If Music Could Talk

Dr. Medulla wrote: I don't mess with those who are obviously my moral superiors based on where they spend their Sundays.

I've been spending mine at Buffalo Wild Wings.

JennyB wrote:Hiroshima day is also my birthday. Do with that information what you will.

My co-worker too.

tepista wrote:

Dr. Medulla wrote: I don't mess with those who are obviously my moral superiors based on where they spend their Sundays.

I've been spending mine at Buffalo Wild Wings.

You saying you're morally superior to wings?

Silent Majority wrote:I love that nobody engaged with Steve's trolling.

Maybe because we can recognize a relative of the tu quoque fallacy.

Dr. Medulla wrote:

tepista wrote:

Dr. Medulla wrote: I don't mess with those who are obviously my moral superiors based on where they spend their Sundays.

I've been spending mine at Buffalo Wild Wings.

You saying you're morally superior to wings?

Those Albany Tame Wings are crap.

tepista wrote:

Dr. Medulla wrote:

tepista wrote:

Dr. Medulla wrote: I don't mess with those who are obviously my moral superiors based on where they spend their Sundays.

I've been spending mine at Buffalo Wild Wings.

You saying you're morally superior to wings?

Those Albany Tame Wings are crap.

I prefer Utica Whimsical Wings.

Wolter wrote:

tepista wrote:

Dr. Medulla wrote:

tepista wrote:

Dr. Medulla wrote: I don't mess with those who are obviously my moral superiors based on where they spend their Sundays.

I've been spending mine at Buffalo Wild Wings.

You saying you're morally superior to wings?

Those Albany Tame Wings are crap.

I prefer Utica Whimsical Wings.

Inder loves the McCartney Mediocre Wings.

Twelve papers graded on the US decision to use nuclear weapons in Japan; only two saw a distinction between the military and civilian populations in Japan. Perhaps no surprise, too, that those two students engaged in a helluva lot more research for their papers (both cited close to three times the minimum required sources). Most of the pro-bomb papers dismissed the idea of morality in wartime (some explicitly said this), which means, I suppose, we can dispense with the idea of war crimes. Anything goes, except when it's the Germans or Japanese or Russians or Italians—then it's savagery. It really is quite depressing that very little reflection went into this topic.

Dr. Medulla wrote:Twelve papers graded on the US decision to use nuclear weapons in Japan; only two saw a distinction between the military and civilian populations in Japan. Perhaps no surprise, too, that those two students engaged in a helluva lot more research for their papers (both cited close to three times the minimum required sources). Most of the pro-bomb papers dismissed the idea of morality in wartime (some explicitly said this), which means, I suppose, we can dispense with the idea of war crimes. Anything goes, except when it's the Germans or Japanese or Russians or Italians—then it's savagery. It really is quite depressing that very little reflection went into this topic.

Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?

Rat Patrol wrote:

Dr. Medulla wrote:Twelve papers graded on the US decision to use nuclear weapons in Japan; only two saw a distinction between the military and civilian populations in Japan. Perhaps no surprise, too, that those two students engaged in a helluva lot more research for their papers (both cited close to three times the minimum required sources). Most of the pro-bomb papers dismissed the idea of morality in wartime (some explicitly said this), which means, I suppose, we can dispense with the idea of war crimes. Anything goes, except when it's the Germans or Japanese or Russians or Italians—then it's savagery. It really is quite depressing that very little reflection went into this topic.

Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?

Not even when Henry Truman became president after Theodore Roosevelt died.

One year later and another round of term papers have arrived on my desk. Fourteen of thirty-eight are on whether nuclear weapons were justified. I told the prof that I'm expecting to feel sad as I consider the moral core of twenty-somethings.

http://www.salon.com/2015/08/05/america ... r_partner/

Naturally the comments are all awful.

Y'know, from 1945 and well into the 1960s, possibly 1970s, discussions about Hiroshima and the Holocaust usually occurred in tandem, realizing a shared mindset that justified the mass murder of civilians for a greater good and an application of advanced science and technology, previously regarded as the tools of social progress, to commit the deed. I'm not sure when the divorce happened, but while people still understand the Holocaust as a monstrous evil, somehow Hiroshima and Nagasaki have largely been removed from moral consideration. What's scarier to me is that my suspicion is that this isn't due to a reconsideration of the differences between the two acts than a simple Nazis were evil while the Allies were good guys. Which means that we could justify genocide as long as it's done by good guys. That's staring into the abyss territory.

So how would you have ended the war, oh great source of wisdom and moral superiority?

Medulla take your hippy "not nuking women and children" bullshit outta here.