Time to stockup on ammo guys

[Lazarus]

At the risk of sounding like a scare mongering conspiracy theory pedler, I believe WW3 kicked off on Feb 24 last year.

Everyone thought both 1 and 2 would be "over by Xmas" until they weren't.

Things are going to get a fecktonne worse in all respects before they get better.

So, yeah, grab what you can, while you can.

[Oldbloke]

I do believe Ukrainian war will continue and probably escalate. WW111, fuk, I hope not.
Worrying times.

[deye243]

Well if we have to have a so-called reset I would rather it be a World War 3 than the one the UN and all those other cock heads are talking about it would also help straighten out the Western worlds youths twisted view of the way the world should be they all need a good Swift kick fair up the arse.

[Lazarus]

Well if we have to have a so-called reset I would rather it be a World War 3 than the one the UN and all those other cock heads are talking about it would also help straighten out the Western worlds youths twisted view of the way the world should be they all need a good Swift kick fair up the arse.

Trouble is Deye, as Einstein is quoted as saying:

"I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones".

[Oldbloke]

A few arking up

Fiocchi
https://www.arkansasedc.com/news-events ... g-facility


Vihtavuori
https://www.nammo.com/story/new-primer-factory/

[Oldbloke]

Well if we have to have a so-called reset I would rather it be a World War 3 than the one the UN and all those other cock heads are talking about it would also help straighten out the Western worlds youths twisted view of the way the world should be they all need a good Swift kick fair up the arse.

Trouble is Deye, as Einstein is quoted as saying:

"I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones".

True. And only an idiot would think we will be ammune.

Pine gap would be a high priority target

[Lazarus]

The problem is OB, a lot of people do think we'd be immune from attack.

No matter how many times, we never learn to stop planning for the last war, even the military.

Once a war is over, people insist on subscribing to the "war to end all wars" philosophy.

Humans are a troupe primate.
It's the root of all tribalism, nationalism, racism and all manner of other bastardry.

While ever there are people, there'll be wars, and fools who believe there won't.

[bladeracer]

The problem is OB, a lot of people do think we'd be immune from attack.

No matter how many times, we never learn to stop planning for the last war, even the military.

Once a war is over, people insist on subscribing to the "war to end all wars" philosophy.

Humans are a troupe primate.
It's the root of all tribalism, nationalism, racism and all manner of other bastardry.

While ever there are people, there'll be wars, and fools who believe there won't.

Yep, warfare is the driving force behind our evolution, it drives our technological, societal and medical breakthroughs.
Without warfare we'd still being getting around in aircraft of sticks and paper.

[Oldbloke]

The problem is OB, a lot of people do think we'd be immune from attack.

No matter how many times, we never learn to stop planning for the last war, even the military.

Once a war is over, people insist on subscribing to the "war to end all wars" philosophy.

Humans are a troupe primate.
It's the root of all tribalism, nationalism, racism and all manner of other bastardry.

While ever there are people, there'll be wars, and fools who believe there won't.

Pretty right there. I think the ALP is smart enough to increase spending on defence. Probably too late though. Our ADF is tiny.

Just keep in mind. LNP Were elected in 2013. And they did SFA

[Lazarus]

The problem is OB, a lot of people do think we'd be immune from attack.

No matter how many times, we never learn to stop planning for the last war, even the military.

Once a war is over, people insist on subscribing to the "war to end all wars" philosophy.

Humans are a troupe primate.
It's the root of all tribalism, nationalism, racism and all manner of other bastardry.

While ever there are people, there'll be wars, and fools who believe there won't.

Yep, warfare is the driving force behind our evolution, it drives our technological, societal and medical breakthroughs.
Without warfare we'd still being getting around in aircraft of sticks and paper.

Perhaps Blade, but perhaps not.

What if all those trillions of dollars wasted on war were spent elsewhere?

[bladeracer]

Perhaps Blade, but perhaps not.

What if all those trillions of dollars wasted on war were spent elsewhere?

