 | | Re: Hiroshima-Was It Necessary?
|
|
(...) Either is possible. (...) No, my argument is more of a "if you're at war, use the appropriate weapon for the job", as I tend to reject "might makes right" in what I hope is a pretty consistent way and welcome being called on it if I ever lean (...) (24 years ago, 16-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
|
 | | Re: Hiroshima-Was It Necessary?
|
|
(...) Ok, I looked. I can't find it. I tried various search strings on the off-topic.debate(1), read through 90% of the results (skimming the other 10% admittedly) and I can't find any place (where you partook) other than the thread starting around (...) (24 years ago, 16-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
|
 | | Re: Hiroshima-Was It Necessary?
|
|
(...) (sorry, forgot the Sarcasm on and Sarcasm off warnings)... that is, unless you plan to *never* post about any of the topics you've posted about already. I guess I am *shocked* that you'd try to stifle discussion that way, Dan. But I can see (...) (24 years ago, 16-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
|
 | | Re: Hiroshima-Was It Necessary?
|
|
(...) Yes indeed, very thoughtful of you. However rest assured I still have some questions for you which I will be posting soon. (24 years ago, 16-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
|
 | | 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 (...) (24 years ago, 16-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|