Save the Environment. Kill People. What?
I was reading an article on CNN this morning about Russia’s new “dad of all bombs.” Apparently, its a really, really big non-nuclear bomb. To quote CNN:
“The tests have shown that the new air-delivered ordnance is comparable to a nuclear weapon in its efficiency and capability,” said Col.-Gen. Alexander Rukshin, a deputy chief of the Russian military’s General Staff, said in televised remarks.”
Then article says this,
“Unlike a nuclear weapon, the bomb doesn’t hurt the environment, he added.”
What?! Is creating a huge crater in the ground and killing massive amounts of wildlife, trees and whatever else was underneath it not hurting the environment?
Also, doesn’t something seem a little off with this ethic? It’s okay to kill people as long as its okay for the environment.
I have an idea. Why don’t we take are of the environment and not kill people.
In fact, why don’t we take are of the environment BY not killing people.
Just a thought….
Gabrielle said...
109/12/07 9:52 AM | Comment Link |
I was just reading this myself. I thought, am I actually supposed to be impressed that they are wasting millions of dollars on finding more efficient ways to blow human beings up?! Russia has so many economic problems (not that we don’t) and this is something to brag about right now? Were are their priorities. Last time I check, the wall fell and they are not being threatened.