One of the most irritating aspects of on line discussions with authoritarians and warmongers is their absolute certainty at how history would have turned out if such and such war had not been prosecuted precisely as it was. They seem to think that their counterfactuals prove something. They don’t. Their counterfactuals are pure speculation predicated on the very assumptions that they are advanced to support. I can play counterfactual, too. “if the US hadn’t entered World War I, it would have ended in a stalemate, and many lives would have been spared. One of those soldiers who did not die would have gone on to invent a cold fusion generator that would have made energy abundant and cheap for everyone. And another would sire a daughter who would serve as America’s first woman president and preside over 20 years of peace and prosperity. See. World War I was not worth it.” Pretty slick, huh?
Another trick is to throw out fake historic facts to put your interlocutor off guard. “Hiroshima and Nagasaki weren’t military targets?!? I see you are not a student of history. Intelligence showed that Japan had facilities throughout both cities where they were breeding a race of super soldiers who could fly and who could shoot deadly lasers out their eyes. There was no choice but to destroy the cities altogether to make sure they were all killed. Ordinary weapons would have been useless against them.” Hard to argue with, isn’t it?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment