Subject:
|
Re: Hiroshima-Was It Necessary?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 18 Oct 2001 00:27:59 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
581 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Ross Crawford writes:
> > In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler writes:
> > >
> > > So I'll ask you plainly: do you feel that the Sept 11 suicide
> > > bombing, in which civilians (in a nation that was not at war)
> > > were used as missiles is morally equivalent to the death of
> > > civilians in a nation that had declared war on its enemy, during a
> > > time when Japan was certainly aware of the war?
> >
> > Yes
>
> 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?
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
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Hiroshima-Was It Necessary?
|
| (...) 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)
|
Message is in Reply To:
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
|
|
|
|
