From: "Mark" 

Okay, I'm sorry if I misinterpreted your post and its underlying point John.


"John Cuccia"  wrote in message
news:ag5o229u3r89vcl0d0dehfool3q4ml5kb2{at}4ax.com...
> On Thu, 30 Mar 2006 12:31:42 -0500, "Gary Wiltshire"

> wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 30 Mar 2006 11:11:17 -0500, John Cuccia 
>>wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 30 Mar 2006 01:15:12 -0500, "Gary Wiltshire"

>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> >>>>> comes across
>>>>>> that  way most of the time>
>>>>>
>>>>> Have you stopped beating your wife yet, or what?
>>>>
>>>> It wasn't an unreasonable response to your smarmy invocation of
>>>> Hiroshima.
>>>
>>> Yes it was.  It was a thoughtless knee-jerk reaction from someone for
>>> whom flag waving is much easier than thinking.
>>
>>Ah, the classic "Your're Stupid!" intellectual argument.
>
> No it's not.  You must have missed my (quite reasonable, IMO)
> explanation to Mark of just how grossly he was misrepresenting my
> argument against the existence of "laws and customs of war".
>
> Your claim that his response followed from what I said (which you
> characterize as "smarmy" is wrong.  As I said, his response was simply
> an emotional, thoughtless reaction to what I said.
>
> It appears that yours is an emotional response also, but one that I
> don't quite get.  How exactly do you consider the destruction of a
> city (leaving aside the question of whether or not that destruction
> was justified, which is a separate argument that I am not making) to
> be smarmy?
>
>
>
>

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5