SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Maurice Winn who wrote (135022)5/30/2004 11:49:32 PM
From: dumbmoney  Read Replies (3) of 281500
 
It may sound strange, but I see parallels between the global warming debate and the "preventive" war debate. In both cases the activist position is based on the notion of predicting future dangers and taking immediate costly measures to prevent them. Sometimes the argument is that the danger is so certain, it would be foolish not to act. Others argue that the very unpredictability of the situation is a reason to act. The safe course of action, they say, is to act; doing nothing would be an unnecessary risk.

The skeptic says, no, our ability to predict the distant future isn't that good; and moreover, the actions that governments take are more a product of political pressures than sweet reason. Also, the skeptic says that safety is not an option; acting and not acting both carry risks.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2026 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News