Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 : Right Wing Extremist Thread -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Neocon who wrote (15750)	9/5/2001 1:08:19 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 59480

I agree that the idea expressed in the quote is not completely adequate but it combined with your response raises the question - "Is there any such thing as collective responsibility"? In you scenario with multiple people needed to make a nuclear attack, would the United States be responsible or would it be the responsibility of every one who participates (say the President, maybe the VP for not challenging the rationality of the president if he actually is acting irrational, the Sec. of Defense, a general or two, a local commander, and two people in a silo turning keys.) I think the idea of collective responsibility makes it easier for those who would want to retaliate against the attack, but I'm not sure I agree with it. Collective responsibility or not the fact that the government has the H bombs rather then me atleast means that there is some possible check on their launch. If I had a private H bomb I could presumably blow it up without going through a chain of command. But in my opinion that is more of a (important) practical consideration rather then a moral distinction. Tim