However, this could be their first attempt.

Analysis of the pollution problem as a function of populationdensity uncovers a not generally recognized principle ofmorality, namely: Using the commons as a cesspool does notharm the general public under frontier conditions, because thereis no public; the same behavior in a metropolis is unbearable. Ahundred and fifty years ago a plainsman could kill an Americanbison, cut out only the tongue for his dinner, and discard therest of the animal. He was not in any important sense beingwasteful. Today, with only a few thousand bison left, we would beappalled at such behavior.

Student Time approximately 2 weeks depending on length of class periods.

Insofar as nuclear weapons also serve symbolic, psychological needs, by demonstrating the technological accomplishments of a nation and thus conveying legitimacy to otherwise insecure leaders and countries, then, once again, there is no rational way to establish the minimum (or cap the maximum) size of one’s arsenal. At some point, additional detonations nonetheless come up against the law of diminishing returns, or as Winston Churchill pointed out, they simply ‘make the rubble bounce’.

This has been translated into Polish here:

Students should have some knowledge of how to construct a spreadsheet.

Walzer points out that while a surrendering soldier is not to be killed, a fleeing one is a legitimate target (Walzer 1977). Walzer then questions the reasoning of this fact because the basic theory behind killing a fleeing soldier is to prevent him from returning to the fight. It ends up soldiers who fled did return to fight, rather slaughter, during the Kurdish rebellion after the war. But Walzer sees that as an internal issue and therefore because the soldiers were not going to return as combatants against coalition forces, killing them was not morally correct. The facts are that a state of war still existed and during a time of war, the killing of enemy soldiers, even if in retreat, is an acceptable act. While the atrocities they committed as an occupying force in Kuwait would seem to warrant the destruction of the convoy, that mentality falls too close to raw revenge. As distasteful and horrendous as the Iraqi conduct in Kuwait was, destroying their convoy as they fled solely for revenge would not hold up under jus in bello (Justice in War). But not only were they legitimate targets, they were also thieves. They had plundered Kuwait and were attempting to return with the ill-gotten booty. As part of just-war theory, the legalist paradigm states that aggression justifies two kinds of violent response: a war of self-defense by the victim and a war of law enforcement by the victim and any other member of international society (Walzer, p.62). Because the war was still in effect at the time and just-war theory dictates that a member of international society can respond violently when enforcing laws, the "Highway of Death" was a just act in a just war.

Let’s have a closer look at the vehicle.

did not help the US achieve its goals in Iraq or Afghanistan, which have become expensive catastrophic failures for the country with the world’s most advanced nuclear weapons. Moreover, despite its nuclear arsenal, the US remains fearful of domestic terrorist attacks, which are more likely to be made with nuclear weapons than be deterred by them.

That last image looks like something out of the game “red alert”

And I think I know quite well Soviets from my own first hand experience having witness both the official “idealistic” side and the reality of the Soviet life, both good and bad things of those times. But that is only my opinion and I have the right to express it and also to be wrong. If you do not like that – that is only your problem.

I prefer to use a scoring rubric.

Prohibition is easy to legislate (though not necessarily toenforce); but how do we legislate temperance? Experienceindicates that it can be accomplished best through the mediationof administrative law. We limit possibilities unnecessarily if wesuppose that the sentiment of denies us theuse of administrative law. We should rather retain the phrase asa perpetual reminder of fearful dangers we cannot avoid. Thegreat challenge facing us now is to invent the correctivefeedbacks that are needed to keep custodians honest. We must findways to legitimate the needed authority of both the custodiansand the corrective feedbacks.

Last picture is a self-propelled howitzer “Coalition SV”.

The tragedy of the commons is involved in population problemsin another way. In a world governed solely by the principle of"dog eat dog" --if indeed there ever was such aworld--how many children a family had would not be a matter ofpublic concern. Parents who bred too exuberantly would leavefewer descendants, not more, because they would be unable to careadequately for their children. David Lack and others have foundthat such a negative feedback demonstrably controls the fecundityof birds. But men are not birds, and havenot acted like them for millenniums, at least.