Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Oberon
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Skybird
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Dowly
I mean, let's but this the other way. Syria makes a raid on US soil for some "as justified" reason, they mission is success but reports start to pour in that there was some US civilians caught in the crossfire and killed. Now, ladies and gentlemen, place your bets, how long would a country named Syria exist on the world map after that? :hmm:
|
6-12 weeks, I assume. That's why they would not do it. Lesson of it: weakness is never a virtue or a sign of civilised manners. It simply is what it is: weakness.
|
Which boils down to the age old question, is might necessarily right? |
No, and might without sense of resopnsibility is tyranny. Power can corrupt. Nevertheless improvement and progress lies in increasing the number of your options, and that you will never acchieve by beeing weak, but only by being strong (in a wider meaning of the word). Thus it is better to have strength and not needing to use it, than to be in need of strength but not having it. What victims of crimes usually have in common is that they were weak. Of the strong ones, some are just, others are not. The latter are a problem.