getting back into rottk
last time I read it I had to stop when caocao brought up the ethical dilemma of "(when) is a preemptive strike for the sake of self-defense ethically justifiable in a situation that has evolved into kill or be killed: either I die or you die"
like is a PRE-emptive strike for the sake of self-defense EVER ethically justifiable? caocao haters would say "how are you so sure the enemy would Actually strike?" but caocao likers would say "the only way you CAN be sure 100% they Won't strike is to nip the bud BEFORE it blooms into disaster"
(when) is a preemptive strike ethically justifiable, especially when the odds are that if you don't nip the bud off possibility before it blooms into uncontrollable disaster, you are certain not to survive. but how can you be so sure the situation cannot be amicably resolved?
having a conversation with this book is like. really really fascinating and gives me a unique wisdom and energy I struggle to find in other human beings who have irreconcilable conflicts with me