To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / *14001 (-20)
  Re: Hiroshima-Was It Necessary?
 
(...) True-- although mainly I think it would be evidence provided twofold-- I.E. "Here are before and after shots of this island, here's a videotape of us blowing it up, and here it is now. Go to the island and verify yourself if you don't believe (...) (23 years ago, 16-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: "The Constitution is what the judges say it is"
 
(...) I said nothing about guns in specific. Nor does this address what I said: you can give up a freedom for security. Okay, this is what you have done: you can't carry a gun, but you feel more secure because of it. You'd rather have the security (...) (23 years ago, 16-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Hiroshima-Was It Necessary?
 
(...) I'd question that part. Not too many years earlier a good chunk of the US populace believed we were being invaded by Mars. Even today, credulous lout believe that the moon landings were faked, so if we'd simply shown a film of our nuclear (...) (23 years ago, 16-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: "The Constitution is what the judges say it is"
 
(...) I said it was a caricature in the message you replied to(!) :) (...) I would say "free", but try to talk me round if you want! (...) So you think I'm less free as I don't/can't have a gun, even though I would feel less free if I did have one? (...) (23 years ago, 16-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Hiroshima-Was It Necessary?
 
(...) No, the idea was that they'd invite other nations to send representatives to witness the event-- not that we couldn't have merely recorded the event anyway. At least such was my understanding. I don't remember if it was explicitly said, or (...) (23 years ago, 16-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: "The Constitution is what the judges say it is"
 
(...) My point exactly, if not directly stated. (...) A bit garbled - I'm not quite sure what you are saying here. Sorry. But I think I address what you are trying to say below. (...) No, it's not you culture. The people of Chicago often noted that (...) (23 years ago, 16-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: "The Constitution is what the judges say it is"
 
(...) My comment was caricature. (...) I would say "free", but try to talk be round if you want! (...) They are freedoms to me... perhaps it is my culture. Scott A (...) (23 years ago, 16-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Hiroshima-Was It Necessary?
 
(...) Why was there no demo explosion in an uninhabited island to convince the Japanese of the power of the bomb? What would be lost? If it failed - nobody would know. If the real thing failed, the Japanese would have a bomb (or at least bits of (...) (23 years ago, 16-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: "The Constitution is what the judges say it is"
 
(...) Mature democracies outlaw them. :-) (...) In my ideal there would be no charities. We can save that one for later. (...) Scotland - not really England - hmm London - Yes (...) GP on demand (walk-in clinic) Specialist in less than 1 month (I'm (...) (23 years ago, 16-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Hiroshima-Was It Necessary?
 
(...) It was interesting reading. Lots of work went into it. It failed to note that there was never a decision to drop one bomb, and then another decision to drop another (it was a decision to drop two bombs). It noted that the Japanese were looking (...) (23 years ago, 16-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: "The Constitution is what the judges say it is"
 
(...) Money is a form of power. You have more money, you have more power. I'm not talking about the United States, mind you, I'm talking about the world at large throughout history. I'll grant you it's pretty blatant here. (...) No, that's not (...) (23 years ago, 16-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Hiroshima-Was It Necessary?
 
(...) From what I heard from a US history teacher, the question was being considered as to whether or not to test on an uninhabited island. We were considering "demonstrating" on the island to other nations, but were worried that "What if the tests (...) (23 years ago, 16-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: "The Constitution is what the judges say it is"
 
(...) And reform in this area is coming -- give it time. Even the two party system is slowly but surely under attack. Again, time will correct these issues. As far as the whole gun thing goes: Sorry to disappoint you but I believe that the ruling (...) (23 years ago, 16-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Hiroshima-Was It Necessary?
 
(...) I think the evidence is against them being necessary to beat Japan (they were already beaten). Cynics will say that they provided a test for the new toy (I can't believe that). But I do wonder if they were deemed necessary simply to send the (...) (23 years ago, 16-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Hiroshima-Was It Necessary?
 
(...) <snipped> That being said, it is reasonable to conclude that you have nothing new to contribute to this discussion and anyone interested in your opinions can check your previous posts. Thanks for pointing that out to us, I'm sure anyone (...) (23 years ago, 16-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Hiroshima-Was It Necessary?
 
(...) I must have missed that debate-- suffice to say that while I obviously don't have all the information, based on what I know, I don't think they were necessary or called for at all. Anyone want to point me somewhere to make me reconsider? DaveE (23 years ago, 16-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Hiroshima-Was It Necessary?
 
(...) No time to dig into this in depth but I should point out that I have, in this very group, already taken the stance that *both* bombings were necessary. I spent a little time at that site late last nite (early this morning, actually). The (...) (23 years ago, 16-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Hiroshima-Was It Necessary?
 
(...) I haven't yet read the site (I dunno if I will-- depends I guess), but it really leads me to wonder whether anyone out there actually *DOES* believe it was "necessary"? And on a related note, I also didn't see the movie Pearl Harbor. And I (...) (23 years ago, 16-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: eBay's Auction for America
 
"Scott A" <eh105jb@mx1.pair.com> wrote in message news:GLAHKt.C9B@lugnet.com... (...) post. (...) opinion). (...) and insensitive to the tragedy which occured within a mile of LD, you spin this to make it look like John was the instigator. If you (...) (23 years ago, 16-Oct-01, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: "The Constitution is what the judges say it is"
 
(...) It was meant to be a caricature – and I said it was! (...) What I was talking about was how in the USA the main political parties are hugely indebted to their sponsors. On of the criticisms of GWB's NMD was that it was payback. Dan has alluded (...) (23 years ago, 16-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)


Next Page:  5 more | 10 more | 20 more

Redisplay Messages:  All | Compact

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR