[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I repeat - there's nothing
> particularly special about dying in a nuclear explosion.
True, if at the center of the attack you'd die right way. Dead is dead.
But what about the perifery? The thousands of people and the entire
ecosystem that die slow deaths due to radiation fallout, cancer, and
gruesomely mutated unviable offspring, *decades* after the fact?
How can we possibly justify that?
I know all this talk of "lobbing nukes at 'em" and "turning their countries
into parkinglots" is born out of deep pain and very understandable feelings
of vengeance. The Romans used to burn and then salt a conquered city's
fields, so nothing would grow again for years and years and years.
But there's other ways of killing your enemies, ways that do not involve
leaving a natural disaster legacy for generations to come (or not come
anymore). Not to mention the fallout winds which would blow all over
neigbouring countries and end up in our own back yards.
I just don't understand why they made those weapons in the first place. Well
I do, of course, but now that we look at this Earth as a fragile sole
ecosystem, and know about the long term dangers of radiation, how can we
continue to make them, even think of using them? (retorical)
Ticia ',:)
----------
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
