Al Gore win Nobel Peace Prize

[Harlan Huckleby]

The Dresden firebombing was indefensible on all of those points.

[mraynrand]

I don't know whether Menachem Begin killed any civilians when he led a terrorist cell in the 1940's, I assume he did, they were attacking the civil administration. It is the same strategy the Palestinians have employed.

You know nothing, yet you assume - and then profess to argue that it's the same strategy. What a fool. BTW, they did not employ the same strategy, whether you assume it into existence in your mind or not.

[mraynrand]

The Dresden firebombing was indefensible on all of those points.

Another blanket proclamation of Harlan. I bet you don't know what the reasoning at the time was - what factors were weighed in the push to end the war, yet you'll push forward and make an excathedral-like statement that the bombing was indefensibleon all those points. Don't you know at the time that there were those who were worried about a lot of other factors. I can see the argument that bombing Dresden wasn't necessary, but it certainly could be defensible on a number of grounds - all of them are probably unknown by you. But that's not even the point - it's another distraction of Harlan - argue an alternate point to avoid facing the fact that you have no standards.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Ayn,

You have the world neatly divided into good and bad columns.

Jewish uprising against British - good.
Palestinean uprising - bad.
U.S. bombing of civilians - good.

It is you who is ignoring realities, details. Running to comfort of simple answers.

I say there is a lot of immorality in war. And it seems it is you playing moral relativist here, German babies being less sacred than Israeli babies because the cause was stronger. (very debatable point, btw, very little purpose in that Dresden bombing. )

[Harlan Huckleby]

Dresden wasn't necessary, but it certainly could be defensible on a number of grounds.

As is the Palestinean resistance defensible on a number of grounds.

[hoosier]

Most aren't aware that the United States has the strictest environmental policies in the world.

Pulling stuff out of your ass contributes to global warming.

[falco]

Most aren't aware that the United States has the strictest environmental policies in the world.

Pulling stuff out of your ass contributes to global warming.

Merlin is certainly one of the biggest polluters then.

[Harlan Huckleby]

I would not be surprised if Merlin is correct, even if the statement was anally generated.

[mraynrand]

Ayn,

You have the world neatly divided into good and bad columns.

Jewish uprising against British - good.
Palestinean uprising - bad.
U.S. bombing of civilians - good.

It is you who is ignoring realities, details. Running to comfort of simple answers.

I say there is a lot of immorality in war. And it seems it is you playing moral relativist here, German babies being less sacred than Israeli babies because the cause was stronger. (very debatable point, btw, very little purpose in that Dresden bombing. )

You really are hopeless. It's you who are reducing things to absurd simplicities. The Jewish uprising isn't necessarily good, it's just that the 'insurgents' (if you will) were not targeting women and children to achieve their goal; the Palestinians explicitly were and are. That's a huge difference. The Bombing of Dresden was done to hasten the end of the war. What calculus are you using to decide who lives and dies? Who was more valuable - German civilians or Allied soldiers? German civilians or Jews and ethnic minorities being roasted in German ovens? The objective was clear. End the war, reduce allied losses, stop the slaughter of innocents BY the Germans, get to Berlin before the Soviet Union to minimize post-war authoritarian control by the Soviets. The methods were crude and horrific, but the goals were noble.

You can't say the same thing about the Palestinians; their methods were and are deliberately, intentionally horrific, and their ultimate goal is horrific (not a Palestinian state, but destruction of Israel, the slaughter of a people). They were offered virtually everything they ostensibly 'wanted' and turned it down. This is why Lenin called guys like you USEFUL IDIOTS. Lenin knew what he wanted as did Arafat - but so long as they can get sympathetic, ignorant, hoodwinked morons to actually believe that they have some noble purpose, they can continue to fight for their cause with the support of all the useful idiots on the planet who have no capacity to distinguish between good and bad motives and causes or between good, bad, worse, and horrific methods. Lenin and Arafat loved people like you Harlan who would use burned babies as a way to equate the slaughterings of Lenin and Arafat with the bombings of Dresden or the nuking of Japan. In fact, Bin Laden himself, in a manner frighteningly similar to you, equates the bombing of Japan with the WTC bombing. You're in exclusive company, really.

[mraynrand]

Dresden wasn't necessary, but it certainly could be defensible on a number of grounds.

As is the Palestinean resistance defensible on a number of grounds.

I didn't say that 'Dresden wasn't necessary' - I said that I could see the argument. That's entirely different. The point that you don' get - either you are a total moron or you're jut puling a contrarian trick - one where you just disagree with everything (a useless weak position but it allows all sort of escapes when continuously proven wrong - this is a trick you use with Skinbasket all the time and you have admitted that you do it on purpose - making the tactic even more shameful) - Anyway, the point is that the ultimate objectives are so radically different in morality and the methods of the Palestines so horrific that the two situations are totally different (see above post). HH = UI

[Harlan Huckleby]

were not targeting women and children to achieve their goal; the Palestinians explicitly were and are.

