On Sat, Feb 22, 2003 at 12:31:27PM +0000, Richard Baker wrote:
> Would an action that killed a thousand Americans but which gave > overwhelming improvements to a million Japanese people be justified?
The details of the improvements are necessary: are they likely to result in life where there would have been death? If it was a choice between the LIVES of 1K Americans and 1M Japanese, then if it were my choice, and it was a clear case of MUST choose and no possible alternatives (like _The Cold Equations_), then I would save the lives of the 1M Japanese at the expense of 1K Americans.
However, in the only RL case in which that question came up, (1) it was an estimated _total_ 1M American + Japanese casualties, including many more than 1K Americans, and (2) the Japanese started it with their sneak attack on Pearl Harbor.
> How about one that killed a million Iraqis but benefited a thousand > Americans?
Same as above, assuming those Iraqis were not in an army attacking someone, or advocates of a terrorist group for killing others, etc.
And we know what happens when you ass-u-me . . .
-- Ronn! :)
Almighty Ruler of the all, Whose Power extends to great and small, Who guides the stars with steadfast law, Whose least creation fills with awe, O grant thy mercy and thy grace, To those who venture into space.
(Robert A. Heinlein's added verse to the Navy Hymn)
_______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
