3 simple questions (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid



Message

blacksword404 -> 3 simple questions (2/2/2009 4:46:14 PM)

The questions are simple. The answers are a simple yes or no. The thought process in between is likely anything but simple. There are no right or wrong answers to it. I expect there will be different reasons for the answers. Take your time and give it some serious thought. I expect some might say they can't predict what they would do in the future. I think you can for the most part. But It is not a future type of question. It's a right now what do you do type. If you don't know that, you don't know yourself very well.

George Washington was offered the first kingship of the United States Of America. He declined it because he felt it would give him too much power. He felt his powers should have been limited more. So they changed it and offered him the presidency. Now if it were you and they offered you the chance to be king.  In past Kingdoms the Kingdom prospered when it had a King who cared for the people. And it Did not do well when a King came to the throne that did not care for the people. No way to tell what your future heirs might do with the power.

1.Would you have the will,or the willpower to resist all that power and do what
was likely best for your country rather than yourself?

In the event of a natural disaster, one where your whole neighborhood was in danger, you are in a place of safety. You are not that far from home and the phone at home is not working.  Your house where your family is may not be safe, but the place where you are is. Going out to try and be with your family will increase your chance of dying.

2. Do you stay where you are and save your own life or do you risk it to go be with your family?

Being A leader means making tough decisions. Making choices you may not like, but doing them anyway because it's necessary. I often say "I have to do what's necessary, I don't have to like it".

In the book Ender's Game by Orson Scott Card, you have a kid (Ender) who is in charge of the human forces. Humans are faced with extinction by insect like creatures. Ender finds a way to beat them and destroys all of the enemy forces. Effectively committing Xenocide.The whole world is ecstatic at winning the war for survival. Ender is a hero. But as time goes on the mindset of people changes and he is not seen as a hero anymore. He is seen as an evil person for wiping out an alien species. Funny attitude seeing these very people directly benefited
from those actions.

In WWII we dropped bombs on Japan. Which brought the war to an end way sooner than it otherwise would have. If those bomb had not been dropped I think in the end we still would have won. But with more casualties on our side as well as Japan. There are people of both Countries that would not otherwise be here if the fighting would have continued. I am sure there are some that think it was a good decision and those that think it wasn't. But that isn't what this is about. It is simply about in these situations where a hard decision is needed which do you make? 

You are commander of your countries troops. You are involved in a war against an enemy that will kill themselves as long as you die with them. Suffice it to say they are quite committed to winning. If you continue fighting you eventually will win. Casualties will be high. But you will win. If you drop an atomic bomb you can put this to bed now. It will break the enemies resolve. Their spirit. If you do decide to drop these bombs you will be praised for bringing the war to an end sooner rather than later. And as years go on you will be hated for doing that exact thing.What is at stake for you is your memory and your place in history. If you don't drop them many more lives on both sides will be lost.

3. You have decide that it is necessary to drop them in order to bring the fighting to a close. But you still have to decide if you will give the order to
drop them or not. Knowing how you will be treated in the end if you do. Do you drop those bombs?



rexrgisformidoni -> RE: 3 simple questions (2/2/2009 5:04:14 PM)

1. yes
2. no
3.yes



Arpig -> RE: 3 simple questions (2/2/2009 5:40:44 PM)

No (Its good to be King[;)])
No
Yes



Termyn8or -> RE: 3 simple questions (2/2/2009 5:41:53 PM)

These questions all have something in common, they have to do with leadership, of a family, a nation or a military force.

As such, three answers are not really necessary. However the long answer might be a toughie. The easy answer is that as a leader you do what is best for those you lead. Yes I am aware that such morality has disappeared from the planet a long time ago, but that makes it no less true, and if it is true there is another thing that is true. That is that a leader is actually a servant.

Those who follow trust the leader to do what is best for them all as a whole, and violation of that trust is not something I would ever do. Hindsight is not even 20/20. If the bombs had not been dropped on Japan, maybe Russia wouldn't have owned a third of Europe for a half century. Maybe. We did not go through that timeline therefore we will never know. In the case of family and natural disaster, I would make every effort to get them to a place of safety or my place of safety. Just to be with them to die, I do not know. The pixels on my PC screen are just not that good at testing mettle.