Can you think of any incentive that would make that happen other than warfare?

Any other industry expects a kid to voluntarily accrue thousands of dollars worth of debt learning the job, then more thousands equipping themselves to do the job, then doing the job for decades to pay off that debt before they actually earn an income.

The military will take a kid from high-school, give them the best clothing, food and living quarters they've ever had in their lives. Then give them a million dollar vehicle to drive and pay them good money to expend another million dollars of ammunition learning to use it. After a few years they then let them leave the military fully trained to excel at whatever occupation takes their fancy.

[Oldbloke]

It's true that ww11 created a leap in technology. So did the space race. But TBH, I'd rather slow down the improvements in technology and save a few million lives.

If there is a nuclear war, the planets population will likely be halved.

[Lazarus]

Perhaps Blade, but perhaps not.

What if all those trillions of dollars wasted on war were spent elsewhere?

Can you think of any incentive that would make that happen other than warfare?

Any other industry expects a kid to voluntarily accrue thousands of dollars worth of debt learning the job, then more thousands equipping themselves to do the job, then doing the job for decades to pay off that debt before they actually earn an income.

The military will take a kid from high-school, give them the best clothing, food and living quarters they've ever had in their lives. Then give them a million dollar vehicle to drive and pay them good money to expend another million dollars of ammunition learning to use it. After a few years they then let them leave the
military fully trained to excel at whatever occupation takes their fancy.

If we weren't wasting trillions on war, we could afford to train that kid free of charge, there would be no debt for them to pay off.
If it weren't for that wastage we could have a universal income, we could pour billions more into medical and scientific research.

""After a few years they then let them leave the military fully trained to excel at whatever occupation takes their fancy.""

If they haven't been killed in that million dollar machine fighting a war caused by the rich, for the rich, or bastardised into lifelong PTSD by fighting and surviving that war.

There is nothing positive about war Blade, nothing.

[Oldbloke]

"There is nothing positive about war Blade, nothing."

That's how the vast majority see it.

[bladeracer]

It's true that ww11 created a leap in technology. So did the space race. But TBH, I'd rather slow down the improvements in technology and save a few million lives.

If there is a nuclear war, the planets population will likely be halved.

Where would we put all these saved lives though and how would we feed them? We don't have room for the people that are here now. The population of our planet has more than doubled just since I was born in the sixties.

If we could come up with a financial incentive for governments to direct funding to addressing over-population and creating more food then it might be possible to continue to expand for a few more generations, but it's only a matter of time until there is simply no room left on this planet for all the people.

What about all the lives that are saved and improved by the technology that came about because of warfare? The diseases that were removed, illnesses that can be cured, access to clean water for huge areas that didn't have it, the ability to travel to seek assistance, the ability to educate people that had been taught that prayer was all they needed, and so on.

I don't believe a nuclear war would halve the population, though it would likely decimate very specific areas of population. The 1914 population was about 1.8 billion, in 1940 population was about 2.3 billion. We killed around 100 million in both the world wars (although those numbers seem to increase every year - in fifty years I wouldn't be surprised if the numbers killed in the wars actually exceed the world population at the time), and a hundred years later we have more than four times the population. Did those wars slow our population growth? Where would we be now if all the people that were killed in wars just during the twentieth century had lived and procreated? Maybe it just meant we would hit 10 billion in the year 2120 instead of the year 2100 (as currently predicted), but we wouldn't have all those technological advances born from those wars?

When speaking of war, it is always worth noting that five times more Australian soldiers have killed themselves after coming home from Afghanistan than died fighting there...

[bladeracer]

"There is nothing positive about war Blade, nothing."

That's how the vast majority see it.

I don't agree, though I certainly understand why any normal person would see it that way. But if there were no positives, there would be no wars. Wars happen because somebody aims to gain from it in some way, and it is rarely the people doing the fighting.

