The point you are making is 'war' is simply unacceptable, correct? v/r
//SIGNED// Stephen S. Wolfe, YA2, DAF 6th MDG Data Services Manager 6th MDG Information System Security Officer Comm (813) 827-9994 DSN 651-9994 -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ricardo Aráoz Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2008 5:43 PM To: ProFox Email List Subject: Re: [OT] 3,000 centrifuges in Iran? Wolfe, Stephen S Civ USAF AMC 6 MDSS/SGSI wrote: > Then you'll like this document: > http://www.umich.edu/~historyj/pages_folder/articles/Hiroshima_and_Nagasaki.pdf > > Interesting read. However it does not address the point I'm making. How many saved US lives do you think would morally justify the murder of two civilian cities? One, ten, a hundred? And how many saved Muslim lives would justify the twin towers? You know, there were also civilians there. To make it simpler, do you wage war on civilians? The story of your service (USAF) suggests you do, suggests you approve burning civilians with napalm. But you personally, would you burn a baby with napalm? And if you had to get out of your plane, near and personal, would you put a baby in the oven and burn him just because his country is at war with you? [excessive quoting removed by server] _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[EMAIL PROTECTED] ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