Last but not least, in the case of Washington, with an attitude like that, he would likely be one of the few who would not abuse the power. One of the founders had a saying something like "If you want to test a Man's character, give him power".

A true leader would never want to impose his personal will on the commoners, he would be content that the people are happy with his rule and therefore it would continue, because I don't care who you are, if you piss of enough people you are out. However if you lead your's into an age of relative prosperity and peace, you are likely to remain ruler.

For example the Russians like Putin, who has been called one of the few actually competent world leaders of today. Not President anymore, but still holding a pretty high office. Those who disagree, get your nose out of Fox news and find out what Putin is REALLY all about. I wish he was on our side.

Sorry if I got too analytical here, but like I said all those questions seem to spawn from the same pond, a question of leadership and what it means. IMO we haven't had a true leader in the oval office for at least a century.

A true leader is a servant, and any tribute offered is voluntary.

I think that says it.

T



kittinSol -> RE: 3 simple questions (2/2/2009 5:51:25 PM)

This catastrophic hypothesis reminds me of the Titanic thread on Gor. Everybody imagines what they would do and comes up with justifications for their own (imaginary) actions. In the end though, it's nothing but speculation and macho posturing. 



philosophy -> RE: 3 simple questions (2/2/2009 5:58:57 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: kittinSol

This catastrophic hypothesis reminds me of the Titanic thread on Gor. Everybody imagines what they would do and comes up with justifications for their own (imaginary) actions. In the end though, it's nothing but speculation and macho posturing. 


...i'm shocked and appalled........they let you in the Gor threads? [:D]



MichiganHeadmast -> RE: 3 simple questions (2/2/2009 5:59:32 PM)

My macho posturing:

1.  Yes

2.  Go check on my family

3.  Yes



kittinSol -> RE: 3 simple questions (2/2/2009 6:00:57 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: philosophy
...i'm shocked and appalled........they let you in the Gor threads? [:D]


I was there in stealth. Disguised as a chest-thumping Man. With a large wedding tackle.



Hippiekinkster -> RE: 3 simple questions (2/2/2009 6:09:24 PM)

1. That's a difficult question. I certainly wouldn't be inclined to use my position to amass a fortune, as my needs are few, and my wants aren't extravagent. I think I would use what power I had to try and make life easier and more rewarding for my fellow citizens, beginning with those most in need, and I'd play hardball to achieve those goals.
2. I'd have to try to be with my family.
3. I'd have done it differently. I would have shipped film of the A-bomb tests and let them know what was coming if they did not capitulate. After that, I don't know what action I would take. If I had more than two bombs built, I'd explode one in Tokyo Bay, then send a communique to the Emperor and the top brass. Only then would I consider using the bomb on a strategic industrial area.



hizgeorgiapeach -> RE: 3 simple questions (2/2/2009 6:33:39 PM)

1.)  Willpower? What's that?  Now gimme my crown, peasant!
 
2.)  My happy ass is staying PUT.  I do them no good in getting myself killed trying to get to them, and besides that, I despise most of what remains of my family.
 
3.)  Nuke 'em till they glow then shoot 'em in the dark.
 
I make no pretenses towards being a "leader" nor do I particularly care to "lead" anyone.  My philosophy on that is "lead, follow, or get the Fuck outta my Way."  Yes, I'm a self centered, selfish bitch that frequently lacks any sort of empathy with the rest of humanity.  I'm not on this planet to win any popularity contests, so that part really doesn't bother me.



kdsub -> RE: 3 simple questions (2/2/2009 8:23:42 PM)

You know the answers to the first two questions will be the same for everyone...at least if they are serious and human.

For the third...NEVER DROP THE BOMB... The WWII bombs were necessary...if they were not used we would have no measure of the destruction. There would have already been a nuclear war without those examples.

Now we know what it will do…there is no excuse to use a bomb even for self-preservation. It is too indiscriminate and destructive. Its use could set off a series of events that could destroy life as we know it.

