Siteadmin, Check users, nsTeam1RO, nsTeam1RW, nsTeam1_talkRO, nsTeam1_talkRW, oversight, Administrators
30,650
edits
Changes
Debate:Were both sides in the Cold War morally equivalent? (view source)
Revision as of 19:20, August 21, 2007
, 19:20, August 21, 2007→NO: to Jazzman
:It seems I have some red links to fill in. In the meantime, I would highly suggest (as I did on the mainpage before the dissent got deleted) that you research the political theory analysis of the Cold War -- it really is fascinating stuff. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazzman831]] 14:14, 21 August 2007 (EDT)
:It seems I have some red links to fill in. In the meantime, I would highly suggest (as I did on the mainpage before the dissent got deleted) that you research the political theory analysis of the Cold War -- it really is fascinating stuff. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazzman831]] 14:14, 21 August 2007 (EDT)
::You seem thoroughly confused, if I may venture to make a personal remark. First of all, there is nothing "off-topic" here. Were you using ''off-topic'' as code for "something you would prefer not to have discussed"?
::You also seem unaware of the meaning of [[moral equivalence]]. Is this because you don't know anything about [[ethics]], or perhaps (as I guess) because you reject the concepts of [[good]] or [[evil]] - as so many [[moral relativist]]s do? Don't worry about being honest; I won't ban you for revealing a fondness for relativism. Bans are for [[intellectual dishonest]], not for partisanship!
::Finally, you seem to think that the Soviets just wanted to survive (not to conquer) and that whether they "struck first" or not is not a matter of ethics. In short, you regard them as having precisely the same moral standing as America: this is the textbook definition of [[moral equivalence]], so I can't understand why you repeatedly reject my application of that concept, unless it is because you are unaware of the definition. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 15:20, 21 August 2007 (EDT)
==OTHER==
==OTHER==