But if you look at war as a whole, and look at the positives that evolve from it, the ability to save and improve lives, the ability to predict and prevent disasters, being able to take technology to peoples that would otherwise face extinction, and the ability to have disparate peoples get together and discuss their differences. These are advances they may well have evolved without warfare, in several more millennia, so think of all the lives lost during that extended time of progress.

The ability to have a remote car accident victim air-lifted, with surgical care onboard, to a hospital in fifteen minutes is a direct evolution from the Korean War. I don't believe the civilian sector would have funded such an advance on its own even seventy years later without the massive military funding that made it happen and made the technology cheap enough for the general population to adapt it.

[bladeracer]

If we weren't wasting trillions on war, we could afford to train that kid free of charge, there would be no debt for them to pay off.
If it weren't for that wastage we could have a universal income, we could pour billions more into medical and scientific research.

""After a few years they then let them leave the military fully trained to excel at whatever occupation takes their fancy.""

If they haven't been killed in that million dollar machine fighting a war caused by the rich, for the rich, or bastardised into lifelong PTSD by fighting and surviving that war.

There is nothing positive about war Blade, nothing.

I agree with you, but how are you going to convince the governments to fund civilian population to the high standards required? I think some countries are certainly moving in that direction, but we're still many, many decades from seeing it become the mainstream I think.

Governments see us as a machine to earn them power and money, they actively do not want to give us that sort of autonomy, they want the population to live indebted to them for everything we are allowed to do, say and think.

[Oldbloke]

I think the negatives far our weigh the positives.
Otherwise ww111 would have started sometime in the last year.

I think there are better ways to maintain the world population than wars.

[bigpete]

I think the negatives far our weigh the positives.
Otherwise ww111 would have started sometime in the last year.

I think there are better ways to maintain the world population than wars.

Yep,like people need to just stop breeding ffs

[Oldbloke]

I think the negatives far our weigh the positives.
Otherwise ww111 would have started sometime in the last year.

I think there are better ways to maintain the world population than wars.

Yep,like people need to just stop breeding ffs

Yep, I reckon the solution is to ban all men under 65 from having sex.

[bladeracer]

I think the negatives far our weigh the positives.
Otherwise ww111 would have started sometime in the last year.

I think there are better ways to maintain the world population than wars.

I thought WW3 did start last year?

Yes, disease, famine and natural disasters are good ones, but they're no less horrific than warfare.

[bladeracer]

Yep,like people need to just stop breeding ffs

This is easy for us in developed countries, children are a selfish indulgence for us. Unfortunately, for very poor people procreation is really their only option to try to survive a miserable life. You stop at one or two kids to bring in some income, and they get killed by disease, accident, or war before they're twenty - you may be too old to produce any more to keep any sort of income coming into your aging family. It's safer to keep pumping them out in hopes of some surviving into adulthood.

The internet and satellites were invented for warfare. Now, a family living far, far below the poverty line can invest in a smart phone, set up a Youtube channel, and earn money to feed themselves every month. The pittance they receive for views, likes, subs and comments is worth immeasurably more to them that it is to us. Like this family living under a rudimentary shelter on a riverbank in Thailand that I've been subbed to for a while - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FAbhzHMcsYc

It costs me nothing at all to click the like button and let their video play in the background while I'm doing other things.

[bigpete]

I think the negatives far our weigh the positives.
Otherwise ww111 would have started sometime in the last year.

I think there are better ways to maintain the world population than wars.

Yep,like people need to just stop breeding ffs

Yep, I reckon the solution is to ban all men under 65 from having sex.

Nope,just stop people from having multiple kids

[Oldbloke]

Nope,just stop people from having multiple kids

Would you please spot ruining my fun.

[Lazarus]

@Bladeracer
As someone who knows, personally, people who have died as a direct result of Putin's war on Ukraine, please tell me Blade, of one positive thing about it. Just one.

Hundreds of thousands dead, tens of millions displaced, an entire country decimated, the world economy thrown into chaos for the unforeseeable future, where is the upside?

It's easy to use throwaway lines about reduction of population by the mass human destruction of warfare when one is not among those being "reduced".

