 | | Re: Hiroshima-Was It Necessary? —Dave Schuler
|
| | | (...) Let's not blur the issue here. What was cowardly about the Sept 11 terrorism was that it took no courage to hijack civilian aircraft during peacetime and steer helpless civilian passengers into buildings. That's hardly the same as the US (...) (23 years ago, 17-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Hiroshima-Was It Necessary? —Scott Arthur
|
| | | | | (...) I don't view the terrorists as cowards. They may well have been deluded, but they were not cowards. The answer to Ross's Truman question is "no". Although, Truman did not drop the bomb personally, he is responsible for that action. It could be (...) (23 years ago, 17-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Re: Hiroshima-Was It Necessary? —David Eaton
|
| | | | | (...) Yes, let's not blur the issue-- what part does being cowardly have in being a terrorist? Let's say they flew their own planes into our buildings. No longer a terrorist action? I don't think whether they/we were cowardly or not is really (...) (23 years ago, 17-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Hiroshima-Was It Necessary? —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | | | (...) It would still be cowardly for them to fly their own planes into the buildings because they would be making an unprovoked attack against innocent and unsuspecting civilians on the civilians' home soil during a time when the home nation was at (...) (23 years ago, 17-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Hiroshima-Was It Necessary? —David Eaton
|
| | | | | | | (...) Still, my point stands then? Whether or not they were cowardly is irrelevant to whether it was terrorism, yes? (...) !! Sure there is. Attempting to get someone/a group of people to do something by making them respond to terror that you induce (...) (23 years ago, 17-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Hiroshima-Was It Necessary? —Ross Crawford
|
| | | | | | (...) I would argue that it wasn't unprovoked. And why were the innocent civilians unsuspecting, when bin Laden had already given several warnings, and "declared war on the US" some 5 years earlier? And just for thought, how much warning did the (...) (23 years ago, 18-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | Re: Hiroshima-Was It Necessary? —Ross Crawford
|
| | | | (...) a (...) Yes ROSCO (23 years ago, 17-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Hiroshima-Was It Necessary? —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | (...) Are you satisfied with the reasoning you presented before in support of that? Has anything about it changed with Dave Eaton's presentation of his rationale? (23 years ago, 17-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Hiroshima-Was It Necessary? —Ross Crawford
|
| | | | (...) I haven't presented any reasoning in support of that before. All my reasoning before has been about whether or not it was terrorism - nothing about morality in there. ROSCO (23 years ago, 18-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Hiroshima-Was It Necessary? —Lindsay Frederick Braun
|
| | | | (...) Er, yes, there is. Read Dave's statement, to which you replied "Yes," again. You say, thus, that they *are* morally equivalent. The term isn't the problem (it hasn't been for most of the .debaters), it's the semantic baggage that goes with a (...) (23 years ago, 22-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Tangents (was: Hiroshima-Was It Necessary?) —Ross Crawford
|
| | | | (...) morality (...) Lets take it back to another example (and no, it's not an analogy). If an escaped murderer breaks into my house, ties up my family and threatens to kill them, but I manage to evade him & get to where my gun is. What should I do? (...) (23 years ago, 22-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
