bolster that narrative, suppressing any and all contrary narratives.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
first contact with the enemy
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
tbh before clicking through I thought this was about the "rationalist accent" topic
End of conversation
-
-
-
Socialized medicine won’t work because the gov can’t do anything right! Let’s let the gov have a few trillion to *checks notes* run a complex series of invasions spanning decades for no discernible reason! Same people.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
This is usually the correct level of meta for this question, but in this specific case you need to step back one further and ask if "what if NOT war" was a available option in context. (I am skeptical.) If you decide it was not, "what if better war" becomes available again.
-
(If you carry this logic far enough you reduce to delta outcome / delta opinion, which is zero, and then stop having opinions.)
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
I think the proper thing to ask is: what would the alternatives have been? I don't think any nation could suffer an attack on its national military, a major city landmark, and (attempted) WH and NOT counter militarily.
-
Hmmmm But we do airstrikes all the time without reprisal
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.