4 ms·
No, he said that these things "can indeed be defended, but only by arguments which are too brutal for most people to face, and which do not square with the prof
by PaulAJ 11y ago
No, he said that these things "can indeed be defended, but only by arguments which are too brutal for most people to face, and which do not square with the professed aims of the political parties."
That is not the same thing as saying that they are indefensible.
- dba7dba 11y agoWithout nukes, it was gong to be more brutal than death of 100,000 civilian lives. As in death of millions of Japanese civilians. A million or so US casualty was projected. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Downfall http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Downfall