Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!columbia!caip!princeton!jrw
From: jrw@princeton.UUCP (Jeffrey Westbrook)
Newsgroups: net.sf-lovers,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Heinlein's panegyric for the Bomb
Message-ID: <1508@princeton.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 16-Sep-86 12:32:10 EDT
Article-I.D.: princeto.1508
Posted: Tue Sep 16 12:32:10 1986
Date-Received: Tue, 16-Sep-86 21:58:12 EDT
References: <1071@hoptoad.uucp> <20812@styx.UUCP> <1076@hoptoad.uucp> <573@dg_rtp.UUCP>
Reply-To: jrw@princeton.UUCP (Jeffrey Westbrook)
Organization: CS Department, Princeton University
Lines: 23
Xref: mnetor net.sf-lovers:8489 talk.politics.misc:132

In article <573@dg_rtp.UUCP> throopw@dg_rtp.UUCP (Wayne Throop) writes:
>
>        He frowned.  "Barbara, I'm not as sad over what has happened as
>        you are.  It might be be good for us.  I don't mean us six; I
>        mean our country."
>
>Hardly saying that "nuclear war is good for the country".  He's sad, but
>not as sad as Barbara.  It *MIGHT* be good (but he does *not* say
>outright that he thinks it is a net benefit).  In fact, he equivocates
>quite a bit during the course of your quote:
>
>        might be ... seems to me ... may have ... may be ... not every
>        case ... it is cruel
>
>Also note that "he" is a character, and not unambiguously mouthing
>Heinlein's thoughts.  Add to that the fact that he is trying to find
>silver linings to cheer up "Barbara", and the fact that the rest of the
>story proves him wrong in no uncertain terms, and...  what was that you
>were saying about "proof"?
>

Holy God, there's a deconstructionist on the net! Somebody send him back
to France!