At 09:31 AM Thursday 7/19/2007, jon louis mann wrote: >That is one - rather bizarre - way of looking at things. I would >suggest that in fact the reason people are able to be more concerned >about collateral damge is because a) they are more aware of it and b) >the stakes are much lower. With the immoral bombing actions of the >Second World War a genuine case can be made for it protecting the >bombing nation (although I am not sure that personally I would try to >make such a case) whereas no such similar case can be made today. > Martin > >i think that now, more than ever, a case can be made for no more war.
I love the idea of Isaiah 2:4. Are you aware of any extant nation or group of people who have successfully implemented it? >the people in these mideast countries are being kept in poverty, >despite their fantastic wealth in oil. people are so full of rage and >desperate for work, that they join terrorist organizations. many >become martyrs simply so their families will be fed. >was it really necessary to fire bomb dresden? I dunno. Was the London Blitz really necessary? >did america really need >to use the a-bomb on densely populated cities? I dunno. Did Japan really need to infect POWs with bubonic plague and then vivisect them to see the effects, in plans for using balloons or other devices to drop bacteria on California? > was the alternative to >invade japan, or were there other choices? I dunno. Any suggestions for what those other choices might have been? >what role do governments >have in going to war when the solution might be to find a way to give >people in these countries hope? I dunno. What would you have done to give Germany's Jews hope in the late 1930s-early 1940s? -- Ronn! :) _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
