Subject:
|
Re: Oddball thoughts (was: Hiroshima-Was It Necessary?)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Mon, 22 Oct 2001 03:51:37 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
632 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Ross Crawford writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Lindsay Frederick Braun writes:
> >
> > Here's an oddball thought: Imagine a world where Hiroshima and
> > Nagasaki were never bombed, and nuclear weapons were never seen
> > in action on such a comparatively small scale. I'd be willing
> > to posit that in such a world, a Cuban Missile Crisis would
> > have become World War III, and we wouldn't be here flapping
> > our jaw-meat about it. Does the end justify the means? Can
> > there not be any *positive* value to having seen the horror of
> > a Hiroshima and Nagasaki relative to the survival of humanity?
>
> Here's another oddball thought: It's likely humanity will eventually cease to
> exist at some time in the future, anyway, so was it worth imparting
> such horror
> on the Japanese population, just to keep humanity going a bit longer?
Was that a serious question?
What are the alternative values to weigh against? I see humanity as good for
millions of years, actually. We may actually last all the way to the heat
death of the universe, we're pretty clever.
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
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
|
|
|
|
