SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: aladin who wrote (67302)9/5/2004 7:12:30 PM
From: Lane3  Read Replies (3) of 793901
 
Some things are just wrong - its a moral issue.

Yes, some things are just wrong. I agree with that.

In WW2 we had little choice but to effect wide spread bombing to prosecute a war we did not start.

How is that different from my hypothetical scenario in which we "have little choice" but "to prosecute a war we didn't start" by engaging in terrorism? How is the immorality of the "wide-spread" bombing in WWII less than the case for bombing occupiers' busses in my WWIII?

Playing my terrorism card could be considered more wrong because bombing is conventional and terrorism isn't. But in my hypothetical, there is more at risk. WWII wasn't an immediately existential issue for the US but it is in my WWIII scenario. That would make the case for the WWII bombing of civilians weaker. There's also a potential difference in the numbers of civilians killed. Bombing busses kills fewer people. A fourth difference is that in Germany we bombed people in their homeland. In my scenario we are bombing people who are occupying our homes. Greater justification in the latter, I think.

So I would be interested in why you think "we had little choice" in Dresden but consider it immoral to bomb the busses of occupiers and colonists in Cleveland or Santa Fe before they can wipe out our country and our culture. On balance, if your criterion is "little choice," it seems to me that we would be more justified in acts of terrorism in my scenario than we were in Germany in WWII. I can buy your "just wrong" argument but I don't think you have a winning hand on the "little choice" argument. The moral weight seems greater to me for bombing the Islamicists than the Germans.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News