To be honest, I'm not sure where I stand on this issue, but it does seem like real damage might be done. I'm frankly worried about him starting a nuclear war. Most of our principles presuppose that the world won't end if we do something stupid. I'm not sure that assumption is valid in this case.

EDIT: In nearly every other case, I am very pro-free speech. It 's an indicator of how shocking this is that I'm rethinking it at all.

Why are my fears irrational? Are you saying he can't destroy most of human life on earth with the push of a button? We may disagree on his temperament, but the material fact remains.

Can and will are not the same, that's why your fears are irrational. Unless you have some specific point on why he would as you say "push the button".

Anyhow this was about censoring an opinion on Twitter, if you want to dilute your judgement then by all means go ahead, but this does come at a cost and censoring someone one twitter to prevent an imaginary war is certainly a stretch of the imagination, and I'm being polite.

There is an actual argument that Hillary was going to impose a no fly zone on Russia in Syria. Would that have somehow alleviated tensions? Let's not forget about the red line, the sarin gas smuggled out of Libya (Bengazi), and the murder of Qaddafi in the streets, all very pertinent to the region. But alas I talk about things which can be argued and not "feelings", the hallmark of the emotionally comprised.

Munroe should really just stick to science and quit trying to be an expert in things where he has no experience.