Comments on: Islamist regimes and nukes (Harris)

By: bradm

bradm — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 17:57:10 +0000

I don’t think I can think of any scenario where a nuclear first strike that kills millions of innocents is an appropriate action. You can?

The horrible part is that Harris tries to blame the Muslims in this situation. Notice that he says the thing in this situation that would plunge us into war wouldn’t be the actual nuclear strike by the U.S., but rather the Islamic people’s “perception” of this event.

By: Josh Sowin

Josh Sowin — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 16:29:40 +0000

So if terrorists said they had a nuke, and we confirmed it, and we found out their plan to attack… you think we should wait and see if they really attack? There are no scenarios where you think we should strike first?

By: bradm

bradm — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 16:07:26 +0000

The problem is - how would we know that somebody is “going to kill us with it?” The only way we could know that is if they actually did attack first. It isn’t a sure thing that millions are going to die, either way. But if we were to first strike against them, then that would be a sure thing that millions would die.

By: Josh Sowin

Josh Sowin — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 15:47:44 +0000

He admits it would be an unthinkable crime. But if someone acquired a nuke and was going to kill us with it, should we strike first or should we let them kill us? Either way, millions die.

It’s a messy issue and is a relatively new question for man to deal with, because we’ve only had this kind of destructive technology for less than a century.

I hope we never have to deal with this scenario, but it seems likely that we eventually will.

By: bradm

bradm — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 15:39:18 +0000

Wow, Harris is a scary fellow. Essentially his excuse for making a nuclear first strike against somebody else is a childish “well, they were gonna do it first.” Ironically, he’s become the very thing he is afraid of in the “Islamists.”