War should not be quick or easy...If you are worried about your legacy in such a decision you are NOT worthy to make it.

Butch



TheHeretic -> RE: 3 simple questions (2/2/2009 8:42:39 PM)

      I would like to think the answers are yes, yes and yes, but only one of those been tested in any fashion.



corysub -> RE: 3 simple questions (2/2/2009 8:55:09 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: blacksword404

The questions are simple. The answers are a simple yes or no. The thought process in between is likely anything but simple. There are no right or wrong answers to it. I expect there will be different reasons for the answers. Take your time and give it some serious thought. I expect some might say they can't predict what they would do in the future. I think you can for the most part. But It is not a future type of question. It's a right now what do you do type. If you don't know that, you don't know yourself very well.

George Washington was offered the first kingship of the United States Of America. He declined it because he felt it would give him too much power. He felt his powers should have been limited more. So they changed it and offered him the presidency. Now if it were you and they offered you the chance to be king.  In past Kingdoms the Kingdom prospered when it had a King who cared for the people. And it Did not do well when a King came to the throne that did not care for the people. No way to tell what your future heirs might do with the power.

1.Would you have the will,or the willpower to resist all that power and do what
was likely best for your country rather than yourself?

    If I was a student of history I would try do what is best for the country....keeping me in power.[:)]  Seriously, that does not mean as King you keep your power by keeping your foot on the throat of the people.  In the long-run, that type of King is usually deposed, oftentimes from within his own circle.

In the event of a natural disaster, one where your whole neighborhood was in danger, you are in a place of safety. You are not that far from home and the phone at home is not working.  Your house where your family is may not be safe, but the place where you are is. Going out to try and be with your family will increase your chance of dying.

2. Do you stay where you are and save your own life or do you risk it to go be with your family?

  That is not even a question!  What kind of man wouldn't try to save his family. How would you be able to live with yourself to do otherwise?  That's why men pick up arms and go to war...because they feel that is a mission that has to be done for family, and country.

Being A leader means making tough decisions. Making choices you may not like, but doing them anyway because it's necessary. I often say "I have to do what's necessary, I don't have to like it".

In the book Ender's Game by Orson Scott Card, you have a kid (Ender) who is in charge of the human forces. Humans are faced with extinction by insect like creatures. Ender finds a way to beat them and destroys all of the enemy forces. Effectively committing Xenocide.The whole world is ecstatic at winning the war for survival. Ender is a hero. But as time goes on the mindset of people changes and he is not seen as a hero anymore. He is seen as an evil person for wiping out an alien species. Funny attitude seeing these very people directly benefited
from those actions.

In WWII we dropped bombs on Japan. Which brought the war to an end way sooner than it otherwise would have. If those bomb had not been dropped I think in the end we still would have won. But with more casualties on our side as well as Japan. There are people of both Countries that would not otherwise be here if the fighting would have continued. I am sure there are some that think it was a good decision and those that think it wasn't. But that isn't what this is about. It is simply about in these situations where a hard decision is needed which do you make? 

You are commander of your countries troops. You are involved in a war against an enemy that will kill themselves as long as you die with them. Suffice it to say they are quite committed to winning. If you continue fighting you eventually will win. Casualties will be high. But you will win. If you drop an atomic bomb you can put this to bed now. It will break the enemies resolve. Their spirit. If you do decide to drop these bombs you will be praised for bringing the war to an end sooner rather than later. And as years go on you will be hated for doing that exact thing.What is at stake for you is your memory and your place in history. If you don't drop them many more lives on both sides will be lost.

3. You have decide that it is necessary to drop them in order to bring the fighting to a close. But you still have to decide if you will give the order to  drop them or not. Knowing how you will be treated in the end if you do. Do you drop those bombs?


I would drop the bombs in a heartbeat!  No matter who was President in 1945, and certainly if I was President, those bombs were going to be used.  You have to remember that the Japanese army was still pretty much intact and, in addition,  the people of Japan were prepared to fight to the death as their soldiers did on the islands.  If those bombs were not dropped, there would have been millions of casualties on both sides and many of us bantering here on Collarme who had grandfathers or fathers in WW2 might not be here today.  If those bombs were not dropped by the U.S. I truly believe that Japan would have used nuclear weapons once their program was completed, as would the Germans had they the time. 



