tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10835776.post698410613135999533..comments2023-10-30T07:45:43.656-04:00Comments on Thoughts and Ideas: Unnecessary nukesA Wiser Man Than Ihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02405864709965908573noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10835776.post-12391116530636386792009-04-10T12:00:00.000-04:002009-04-10T12:00:00.000-04:00I think you make a good case Wiser, but now that h...I think you make a good case Wiser, but now that honor has been discarded, I wonder if Pandoras Box has not been opened.<BR/><BR/>Hoosiertoo. Where to begin? No difference between a sword fight and a nuclear exchange? No problem with total war? Few "non-combatants"? "Confine their lunacy"?<BR/>These statements are so discouraging on so many levels, not least is my suspicion that they reflect generally held opinions. Pray for us all while you are at it.<BR/><BR/>Socialism or barbarism.troutskyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16020298501632120830noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10835776.post-16100672882189791582009-04-08T21:49:00.000-04:002009-04-08T21:49:00.000-04:00The populations of the various factions in the pas...<I>The populations of the various factions in the past world wars were every bit as necessary to the war effort as the armies. Arguably, they were even more so. In that type of conflict there are really very few non-combatants, and mostly children at that.</I><BR/><BR/>This makes our Pope an enemy combatant in Hitler's Reich! Some allowance must be made for those in totalitarian regimes, no?<BR/><BR/>Further, this makes us combatants in our war against whomever it is we're supposed to be fighting. By the standards of Just War, the Iraqis are acting permissibly in attacking Americans, who are the real aggressors. But if we're combatants, then any future terrorist attacks on Americans can be justified, which strikes me as an intolerable absurdity.A Wiser Man Than Ihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02405864709965908573noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10835776.post-19097950513718653422009-04-08T01:11:00.000-04:002009-04-08T01:11:00.000-04:00Nuclear weapons are just weapons. More damage and ...Nuclear weapons are just weapons. More damage and loss of life was effected in Germany and Japan with conventional weapons than with nuclear. That the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki convinced the Empire of Japan that further resistance was futile was reason enough to use them, IMO. We could certainly have destroyed the two cities with conventional weapons had we needed to, and could do so again.<BR/><BR/>I think the problem you have is with total war more than with any particular weapon. Me? Not so much.<BR/>The populations of the various factions in the past world wars were every bit as necessary to the war effort as the armies. Arguably, they were even more so. In that type of conflict there are really very few non-combatants, and mostly children at that.<BR/><BR/>Whatever else history has taught us, MAD works - at least with rational opponents. It will be interesting to see what the mad mullahs do with their nukes. One hopes they confine their lunacy to the Middle East; I suspect otherwise.<BR/><BR/>If everyone else has nukes, it'd be wise to hold on to ours. I pray we wouldn't have to use them, but the threat that we just might has and will cause others to think twice about messing with us.hoosiertoohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10860188380201743436noreply@blogger.com