Originally published at: http://boingboing.net/2016/12/30/will-malfunction-or-incompeten.html
…
5 Likes
Why not both?
42 Likes
Previously, my money would have been on malfunction, but recent events make me think that incompetence has a pretty good shot at it too.
22 Likes
The answer is Yes.
18 Likes
It’s amazing how many malfunctions have already happened. That we’ve lived through. So far.
16 Likes
to both, at the same time.
6 Likes
25 Likes
Let’s see, Tronald Dump is at the wheel starting Jan 20?
Obviously incompetence!
10 Likes
It’s not how or if but when.
WW3 will be over in a matter of days. An abrupt ending to years of incompetence and human malfunction.
5 Likes
How about not really giving a damn, wanting to see what would happen, not understanding the consequences, painting oneself into a corner with inflammatory rhetoric… or plain vindictiveness.
Or all of the above.
4 Likes
Neither. A war is a conflict with specific objectives, and you don’t create military or political objectives by accident. And a World War implies that many countries are fighting it out, which makes it even less likely.
But the article seems to be using “World War Three” as a stand-in for any sort of nuclear weapons incident, which isn’t necessarily the same thing. An attack or accident would of course be tragic, but I don’t see the incentive to escalate from “this is a tragic loss of a city/base” to “let’s have everybody die everywhere 4 teh lulz.” I have noticed that murmurs about “nuclear war” have been increasingly part of the collective media buzz over the past two years or so. Sure, it could happen, but there isn’t much reason for it. Profit, conquest, control? It wouldn’t achieve any of those things - or anything else, really.
6 Likes
I’m guessing Donald Trump.
3 Likes
That’s not a guess, it’s a given.
3 Likes
I get the reasoning behind threatening retaliation, but once their missiles are in the air, what’s the point? All you’d be doing is murdering millions of people from beyond the grave and ensuring two (or more) ruined continents instead of one. You’re dead either way, so why not take the high road? The country is going to be an unoccupiable radioactive wasteland for a few centuries, so the enemy won’t be able to profit off your destruction, plus they’d feel really stupid.
9 Likes
Don’t worry, the remaining 1% and TGOP will find a way to make a profit from it.
9 Likes
Some say the world will end in fire,
Some say in ice.
From what I’ve tasted of desire
I hold with those who favor fire.
But if it had to perish twice,
I think I know enough of hate
To say that for destruction ice
Is also great
And would suffice.
12 Likes
Only George R.R. Martin knows for sure, and we’ll only find out one he’s finished writing the series.
7 Likes
No one will have the endurance
To collect on his insurance
Lloyd’s of London will be loaded when they go
6 Likes
He’s malfunction and incompetence, personified, at the same time
6 Likes
Film tip: Fail Safe (1964)
2 Likes
