Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Safe-Keeper
Quote:
|
It would also be interesting to then later get reports that Jap soldiers picked up from a sunk troopship massacred a marine hospital and then you get to ask what relevance sanity has in insanity
|
Going by that reasoning, no one should be rescued at all. Let's just close down the coast guard and let everyone drown, 'cause you know they're picking up the occassional rapist, murderer or robber. |
What you are missing is a reasonable argument. You seem to just want to twist this to be opposite what ever I say and this shows how far you will go to stretch it.
How does that have any relevance to a US Sub captain? How does what I say lead to such a rediculous conclusion
My statement places the consequences of action or lack of as a possibility. It is absurd to now say the coast guard should not rescue anyone because someone might not be a good guy.
We are talking about a war scenario. One of choice.
Troops in the water, let them live because they are at this moment not taking hostile action knowing they will at a future point? Or, take the opportunity to reduce the enemy’s capacity to inflict harm on our effort to succeed in winning the war.
Then make that choice create results
If you simply want to argue go ahead. Would rather you actually had a point rather than stupid barbs
If you can’t understand the UN comment (always acting righteous while taking money as kickbacks to look the other way) or the Muslim terrorist comment on our will to resist and succeed or capitulate you simply ignore the obvious.
Wulfmann