Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

"He did worse things" isn't a moral argument though. By that logic we should be shooting any murderer on sight even if they surrender to police and offer no resistance.

The question is whether the price was worth the military gain, or whether there was a less disagreeable way to achieve it.

And in some ways strategic bombing fails both tests, as it was still a novel way of war that was ill understood. Hence for example campaign against synthetic fuel wasn't waged until 1945, battle of the Ruhr was abandoned instead of largely ineffective bombings of Berlin etc. But then again, if we judged every war based on how we know after about how it should have been fought then all leaders anywhere and anytime fall short.

So I'm just happy we have developed precision weapons and accurate recon that lets us wage air campaigns of much greater military impact, with less than a % of civilian cost. At least when you're a western power.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

"He did worse things" isn't a moral argument though. By that logic we should be shooting any murderer on sight even if they surrender to police and offer no resistance.

Yes, I agree it's not a moral argument. But generals and officers are human beings, prone to human errors and biases. If a country is brutalized, don't expect its inhabitants will make rational moral decisions.

Take the strategic bombing of Berlin by the RAF (diverging from the Ruhr campaign), it wasn't rational, but it was an intrinsically human decision made by people without hindsight. London was bombed by the Luftwaffe so the Germans should suffer the same, that was the general sentiment in Britain.

War is incredibly messy and brings up the worst in people, in the case of WW2 the best course of action was to defeat the Axis at any cost because their goals were unarguably evil. I'll not pass moral judgements on those generals and political leaders who were forced to deal with that awful situation.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I'm just doing my normal thing (Catholic fun fact posting about a monastery and Saint :marseypraying:) and you and @BushWasRight decided to be all serious about war. He is correct that the traditional "just war" doctrine dates back to Augustine who I think nicked it from a Roman.

Ecumenical councils are the highest authority in Tradition, and Vatican II did not mince words in condemning the bombs. Obviously the decision at the time and the postwar culture influence these things in how we view them, but Gaudium et Spes sections 80-82 are the newest entry in Catholic teaching on the subject. It's too long to quote but would only take a minute to read.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Sometimes I forget most of your arguments and posts are of ecclesiastical nature.

By the way, I have some LATAM church related news for you. The commie sandinista dictator and Maduro ally, Daniel Ortega is imprisoning priests again (he did a Church crackdown a few years ago) while launching new attacks against the church for not submitting to his rule.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Sometimes I forget most of your arguments and posts are of ecclesiastical nature.

https://i.rdrama.net/images/17229829046632724.webp

!Catholics check out Gaudium et Spes sections 79-82 for the authoritative and binding positions on war, the nuclear bombs, and the arms race.

Therefore, we say it again: the arms race is an utterly treacherous trap for humanity, and one which ensnares the poor to an intolerable degree. It is much to be feared that if this race persists, it will eventually spawn all the lethal ruin whose path it is now making ready. Warned by the calamities which the human race has made possible, let us make use of the interlude granted us from above and for which we are thankful to become more conscious of our own responsibility and to find means for resolving our disputes in a manner more worthy of man. Divine Providence urgently demands of us that we free ourselves from the age-old slavery of war. If we refuse to make this effort, we do not know where we will be led by the evil road we have set upon.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Sorry, but I think we need more nukes, not fewer and that applies to the US. And Brazil should have an arsenal of at least 500 warheads along a nuclear triad.

!macacos !anticommunists

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Reported by:

:#marseysmughips:

But yes, I am rarely posting out of "how is this related to Catholicism" character and that's part of why I make people so mad on this site, :marseywingcuck: Catholics who want to pick and choose what parts to follow included. Between that and talking about my family situation which irks the chuds/biofoids users I induce rage amongst a huge % of the userbase without much effort.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I induce rage amongst a huge % of the userbase without much effort.

!nooticers thoughts on Corinthian?

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I had no idea he annoyed people :marseyhmmm:

@Corinthian can you link me to some of your greatest hits? :marseyshy:

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

More comments

is he Catholic? invite him to !babykillers

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

More comments

Takes himself a lil too seriously tbh

But overall a good sport

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

The yellow fever guy? I'm okay with him

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

More comments

literally who

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Who? :marseysaluteussr:

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Weirdo, but overall fine. :marseywholesome:

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

More comments

Catholics who want to pick and choose what parts to follow included

Protestants, you mean.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

World Wars fought since nukes: 0

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

All countries should have nukes

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Wrong, some should and most shouldn't.

Brazil should be the sole nuclear power of South America. Spain should have also have nukes but Portugal shouldn't as Spain is the bigger one in the Iberian Peninsula, this gives paellacels the mandate of heaven over bacalhaus.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Didn't know you were a Duginist, based tbh

With that being said, Portugal shouldn't exist and there should be an Iberian Federation, so I agree with you

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

yes don't spend you're money and time fighting wars!

spend them on the church instead.

@CountNosfarakeet say this as a feminist ally

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Link copied to clipboard
Action successful!
Error, please refresh the page and try again.