[bladeracer]

@Bladeracer
As someone who knows, personally, people who have died as a direct result of Putin's war on Ukraine, please tell me Blade, of one positive thing about it. Just one.

Hundreds of thousands dead, tens of millions displaced, an entire country decimated, the world economy thrown into chaos for the unforeseeable future, where is the upside?

It's easy to use throwaway lines about reduction of population by the mass human destruction of warfare when one is not among those being "reduced".

Don't mistake me for somebody that wants war, or enjoys its existence. I personally know people that have come through wars, and been damaged for the rest of their lives as a result, including my own father. War is no different to disease, famines, or massive natural disasters, all destroy human life, countries, and radically alters the course of people's lives, forever. These all leave permanent scars on the planet, and the people.

The positives I've already talked about, all of out technological, scientific, societal and medical advances are enormously accelerated by warfare. Without countries willing to hurl trillions of dollars into searching for better ways to wage war all of these advances would remain mired in lack of financial incentives making such studies non-viable, even for the wealthiest of countries.

[Lazarus]

@Bladeracer
As someone who knows, personally, people who have died as a direct result of Putin's war on Ukraine, please tell me Blade, of one positive thing about it. Just one.

Hundreds of thousands dead, tens of millions displaced, an entire country decimated, the world economy thrown into chaos for the unforeseeable future, where is the upside?

It's easy to use throwaway lines about reduction of population by the mass human destruction of warfare when one is not among those being "reduced".

Don't mistake me for somebody that wants war, or enjoys its existence. I personally know people that have come through wars, and been damaged for the rest of their lives as a result, including my own father. War is no different to disease, famines, or massive natural disasters, all destroy human life, countries, and radically alters the course of people's lives, forever. These all leave permanent scars on the planet, and the people.

The positives I've already talked about, all of out technological, scientific, societal and medical advances are enormously accelerated by warfare. Without countries willing to hurl trillions of dollars into searching for better ways to wage war all of these advances would remain mired in lack of financial incentives making such studies non-viable, even for the wealthiest of countries.

I'll agree that the mass death and suffering of war does act as a stimulus to find better ways to wage the mass death and suffering of warfare, and that when millions have died, those who survive can enjoy concomitant benefits, but FMD, surely it would be better overall if the money spent was used for peaceful purposes.

I'm still waiting for the upside of the current world war.

[Lazarus]

Let's make it personal Blade.

You say the deaths of untold thousands, or millions, is worth it for the impetus towards scientific development.

Are you willing to sacrifice yourself, or Rose, to this advancement, or is it just random strangers you're happy to sacrifice?

[bladeracer]

I'll agree that the mass death and suffering of war does act as a stimulus to find better ways to wage the mass death and suffering of warfare, and that when millions have died, those who survive can enjoy concomitant benefits, but FMD, surely it would be better overall if the money spent was used for peaceful purposes.

I'm still waiting for the upside of the current world war.

Yep, but how do you go about convincing a government to transfer its military funding, and all of the employment, industry and infrastructure that includes, into studying all the things that the military invents, prototypes, tests, and then mass produce them so they're cheap enough for people to afford? Things that are not going to return any financial profit within a lifetime?

[Lazarus]

I'll agree that the mass death and suffering of war does act as a stimulus to find better ways to wage the mass death and suffering of warfare, and that when millions have died, those who survive can enjoy concomitant benefits, but FMD, surely it would be better overall if the money spent was used for peaceful purposes.

I'm still waiting for the upside of the current world war.

Yep, but how do you go about convincing a government to transfer its military funding, and all of the employment, industry and infrastructure that includes, into studying all the things that the military invents, prototypes, tests, and then mass produce them so they're cheap enough for people to afford? Things that are not going to return any financial profit within a lifetime?

You should be a politician Blade, you evade questions so well.

I ask you again, are you willing for you or your family to be the ones to suffer and die on this alter of military development, or is it just strangers you'll sacrifice for the development of a better rifle or better wound dressing?