OT: Free speech?

[sachmo]

Originally posted by orm:

quote:

---

Originally posted by sachmo:
The problem is in what position you take on the subject. If you believe that it was necessary to save more lives, then it becomes acceptable. I have a feeling that if there were chemical bombs and/or nuclear weapons going off in America, there would have been far less outcry about the prisoner abuse.

It is never acceptable to fall back to such kind of barbarism. Not for people who say they defend "freedom", "peace" and "human rights". Acceptance for such practics for enemies leads in most cases to use same practics on own population few years later.

---

You and I may believe that, but if you had lived through those time, or you were a soldier waiting to invade Japan, you might have a different story. I guess when you come down to it, what is the price you are willing to make others PAY for your rights? Would you firebomb a city to kill your greatest enemy, or would you avoid it because it is not in your character? When I think about losing my family, lots of moral questions get answered pretty quickly.


Clarification: I am not attempting to justify any of the current issues in Iraq nor draw a comparision between the Iraqi threat and the Nazi threat. My purpose is to try and spark conversation on how "atrocities" can be viewed in a different light by some.

[ May 19, 2004, 14:55: Message edited by: sachmo ]