Theater…

Buy:Acomplia.Lasix.Lipitor.Buspar.Seroquel.Female Pink Viagra.Ventolin.SleepWell.Wellbutrin SR.Zetia.Amoxicillin.Lipothin.Zocor.Nymphomax.Aricept.Prozac.Advair.Benicar.Cozaar.Female Cialis….

On the one hand, people might like them mostly for reasons of sentimentality or politeness memes. But I guess mostly they would be the obvious cases.

On the other hand, there might exist contexts where they actually convey meaning. Like, there are lots of things people do in our culture because they think they have to. If a thank you sends a message or serves as a reminder that you reject a morality of obligation or entitlement, and instead recognize that the person did what they did because they saw value in doing it for its own sake, then that could be good.

Psychiatrist type people tend to say that before, it either was unscientific or not very good (no one takes Freud seriously these days), but NOW they do things scientifically and rigourously, and they’re improving at such a fast rate that no wonder they keep changing, and anyway what some manual says isn’t the most up to date way of thibkig about it and it’s wrong about a lot of things.
Do you have any criticisms of this? Why isn’t ‘it’s scientific now but it’s an early field so fast changes’ not a good explanation for the thing you quoted?

How useful do you think thank-yous are when they’re not obvious? And why?

Saying we knew and let our men die requires a conspiracy theory, with the general problems those have, as explained on STWTR.

You can’t judge the morality of nukes by counting deaths in the different scenarios. The acceptable number of innocent American casualties is zero. If certain Japanese soldiers and leaders force us to use nukes to protect Americans, then the consequences are on them, not on us. They could have protected the Japanese civilians by surrendering; by refraining from trying to kill Americans; they refused.

On another note, wikipedia says Japan had 580,000 WWII civilian deaths. Even if they are counting the nukes around 200k (which I doubt they are, since it’s civilian deaths in wwii, not deaths later as a result of stuff from wwii) then there’s still the other 65% of the deaths to consider. so why focus so much on the nukes? we did non-nuking stuff that killed more people, e.g. bombing the hell out of tokyo. should we have never sent a single plane to bomb tokyo during the entire war, or what? if doing that is OK b/c we are fighting for good and freedom and saving the lives of good people, that applies equally well in the nuking case. if you reject that, and think even one little bomb dropped on tokyo is wrong, then it’s dishonest to complain about the nukes in particular just b/c they sound worse; that’s using propaganda value to obscure one’s actual position.

So I’m not convinced. If you press on and keep repeating the claim often enough, do you think that will change?