Eric L. Strobel" <fyzycyst_at_home.com>:
> There are SO MANY things wrong with this that I hardly know where to
> begin... First off, you obviously know NOTHING about the Nazis or you
> wouldn't have written that first sentence.
Now - wait a moment - obviously that YOU don't know a thing about them. I doubt that with your views on the situation you have ever suffered the horror of the Second World War. My family did. So let me enlighten you - you do sound like them. The same fanatic rage and burning desire to sacrifice even more people...
> Next, nobody is judging the lives of those who might get killed in any action taken against the swine that did this or those that give them aid.
>
> And, for your information, the deaths of innocents in wartime is only murder when the purpose of the attack is to deliberately kill civilians. This is a
> widely accepted principle that's been around probably as long as there's been wars. Also, as stated in other messages, these civilians make a
> conscious choice to support their government either actively (in which case they truly are not innocent) or passively (through inaction).
It's not a war (yet) - so whatever you are saying is not applicable. Imagine a different situation - some crazy group of american people go to let say Kuala-Lumpur and deliberately kill a couple thousands people over there in a horrible way as and act of terrorism? Should the rest of the world consider this as war declaration and wipe out USA killing lot's of innocent people just because of that terrorist?
Now a - imagine that that group was directly supported by american president, the group themselves were US army troops and the coutry was Iraq... Did you still not get the picture? Many thousands of innocent people died over there because of stupid unnecessary violent actions of America and Great Britain against Iraq government couple years ago in an act of terror (yes - it was NOT a war -it was never declared).
So why (using your arguments) weren't they attacking USA? Do not even try to say that life of American citizens is more valuable than of those in Iraq - I see no difference.
> That's a silly statement. It was WAR! If Japan HAD been capable of such retaliation, they would have done so and would not have surrendered. If you feel that pinprick attacks against the Nazi or Imperial Japanese military would have been sufficient to defeat them, you'd best do a LOT of studying on the topic. The only way to end that war was to eliminate those powers' ability to continue to wage war. Unfortunately, that meant destroying a great deal of civil infrastructure that was being used for the manufacture and distribution of war materiel.
Well I did studied this. And you know what - again I don't think you ever get a picture. The war was won and practically finished at that time. Those bombs were necessary to americans to show Russians (and possibly other "communist" countries of which USA was so "worried") how mighty USA are. It's like russians for instance would wipe out a Berlin after end of Second World War - totally unnecessary and stupid act.
Lastly - reading all your replies in this list and understanding that you going to continue this and other flames - this is my last reply (reagrdless on whatever you might say).
If you want to continue - go find some other list. This one only devoted to Newtons/MessagePad.
Alex
-- This is the Newtontalk mailinglist - http://www.newtontalk.net To unsubscribe or manage: visit the above link or mailto:newtontalk-request_at_newtontalk.net?Subject=unsubscribe
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Wed Oct 03 2001 - 12:01:48 EDT