New Mars Forums

So. . . what would be the point of sending colonists then? 

Without a doubt it would have been used against the Russians. If the Reich had a half-dozen as you mention likely they would have used two or three to halt the Soviet advance immediately, then gone on the offensive to the East (albeit hobbled) while trying to use the bombs to saber-rattle the Western allies into backing off.

There were plans to bomb New York and aircraft designed specifically for that purpose, but it's of dubious strategic value given the more pressing issues facing Germany. While Hitler wasn't the most rational man (at this point in the war he was completely off his nut) his Luftwaffe generals would probably not have been enthusiastic about using such weapons in a long range psychological bombing campaign against London, New York or Washington when the Red Army was at the door. Whether military or "Hitlerite" concerns would out would likely be a result of the chain of command and the backbone of certain officers.

This Russia-centric thing is out the window though if they had nukes by the time of D-Day. Hitler's the sort of fellow that would happily drop a nuke or two over occupied territory to halt an invasion. I suspect if he could have blown up the entire planet during those last days in the bunker he would have done it.

However I must say that if Germany had developed nuclear weapons and used them to crush the Soviet advance. . . Well, let's just say I have greater respect for the conduct of German military forces (even most Waffen SS units) than the vast bulk of the Red Army that swept through, raping and pillaging like the Huns of old.

One thing is almost certain, Germany would not have made the mistake we did. Having developed the bomb first, they would not have allowed enemies to do the same if at all in their power to prevent.

No offense to the modern Russian people, but letting the Soviet Union develop the atomic bomb was a mistake, particularly if one truly believed that war was almost inevitable. Maybe, just maybe being a wee bit looser with a nuke or two would have saved the people of Eastern Europe and elsewhere a great deal of misery.

And that's Cobra's "read in stuff that isn't there to call me a Nazi" rant of the day. 

I hear ya Rik. I'm surprised myself at how quickly this went through.

I'm sure a reasonable solution can be found that balances the various issues.

Ick, I sound like Congress now. Don't like it.  :evil:

A valid concern which has been raised from the outset. Hopefully a good balance can be found between allowing usergroups for specific undertakings without giving the impression of elitist snobbery about it.

Perhaps Josh can make it so usergroups are only visible to those granted access to them?

A rape occurs on a Mars ship. Crew of six. The victim is the mission commander.

Feel free to run with it, I doubt I'll ever develop the idea.

LostBelinda:

We're all new to this upgrade so bear with the transition. According to the FAQ you can select "I've lost my password" from the login screen, following its instructions should allow you to reset the password and get back in. The old one is encrypted and can't be retrieved.

I haven't tried this yet so I can't be sure of it, but if that doesn't work you could always re-register and bypass the whole issue. But you'd lose past post counts and other bits of non-vital info.

Hope that helps.

Of course I don't want us to be like Iran, but what's your point? Returning to past immigration policies wouldn't be turning us into a closed fundie state. Acknowledging that immigrants who don't assimilate are a problem would not bring the entire structure of Western society crashing down.

That is pretty cool.

And it really is made of cheese!  :shock:

The way I read it he's not so much saying that it would reduce war-like tendencies so much as it would allow us to reconcile them with the sort of people we like to think we are.

Whatever the case, there will always be those who seek to take something by force and blowing up a tank in a temple isn't going to accomplish that. When they attack, at some point someone must defend.

One could even go so far as to say that war is the natural state of humanity. All paths seem to lead us to it, regardless of initial intent.

Which works fine for the first generation. After that, lock and load.

The problem though is that charity and social awareness are a product of culture rather than political system or economic arrangement. That's the fatal flaw of communism, trying to legislate or dictate charity and social consciousness.

So if the culture of the Martian colony is amenable to that way of thinking it will all work itself out. If not, no amount of prodding will succeed in truly achieving it.

I could go into another fasco-libertarian rant but no sleep and no food makes Cobra go moderate.

These new smilies kinda blow. Except this one:  :twisted:

Such is the peril of skipping the "impose order" phase in favor of a rush to "democracy."

Now we either live with it, try to retroactively impose our will with dire consequences, or. . . let civil war happen, let the blame fall among the factions, partition Iraq and intervene to end the conflict like a benevolent superpower at the request of the elected governing bodies of those partitions.

Are we willing to let a few thousand die for politcal expediency in order to secure rights for Iraqi women and at the same time make our task of cultural remolding that much easier?

For a break from Terran politics and somewhat back to the point of these newly revamped forums. . .

Much has been written here about the near-inevitability of some form of Socialist system within Martian colonies. For the sake of discussion let's just accept the premise for now, Mars is Red. . . or at least a deep shade of pink. All that collectivism to survive in a harsh and inhospitable environment.

But then some enterprising monkeys start tinkering with the atmosphere and over time that inhospitable environment becomes progressively more conducve to life. As that happens, people need their rigid social structures progressively less.

Since any social apparatus tends to ossify, we'll likely end up with a very rigid Martian governing body of sorts trying to impose itself after it's outlived its usefulness.

At what point does a necessity become a tyranny?

Of course a long-term plan involving a transitional system could alleviate many of the potential pitfalls, but no guarantees. By adopting the kind of rigid structure required for colonization we may be virtually guaranteeing the first Martian War when those forms become less of a necessity and more of a bothersome elite professing to know best.

So the utopian socialists may be arguing for militarism and open war on Mars in a roundabout sort of way.  [/i]