Subject:
|
Re: Hiroshima-Was It Necessary?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Tue, 16 Oct 2001 23:58:51 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
511 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Eaton writes:
> > 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 here:
> > http://news.lugnet.com/off-topic/debate/?n=13613
>
> It's pretty recent that this topic came up, I'll find you the thread start.
>
> > Or
> > perhaps I didn't search hard enough-- or you were just mistaken.
>
> Either is possible.
Nope, it was definitely a thread. My post on the subject,
which includes why I think it was both political and necessary,
is here:
http://news.lugnet.com/off-topic/debate/?n=12464
> > Honestly, it sounds like you were making a rather "might-makes-right"
> > argument when it all boiled down to it-- but again, maybe I'm mistaken.
>
> 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 on that
> particular statement to support anything.
The most devastating war in ALL of human history is a very
hard thing to Monday-morning quarterback. In a total war,
how much is too much? Historians try to put themselves into
the contextual position, and to figure out who knew what, when,
and why they might have made the decisions they did. And to
my satisfaction--both personal *and* professional--the right
decision was made. Indeed, it was the only politically and
strategically--in the long term--viable decision given the
context of 1945.
best
LFB
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Hiroshima-Was It Necessary?
|
| (...) That is open to argument, but I don't have enough knowledge of politics at the time, so I'll bow to your greater knowledge. But though it's changing the subject of the thread, I still believe the acts of dropping the bombs were terrorism, no (...) (23 years ago, 17-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | 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 (...) (23 years ago, 16-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
133 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
