December 21, 2012
Two questions for Wayne LaPierre

—Is the best way to stop a war to have one dominant country (say, perhaps, the United States)? Or should everyone be equal in power, so no one can possibly take advantage of anyone else?

—Is the best way to stop a nuclear war to have only one dominant country with nuclear weapons (say, for the sake of argument, the United States)? Or for every country to have nuclear weapons so no one can safely attack anyone else?

Something tells me you’re a lot less in favor of the war of all against all when “they” can shoot back.

  1. sirwillhelm reblogged this from politicalprof
  2. wiltonchambers said: Not to disagree, but wasn’t point 2 the basis for our entire cold war foreign policy - Mutual Assured Destruction?
  3. theriverwanders reblogged this from politicalprof
  4. pol102 reblogged this from politicalprof and added:
    From politicalprof: Someone should give the NRA’s spokesman a quick crash course in international relations theories of...
  5. resurrecthobbes reblogged this from politicalprof
  6. no1729 reblogged this from politicalprof
  7. niesenn reblogged this from politicalprof
  8. listswithonlyoneitem reblogged this from politicalprof
  9. alls-well-with-the-world reblogged this from politicalprof
  10. politicalprof posted this