NYLass -> RE: 3 simple questions (2/2/2009 9:05:36 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: blacksword404

1.Would you have the will,or the willpower to resist all that power and do what
was likely best for your country rather than yourself?  Yes

2. Do you stay where you are and save your own life or do you risk it to go be with your family? YES, stay


3. You have decide that it is necessary to drop them in order to bring the fighting to a close. But you still have to decide if you will give the order to
drop them or not. Knowing how you will be treated in the end if you do. Do you drop those bombs? No



ThatDamnedPanda -> RE: 3 simple questions (2/2/2009 9:27:13 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: blacksword404
1.Would you have the will,or the willpower to resist all that power and do what
was likely best for your country rather than yourself?


I certainly hope that I would,  but I'm certainly glad that I'll never have to find out for sure.



quote:

ORIGINAL: blacksword404
2. Do you stay where you are and save your own life or do you risk it to go be with your family?


There's no choice here. If my family is going to die, I'd rather die with them than live without them.



quote:

ORIGINAL: blacksword404
3. You have decide that it is necessary to drop them in order to bring the fighting to a close. But you still have to decide if you will give the order to
drop them or not. Knowing how you will be treated in the end if you do. Do you drop those bombs?


Yes. And then take cyanide.



ThatDamnedPanda -> RE: 3 simple questions (2/2/2009 9:31:03 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hippiekinkster
3. I'd have done it differently. I would have shipped film of the A-bomb tests and let them know what was coming if they did not capitulate. After that, I don't know what action I would take. If I had more than two bombs built, I'd explode one in Tokyo Bay, then send a communique to the Emperor and the top brass. Only then would I consider using the bomb on a strategic industrial area.


I don't often disagree with you, ol' buddy, but I'm afraid I have to here. Your sentiments are certainly in the right place (as they always are), but I would point out that even after we annihilated one of their major cities, a city full of Japanese citizens, they still didn't surrender until we incinerated a second one. I think it's highly unlikely a film or even a demonstration blast would have had any greater effect on their intransigence.



aravain -> RE: 3 simple questions (2/2/2009 10:24:49 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: blacksword404

1.Would you have the will,or the willpower to resist all that power and do what
was likely best for your country rather than yourself?

2. Do you stay where you are and save your own life or do you risk it to go be with your family?

3. You have decide that it is necessary to drop them in order to bring the fighting to a close. But you still have to decide if you will give the order to
drop them or not. Knowing how you will be treated in the end if you do. Do you drop those bombs?


This is a fun exercise :)

1. No, I wouldn't. I freely admit it, I am not someone who can take power like that. I'm a very 'benevolent' person, especially when it comes to the well being of others... I would be much better at an adivsory role (and none of that cushy crap. Enough to live on, but I don't need to be rich [8|] and my kids (haha, I have kids in this alternate reality) would NOT automatically inherit my position) EDIT: That is to say, I would decline the position (both positions as King or President) in favor of a supervisory role and a suggestion for someone else I thought likely to do a good job.

2. Family. That goes into deeply personal reasons relating to 'caring' about dying and/or death. [:D]

3. No. (No explanation)



Crush -> RE: 3 simple questions (2/2/2009 10:59:29 PM)

1. Yes
2. Depends on the potential success rate.  I'd definitely want to try, but if it was suicide, not just an increase in my chances for death, then not immediately.
3 Hell yes, if I'm fairly certain it would bring things to an end.   My tribe comes first.



Vendaval -> RE: 3 simple questions (2/3/2009 12:19:48 AM)

1. yes
2. yes
3. no



YoursMistress -> RE: 3 simple questions (2/3/2009 12:59:43 AM)

1 yes - turn down the crown
2  no - don't stay put
3 yes - drop the bombs

If I were the best candidate for King we would be in terrible shape for sure with no hope.

I don't think I could fail to at least try to save my family.

By your description it would be the surest way to end the conflict and minimize casualties on both sides. 

yours



Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875