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 (42146)	1/10/2002 2:39:24 PM
From: The Philosopher	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

Pride has nothing to do with it. I am glad that Truman made the decision he did. That decision might have saved the life of my father in law and allowed the birth of my wife and my children. That doesn't mean I'm proud of it, any more than I'm proud if I take the responsible action of putting to sleep a beloved dog, or disciplining a child who needs correction. It's not that I'm proud of those things; it's that I recognize the need to do them and am man enough to do them and not whine about how unfair it is that I had to do them. IMO dropping the bomb was the right thing to do.

To: Yogizuna who wrote (42146)	1/10/2002 4:11:18 PM
From: TimF	Respond to of 82486

Burning people alive is one of the most horrible if not the most horrible torture methods available to the human race After all we could have let the Germans refine in peace at the cost of the deaths of more American and allied soldiers. Torture implies deliberately causing pain in a more controlled way usually to get information or to inflict punishment. Typically the attempt is made to maximize the pain without killing the person tortured. I wouldn't call dropping a bomb on someone torturing them. Sure it can inflict pain as well as death, but its intended to cause death and destruction, not to maximize pain. It is less controlled then torture. Horrible may be a good word to describe some possible results or incendiaries, high explosives or nuclear weapons, depending on the circumstances and justification the word atrocity might apply but "torture" really doesn't fit to well. As for comparing the worth and value of an innocent Japanese life against an American one, I am not willing to even consider such a racist way of thinking. Holding the life of the enemy to be less dear then the lives of those on your side is not racist (of course racists can think like that but many non racists have as well). Its the typical way of war. Its one of the reasons war is so horrible but without that attitude you are unlikely to win a war. Recently with the US's great power and technical advances particularly in bombing accuracy we have been able to be more careful about the lives of our enemies, particularly enemy civilians. However if you don't have the technologies and techniques that we have now, or if you are not fighting an weak enemy it is hard to be so careful. Do you think it was racist when we buried Iraqi soldiers alive so as not to put our soldiers at risk? Do you think bombing German oil refineries even though we know that some civilians would be killed (inaccurate bombers, flammable even explosive targets, and frequently nearby civilians) was racist? After all we could have let the Germans refine fuel in peace at the cost of the deaths of more American and allied soldiers. Tim

To: Yogizuna who wrote (42146)	1/11/2002 10:25:19 AM
From: J. C. Dithers	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

...both innocent and non-innocent in Japan and Germany... I think you are unclear on the concept of war. When two nations declare war upon another, there are no "innocents" left in either country. A nation is nothing more than its citizens. When your nation declares war on another, it does so on behalf of you as a citizen, making you "guilty" of being in a state of war with the other nation. If you do not wish to be so considered, you always have the option of renouncing your citizenship and leaving your homeland if you can find a way to do it. Otherwise, you are the enemy as far as the opposing nation is concerned. It is not possible for you to claim the status of an "innocent bystander" while your nation is at war and to retain your citizenship at the same time.