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 : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bill who wrote (2041)	7/21/2005 10:18:16 AM
From: epicure	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 540706

Yes. Brave. Putting yourself in danger without thought to your own physical well being, and making yourself a marked man, on purpose, knowing (or not caring) that you will be marked, is bravery. I'd say bank robbers are also brave. They are criminals, and quite uncaring about human life, but the quality of bravery is not necessarily related to the quality of goodness, definitionally. I think you think that because I don't like anti-abortion protestors I would be swayed by the victims. Bravery isn't about the victims, it's about the quality of the personal action, and personal death defying (or embracing) strategy. I think most people agree Kamikazis (sp?) are/were brave, and I don't think it matters to their bravery, what their targets were. You seem to want the brave to be good. I don't think the two go together at all (though since all cultures idealize the bravery that their culture finds appealing, I will grant you that for propaganda purposes we often see bravery used as if it were "good"- but that is just pr). You still don't address the huge US attacks on Japanese civilian populations- is there a reason for that? Was the Us cowardly (in your scheme it would seem they would have to be, since they intentionally attacked civilians)?