You seem to have completely missed the point. I'm not focusing on body counts, except to complete the calculation of those who are focusing on body counts. My purpose, in fact, is to point out that such simplistic moral arithmetic has no power to help determine the best course of action. It can only be used to justify a predetermined course of action. Bush decided to go to war with Iraq a long time ago, and came up with the relative body count argument to rationalize that decision. In so doing, he foreclosed any attempt to find a better way.
There are many things worse than death, and at the same time there are many things worth dying for.
....
In other words, we could conceivably kill millions of civilians and the war could still be a Just war...
Yikes! Thank you Dr. Strangelove! You sure seem to have an appetite for death. I wouldn't be so casual about dismissing millions of deaths simply because the moral calculator says it's relatively OK.
Speaking of ad homineum rebuttals:
however, if you are intellectually honest then no simple arithmatic formula...
Was that really necessary? It seems like ad homineum attacks are so integral to Rightist nature that you didn't even notice it, did you?
--Robert
Off Topic » in reply to the failure in your logic...
Re: the failure in your logic...
The whole thread (42 posts)
- For the "Better Red Than Dead" crowd.
- Another Perspective (a better one)
- This requires explanation....just whom do you think is included in this grouping?
- Re: explanation
- He supported building those bombs...Did you?
- To be a little more precise...
- offered as an aid to your precision......
- Moral 'profit and loss'
- Re: Moral decisions
- Thank you, Robert
- the failure in your logic...
- I mentioned no one specifically. Ears burning? (n/t) (n/t)
- Maybe that open letter resonnated a little too clsoe to home? n/t (n/t)
- Wow, Pub, that's just sour. Someone piddle in your cornflakes? ;-) n/t (n/t)