I disagree with the assertion that Earth-Watchmen is now at the same stage of international relations that we're at today. The Soviet Union still exists in their world. Its collapse is what ended the Cold War in the real world.
In fact, I'd say that one of the unintended effects of Ozy's plan is that the Soviet Union would stay around for longer than its natural expiration date. I'd assume that whatever alliance exists between the US and the USSR in Earth-Watchmen would include some sort of strengthened economic relationship between the two which would ultimately add more resources to the Soviets. On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 11:50 AM, Ronald Methvin <[email protected]> wrote: > It only had work long enough for the world to get through that stage of > international relations where wide scale nuking was no longer a major/likely > concern - basically, to where things are now in the 'real world' and have > been since the mid-1990's (after the "Cold War" ended). Is anybody really > concerned about a nuclear war anymore? Even when we get pocket-nuked, I > doubt we will launch nuke missiles. Yes, I said 'when', as in, within the > next 10 years, someone /will/ setoff a nuke on a boat off the shore of NY or > DC. One of the reasons we won't launch missiles is it won't be a major > gov't that does it, also, when we do find them, our ‘conventional’ missiles > work pretty well when you just want to blow crap up in a semi-contained kind > of way. > > > > A major impact of Ozzy's plan, though, would be to the world's economy. > You think things are bad now with our 8% unemployment and the stock market > only 200% greater than it was 20 years ago? Remember how much the market > and the economy tanked after 9/11? Imagine that in dozens of cities across > the globe. Hopefully, he plans on spending all those billions he has on > fixing things, which I think he will (let’s ignore than most of his wealth > would be gone, too). He's not an immoral person, not even amoral - just a > very logical futurist. > > > > That leads to the next question; were his actions the 'right' thing to do? > Depending on the probability, yes – as long as your goal is the continued > existence of mankind. According to basic Game Theory, given a population > of 6 billion, even if there is just a 50/50 of a nuclear war in a given time > frame, say 5 years, and, in the case of war, there is 50% chance of total > annihilation, 25% chance of 90% annihilation, and 25% chance of 50% > annihilation, mathematically, the expected death toll due to nuke war is > 2.55B. Even if Ozzy’s plan only reduced the number of likely war by 10% > (40% chance of war with 50% chance of total annihilation and 25% chance of > 90% ann. and 25% of 50% annihilation), he could kill 89 million people and > still be ahead of the expected death total by 1 million. And I’m pretty > sure he expected a better than 50% chance of nuke war and a greater than 10% > reduction. This also assumes an only two option ‘game’, but presumably, > Ozzy figured all other options would have had negligible effects on the > results. Yes, if Vulcan were real, they’d be some cruel m...@f%’s > > > > Next question: after it was too late, who was right, Rorschach, NiteOwl, or > Dr. M (did Lori have an opinion?)? The difference between NO and DM > being, NO would have only tried to talk R out of telling everyone, while DM > was willing to kill another person to do it. I’m probably going with NO. > Sadly, the world would be better off not knowing the truth – and no one > would have believed just R, anyway; so, killing him just prevents him from > being an annoyance to Oz. > > > > Next: Should DM have also/instead killed Oz? It’s both amusing and sad > that R would’ve killed Oz, but physically couldn’t – at least not at the > base. Maybe with a car bomb later. So, should DM have killed Oz, too. > Logically > speaking, no. We can assume Oz had plans to help mankind weather the > storm (see 3 paragraphs above), and killing him would only ‘eff up those > plans. And, again, it’s not like he did what he did out of evil intent, > malice, or greed – he did it to save mankind. Sure, one side of the coin > has him killing more people than Hitler, Stalin, and Mao, but the other side > of the coin has him saving 2,500,000,000 people. > > > > Also, had it been aliens, 1) they were obviously incompetent aliens as they > inadvertently blew themselves up trying to get here, and 2) even if they did > show up without spontaneously exploding, ‘eff ‘em! Dr. M. could come back > and save us! > > > > Thoughts? > > > > ~Ron > > --- On *Mon, 3/9/09, Terry Morton <[email protected]>* wrote: > > From: Terry Morton <[email protected]> > Subject: [The Unique Geek] Re: Watchmen **SPOILERS** - Would the > antagonists plan work? > To: [email protected] > Date: Monday, March 9, 2009, 10:25 AM > > > I agree that it wouldn't last. You could probably keep it going if you > had Ozymandias or Dr. Manhattan do something bad every couple of years to > keep the threat alive, though. > > > > On Sun, Mar 8, 2009 at 3:32 PM, Shag <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Be warned this thread will contain SPOILERS for both the Watchmen >> graphic novel and the movie. >> >> You were warned… >> … >> … >> … >> … >> … >> … >> … >> … >> … >> … >> … >> … >> … >> … >> … >> … >> … >> … >> … >> … >> … >> … >> … >> … >> … >> … >> … >> … >> … >> … >> … >> … >> … >> … >> … >> … >> >> >> Would Ozymandias’ plan work? Would destroying a large number of people >> and cities unite the planet against a common foe (regardless of whether we >> are talking about the Graphic Novel or Film version)? >> >> Personally, I think it would unite the planet for a short while, but not >> for long. Basically Ozy is causing the Earth to unite on a war-footing. So >> the human race is going to be nice to each other, but preparing for war. >> Once that war never materializes (with either the Aliens or Doctor >> Manhattan), the old rivalries will eventually start back up. >> >> Here are a couple examples from history: >> >> 1) Soviet Union – The Soviet Union was together for something like >> 70 years. Once the Soviet Union fell apart, the old rivalries started right >> back up. So even 70 years of controlled peace wasn’t enough to squash the >> old hostile feelings. >> >> 2) Iraq and Weapons of Mass Destruction – How long did the American >> public wait for George Bush to find Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq? >> After a few years of no WOMD, the public turned on him. (I’m not trying to >> start a political discussion about this particular issue, just using this as >> an example. If you don’t agree with the example, fine. Let’s not turn this >> into a political debate.) How long would the people of the Watchmen-verse >> wait with no real enemy in sight or contact with Dr. Manhattan? >> >> So I think Ozy’s plan would work for a while. But with no real enemy to >> fight, I think human nature would reassert itself within 5 to 15 years. >> >> What do you think? >> >> >> The Irredeemable Shag >> http://onceuponageek.com >> http://firestormfan.com >> >> > > > > > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Unique Geek" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/theuniquegeek?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
