Essential The Locker Room's Random Thoughts
- Thread starter patscorpio
- Start date
-
- Tags
- life
Amo Husserl
Superstar
If someone threatens to bomb your country, are you going to:
A. Bomb them before they bomb you
B. Neutralize the threat
C. Accuse them of a war crime
A. Bomb them before they bomb you
B. Neutralize the threat
C. Accuse them of a war crime
If you picked A, you now commited a war crime and now escalated what was once a threat into a full fledged war. In the eyes of the law, you are now worst than your own enemy. This is similar to reacting to intimidation or bullying from an aggressor. You become the aggressor.
If you picked B, you neutralized the threat by identifying the threat and eliminating the dangers of it. Whereas, you'd gain intel on your enemy's operations and remove their ability to bomb you by strengthening your operations or weakening theirs. In this case, a bully would use intimidation against you therefore you eliminate his ability to intimidate by improving your mental health and minimizing the value of their intimidation until it becomes useless against you.
if you picked C, you accused the aggressing country of committing a war crime but this does not stop the threat nor does it give you protection. Instead you've now alerted the enemy to attack you as you are defenseless against them and unable to retaliate, thus escalating the problem further. Similarly now that your bully knows their intimidation is working and they can now manipulate you with more threats and intimidation to completely takeover your mind.
Note: all of them are right answers depending on the situation you're dealing with and are even interchangeable but only one of them is truly effective regardless of the situation and that is neutralizing the threat. When you eliminate your enemy's ability to affect you then you have no enemy but yourself. With people that bully your thoughts, only enemy is yourself therefore you have to protect yourself
If you picked B, you neutralized the threat by identifying the threat and eliminating the dangers of it. Whereas, you'd gain intel on your enemy's operations and remove their ability to bomb you by strengthening your operations or weakening theirs. In this case, a bully would use intimidation against you therefore you eliminate his ability to intimidate by improving your mental health and minimizing the value of their intimidation until it becomes useless against you.
if you picked C, you accused the aggressing country of committing a war crime but this does not stop the threat nor does it give you protection. Instead you've now alerted the enemy to attack you as you are defenseless against them and unable to retaliate, thus escalating the problem further. Similarly now that your bully knows their intimidation is working and they can now manipulate you with more threats and intimidation to completely takeover your mind.
Note: all of them are right answers depending on the situation you're dealing with and are even interchangeable but only one of them is truly effective regardless of the situation and that is neutralizing the threat. When you eliminate your enemy's ability to affect you then you have no enemy but yourself. With people that bully your thoughts, only enemy is yourself therefore you have to protect yourself
Last edited:
O.T.I.S.
Veteran
Since there is no thread about what happened in El Paso earlier today, here is the real reason why they shut down El Paso airspace at 2 o’clock in the morning
I can honestly admit that sometimes I be doing too much.