The Jewish terrorists were good terrorists? The Brittish civilians they killed had it coming, because they stood in the way of the noble cause?

The Palestinean cause is just as noble as the Israeli cause. And I disapprove of terrorism for any cause.

The Bombing of Dresden was done to hasten the end of the war....The methods were crude and horrific, but the goals were noble.

crude and horrific methods should only be used as a last resort. not the case with Dresden. There was a large measure of vengeance in that action.

You can't say the same thing about the Palestinians; their methods were and are deliberately, intentionally horrific, and their ultimate goal is horrific (not a Palestinian state, but destruction of Israel, the slaughter of a people).

hello? Dresden was intentionally horrific, designed to kill, terrorize and demoralize German civilians.

You completely dismiss the Palestinian cause. Such black and white thinking.
To say that the Palestinian people are commited to the slaughter of Jews and the destruction of Isreal is a statement of gross ignorance. Although the numbers in that camp have increased the last 10 years, unfortunately.

I am a staunch supporter of Israel; and I recognize the Palestineans as human beings deserving of a generous accomodation.

In fact, Bin Laden himself, in a manner frighteningly similar to you, equates the bombing of Japan with the WTC bombing. You're in exclusive company, really.

Let the record show that I don't believe Bin Laden's cause is noble.

And for future reference, I also am opposed to the cause of Hitler, Stalin, Idi Amin, and Pol Pot.

[Harlan Huckleby]

the ultimate objectives are so radically different in morality and the methods of the Palestines so horrific that the two situations are totally different

I disagree on both counts. I have sympathy for the Palestinean cause, their desire for self-government is legitimate.

And a bomb is a bomb whether it is delivered in a backpack in a coffee shop, or as an incindinary device dropped from an airplane on innocent civilians. They are not radically different, they are both horrific.

(I don't understand your criticism of my debating tactics, I can't follow the logic. Any suggestion that I am insincere is false. And I can't imagine myself admiting to some "trick." )

[mraynrand]

the ultimate objectives are so radically different in morality and the methods of the Palestines so horrific that the two situations are totally different

I disagree on both counts. I have sympathy for the Palestinean cause, their desire for self-government is legitimate.

And a bomb is a bomb whether it is delivered in a backpack in a coffee shop, or as an incindinary device dropped from an airplane on innocent civilians.

(I don't understand your criticism of my debating tactics, I can't follow the logic. Any suggestion that I am insincere is false.)

I don't say this with any pleasure, but I think you're very stupid. Seriously. At the very best you are morally blind, a moral fool of sorts. You can't see the difference between identifying a bomb as a bomb and judging whether the cause behind the bomb in one instance may be more justified than another. You can't see that a desire for self government is different than an evaluation of the the goals of the people seeking the self government or the difference in methods that different people seeking self government employ. It's worthless 'debating' this with you, since you apparently don't even comprehend the critical distinction between an inanimate object and a human motivation. It would be easier discussing this with Dostoyovsky's Prince Myshkin.

[mraynrand]

hello? Dresden was intentionally horrific, designed to kill, terrorize and demoralize German civilians.

You completely dismiss the Palestinian cause. Such black and white thinking.
To say that the Palestinian people are commited to the slaughter of Jews and the destruction of Isreal is a statement of gross ignorance. Although the numbers in that camp have increased the last 10 years, unfortunately.

I am a staunch supporter of Israel; and I recognize the Palestineans as human beings deserving of a generous accomodation.

You're the one who is grossly ignorant. The Palestinians got their freely elected government, Hamas. Read their literature. They are a terrorist group that wants to eliminate Israel and the Jews. WAKE UP.

Yes, Dresden was bombed for exactly the reasons you wrote - SPECIFICALLY TO BRING A SWIFT END TO THE WAR. And that end was for good reasons - that I already stated. But I've got to stop. Your idiocy is lowering my IQ.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Hamas. Read their literature. They are a terrorist group that wants to eliminate Israel and the Jews.

Hamas grew in response to the foolish, expansionist policies of Ariel Sharon and other Isreali right wingers. Sharon systematically undermined moderate Palestinean leaders. Near the end of Sharon's life, he saw the futility of his ways and did a 180 degree flip. He broke from Likud, formed a new party prepared to relenquish territories. But the damage was done.

Palestineans did not vote for Hamas because of their hardline ideology. Rather, they rejected Fatah because of its rampant corruption and incompetence. This is basic stuff, you are uninformed.

Solid majorities of both Israeli and Palestinean populations support a two state solution. A fight to the death is not inevitable. The broad outlines of a settlement are there. The holdup is the political disarray and social/economic collapse of the Palestineans. Maybe you noticed they just had a little civil war. Tony Blair has been tasked by the United Nations with helping to rebuild Palestinean institutions.

Yes, Dresden was bombed for exactly the reasons you wrote - SPECIFICALLY TO BRING A SWIFT END TO THE WAR.

I don't accept that slaughtering tens of thousands of innocent civilians was militarily significant. And the ends did not justify these means. Just as the slaughter of civilians by terrorists is not justified, even for legitimate goals.