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 / *14035 (-5)
  Re: Hiroshima-Was It Necessary?
 
(...) Aren't you saying that it's not the case that you didn't know that what you hadn't said contradicted what he had said wasn't the case? Dave! (24 years ago, 17-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Hiroshima-Was It Necessary?
 
(...) Everything I have ever read about WWII Japanese suggests that there was pretty strong belief that they would likely have fought bitterly to the end had something overwhelming happened to make the entire populace recognize that further fighting (...) (24 years ago, 17-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Hiroshima-Was It Necessary?
 
Typo alert! (...) This should say "we have to accept the outcome that they view themselves as good and us as evil as JUST AS VALID as our own finding of the opposite" Too many negatives and I got confused, I guess. Sorry about that, peeps. (24 years ago, 17-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Hiroshima-Was It Necessary?
 
(...) Well that's the crux of the hole in my argument. Unless it can be shown that it is NOT a subjective judgement (that is, that it's not just a morally relative judgement), we have to accept the outcome that they view themselves as evil and (...) (24 years ago, 17-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Hiroshima-Was It Necessary?
 
(...) Sarcastically. (1) That's distortive because you snipped the cite. At the same time you were composing your post accusing me of being closed minded, I was composing a post acknowledging a serious hole in the argument I advanced. That's not the (...) (24 years ago, 17-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