Originally Posted by
Eisbaer
By the way, your hero, the one you quote in your signature line, was a war criminal. Talk about an excellent example to follow for ethics and standards of behavior.
Although Curtis LeMay was an extreme political right winger, he would probably only be considered a war criminal by somebody on the far left, an assertion that could not be reliably backed up by any legal standard that would have led to a conviction. Although LeMay was viscously parodied as General Jack D. Ripper in
Dr. Strangelove, there is no conclusive evidence of war crimes on his part by any conventional standard. You're certainly not suggesting that his bombing campaign against Japan in World War II was a war crime, are you? Were the Army Air Force generals who planned the firebombing of Dresden war criminals? Was Truman a war criminal for dropping the atomic bomb?
What you are doing here is the book definition of an Ad Hominem attack. Say what you want about Jack but he has it just right as it comes to scabs.
Not necessarily. If Jack London had pontificated on physics, mathematics, or the manufacture of Christmas tree ornaments, it would have been
ad hominem to attack him on moral grounds. Since London was questioning the morality of "scabs," he was legitimately vulnerable to argumentation based on his own personal morality. You need to give the "book definition," a little more study.