Originally posted by shavixmir
If I was to threaten you with a stick and say: "I'm gonna beat up your kid."
Wouldn't you get a stick to hit me back with?
Self defence I completely agree with. I would defend my children to the death of cause infact I'd defend anyone I saw being hurt if I could without putting my children in danger. And, yes I guess one could argue that it's self defence to build up a suply of arms if your potential emeny has them. Ultumatly though, I disagree and I think it'd be retaliation, which I'm against. If someone hit my child at school the next day I wouldn't feel the need to hit them back. I'd instruct my child to keep their distance and I've told them all they must defend themselves with words first and if neccessary with force after, which they do do.
When it comes to nucular weapons; if Japan had them when we sent two their way, and retaliated with more then where would we be now? How dose a country defend against nucular war? It dosen't. And killing the other side would be out of hate and bitterness. It's not possiable that a whole country wants to make war.
Besides it's all pointless anyway and everyone should live in the moment and not worry about the maybes, spending energy thinking if they hate us we'll hate them back. Also what we're talking about here is a potential of a potential in nucular weapons. In contrast, we can see the stick and persumably we know of a motive. Infact if you were to do that and knowing you're not insane I would asume you're joking.