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 / 12346
  Re: Are we doing the right thing?
 
(...) Wait a sec... What? Now I'll admit it's been a while since I've seen the movie, but weren't they just testing the caterpillar technology? I don't think there were any plans at all about using any weapons on the US. (...) Well-- 1st off, that'd (...) (23 years ago, 31-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Are we doing the right thing?
 
(...) Which is exactly why that foolish missile-defense nonsense is so dangerous. We're liable to create just the right conditions for a nuclear "incident" with this money-sink, er, national defense system. This whole issue just makes me sick to (...) (23 years ago, 31-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Are we doing the right thing?
 
(...) Yeah, sorry, they were only testing the catepillar, the sub WAS created though for the purpose of destroying a US city (...) And the entire crew on Tupolev's boat... and had he had his (...) right, the US would just be intimidated. At (...) (...) (23 years ago, 31-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Are we doing the right thing?
 
"James Simpson" <jsimpson@rice.edu> wrote in message news:GIy92A.9r3@lugnet.com... (...) With that logic, I'd expect you to next say that bulletproof vests on police officers invite criminals to shoot them. It is imperative to our national security (...) (23 years ago, 31-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Are we doing the right thing?
 
(...) I don't think that's a fair extension. Bulletproof vests are *not* sold as a guarantee of protection, rather as an added margin of safety in given situations. The problem with missile-defence is precisely that which James and Dave pointed out: (...) (23 years ago, 1-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Are we doing the right thing?
 
(...) with (...) me (...) On the other hand, there is something to be said for Tim's extension (though it's clear that he meant it as counterfactual) as worth thinking about. If I were preparing an action of some kind that had a plausibility of (...) (23 years ago, 1-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Are we doing the right thing?
 
(...) That's a good point, and another way of getting at the problem with a missile shield. Putin has, in fact, hinted that this would be the case--can you imagine nuclear missiles with advanced ECM capability? *shudder* (...) It does, but I didn't (...) (23 years ago, 1-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Are we doing the right thing?
 
"Mr L F Braun" <braunli1@pilot.msu.edu> wrote in message news:GIywD1.6y3@lugnet.com... (...) Neither is our missle system guaranteed protection, from what I understand of it. (...) Now, that's a good point. I'm definitely against nuclear war, but (...) (23 years ago, 2-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Are we doing the right thing?
 
(...) Yes, but the perception--which is based in our adulation over technological can-do fixes, something the US has always had a severe disposition toward indulging in--is what's important. (...) It's the question of which is more dangerous: The (...) (23 years ago, 2-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Are we doing the right thing?
 
First, Lindsay, I don't want to gush, but I really just love reading your stuff. Your only problem is that you're too sporadic. :-) Do you teach like this? Or does the nature of the college classroom require the lecture to be generally dry? Most (...) (23 years ago, 2-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Are we doing the right thing?
 
(...) Don't you, though? It's really cool. He has tons to say. (...) (Not to go off to a tangent, but that's why I had so much fun in my American Studies class, a combination of English and U.S. History... they were two seperate classes but the (...) (23 years ago, 2-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Are we doing the right thing?
 
(...) At some point, I wonder why people don't leave dangerous places. (...) That's not nasty at all. I expect you to have a fascinating perspective on the issue. But don't believe for a second that it's an entirely easy thing for me to say. I think (...) (23 years ago, 2-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Are we doing the right thing?
 
(...) Depends. I try to draw relevance to the here and now, elements of the present-day psyche or political order, whenever possible. (...) You're telling a story, kind of like Grandpa's family lore. It's just on a national--or world--scale. When it (...) (23 years ago, 3-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Are we doing the right thing?
 
(...) Indeed. He does not have enough food to feed his kids, and your big worry is how to get to the mall to meet you friends. (...) ... and how does the extra-judicial executions help? How did moving tanks into Beit Jala help? Perhaps the best way (...) (23 years ago, 3-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Are we doing the right thing?
 
(...) Chris: With all due respect, I take personal moral umbrage with this statement. You and I have already well-established that our world-views diverge just about as much as any two humans' world-views can, but, I think that this idea is still (...) (23 years ago, 4-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Are we doing the right thing?
 
(...) disposal (...) OK. (...) But I believe that principles are inconsistent at their heart. (...) If you, your children and the bus driver are trapped under an avalanche and your children are starving, do you kill and serve the driver to avoid (...) (23 years ago, 5-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Are we doing the right thing?
 
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Christopher L. Weeks writes (...) Some would assert that morality is only realized when one's life is on the line. Anyone can be moral while sitting comfortably in an air conditioned apartment; ie, when nothing's at (...) (23 years ago, 5-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Are we doing the right thing?
 
(...) The presence of gray areas in any moral calculus, i.e., moral conundrums, does not negate moral principles. In some circumstances we do not know what the right thing to do is, but in all circumstances we can determine what is definitely not (...) (23 years ago, 5-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Are we doing the right thing?
 
(...) Forgive my bad ettiquette, but an edit is in order; This sentence should read "Why, those who have in fact butchered, raped, and terrorized." james (23 years ago, 5-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Are we doing the right thing?
 
(...) The fact that someone is innocent of those three acts doesn't make them guiltless for any number of others. Is this "butchery" that we're talking about the worst thing that you can imagine? Is it inherently worse than enslaving thousands? (...) (23 years ago, 6-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Are we doing the right thing?
 
(...) My response to a wrong committed against me can only be in measured proportion to the wrong in question done to me. What I'm getting at, is that I can't morally punish a man for everything he's ever done - only the crime for which evidence has (...) (23 years ago, 6-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  In light of Tuesday's events (was Re: Are we doing the right thing?)
 
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Christopher L. Weeks writes: <lots of snippage> (...) disposal (...) What say you now, sir? Alan (23 years ago, 12-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: In light of Tuesday's events (was Re: Are we doing the right thing?)
 
(...) The same. The fact that I am 40 miles from the site of the World Trade Center, and have spent more of the past 36 hours crying than a grown man is "supposed" to, doesn't change the logic one bit. I still hold that under some circumstances (...) (23 years ago, 12-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: In light of Tuesday's events (was Re: Are we doing the right thing?)
 
(...) However, your logic does not allow for "under some circumstances" but rather points to ALL circumstances. Following on from your earlier example of you, your children, a bus driver and an avalanche, whether you think Tuesday's events are (...) (23 years ago, 13-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: In light of Tuesday's events (was Re: Are we doing the right thing?)
 
(...) You mean like when I wrote that when less hostile opportunities to improve the situation are present, they are a better choice? My statements were not all inclusive. I can see how you might, looking to be annoyed, take my stance to be what (...) (23 years ago, 13-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: In light of Tuesday's events (was Re: Are we doing the right thing?)
 
Chris, I am not trying to claim that you are saying things that you haven't said. Rather, I am trying to reflect back to you the conclusions and philosophy that you have conveyed in your posts, and also to apply them to the very real tragedy at the (...) (23 years ago, 14-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: In light of Tuesday's events (was Re: Are we doing the right thing?)
 
(...) Fair enough. I'll try not to be testy...things have been rough and I guess I'd rather this conversation have waited a week, but here we are. (...) Last week was a long time ago. (...) watching (...) Exhibit A and a half - On Thursday, 6 Sep (...) (23 years ago, 14-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

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