Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Yogizuna who wrote (40389)	12/4/2001 3:09:00 PM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

It is up to you to demonstrate that there were other options that would not have produced similar collateral damage anyway. The fierceness of the fighting on Okinawa had convinced our military that the invasion of the Japanese Home Islands would have been devastating to not only our men or theirs, but to the civilian population.......

To: Yogizuna who wrote (40389)	12/4/2001 3:58:53 PM
From: J. C. Dithers	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

Incinerating women and kids is never justified If the war continued, Japan was invaded, and women were coming at our soldiers with guns, swords, or spears, and children were coming at our tanks with bombs strapped to their chests ... what do you feel would have been an appropriate response by our troops? I ask this question of you very seriously, as there is little doubt that it would have happened. One of the weapons carried by our troops was the flame-thrower. A soldier armed with this heavy weapon would not be carrying another. Would morality require that such a soldier permit himself to be killed rather than using it?