Len,

>>Especially when the seem, without variance to mimick your consistantly negative viewpoints.
>>
>>Little? I'm 6'6" and weigh 255 lbs. My wife thanks you, though :)
>
>Glad I can please someone.
>
>This seems to have gotten somewhat out of hand. Again I will state for the record, I am not anti-American, I believe that what happened was wrong & that the people behind it should be brought to justice.
>
>I have no personal grudge against you, Jerry, & trust that we can hold opposing views without animosity. (I apologise for the "little man" comment, I was out of line there).
>
>I have very strong sense of morality which I believe that it is important to hold on to regardless of the situation, one of those being my pacifism. Please do not confuse that with cowardice.

The problem here, of course, is that we are not confusing pacifism with cowardice. It's really more of confusing pacifism with justice.

Now.. Just so you'll know and perhaps realize that your point of view isn't unknown over here by us bloodthirsty Americans <g>, I was a pacifist earlier on in my life. I misunderstood some of the teachings of Jesus quite candidly and it wasn't until later that I began to understand some things about human nature.

If you start from the position that mankind is basically "good" then the pacifist's argument can make some sense.

If you start from the position that mankind is basically "evil" then the pacifist's point of view is quite unrealistic.

At least that's how I cut that fish, so to speak.

Anyway, after examining almost 6,000 years of recorded human history and discovering that only some 200 years were totally free of recorded war it began to dawn on me that man was basically "evil". Quite in line actually with what I understood as a Christian.

Now, man is quite capable of acting in a "good" way, and everyone should do this. If everyone did this then there would be no need of any kinds of civil laws asserting the restriction of certain types of behavior (don't steal, lie, commit fraud, cheat, murder, etc) and we could all do away with them. Search as I might I cannot find anyplace either now or in recorded history that a)had no civil laws (oral laws included) and b) survived. As a matter of fact, even those countries that have had lasw haven't survived.

So, the question comes down to whether or not you belive that man is intrinsically "good" or intrinsically "evil".

If, as a pacifist, you believe that man is intrinsically "good" then you are either naive or hopelessly ideological in the face of all of mankind's recorded history. You have no proof that your ideology works. Actually, history is replete with pacifists constantly being taken advantage of by "bully" nations.

On a personal level I think it's fine that you take that position but, again, I think it's out of sorts with reality. Now, should all mankind act as I think you'd like them to act? Absolutely! As a Christian this is my desire as well. But it simply will not happen apart from a direct intervening by God. Man cannot change himself, sadly.

If, as a pacifist, you belive that man is intrinsically "evil" then you are at something of a disadvantage as how to cause evil men to not behave in an evil manner, which is their nature to do. Evil men will never ultimately be persuaded by moral arguments as it is not their "language". OTOH, they do understand the sharp point of a stick and will respond to this as self preservation is almost always their first priority - just at the expense of someone else.

Pacifists seem at their very core to want to acknowledge the intrinsic value of life. I'd agree with that assessment. Christianity teaches me that God Himself was willing to die for mankind so there must be something of value there from His POV. <g>

I think that pacifists often confuse (this is what I did anyway) the notion of the intrinsic "worth" of man from God's POV which totally validates it for me and the notion that mankind is intrinsically "good", not "evil". Christianity teaches both that man is intrinsically "evil" (and in need of redemption provided freely by God on man's behalf) and the notion that man is worth redeeming; that is has some sort of value, at least from God's POV. This seems the most "in synch" with the reality that I have observed in my lifetime anyway, and in history. There is indeed something within us that is repulsed by evil but when we confuse the two ideas of man's nature and man's worth it leads to all kinds of troubles.

Now, for those who do not value their own lives, whether or not man is intrinsically "good" or "evil" (I believe evil) then the argument is totally moot. You must simply stop them as best as you are able as moral arguments based upon the value of life have no meaning for people like this.

You have objected to my assertions that we must stop people like this at all cost but I think you have not thought through your position as well as you should have.

I say this as someone who has held your position strongly enough to spend three months in the US Army stockade for my belief. I was confused and you are as well IMO. I don't say that as a put down but as an observation of someone who has held your position in the past.

I think you've confused your desires with reality. I quite agree with your desires and quite disagree with your application of those desires.

>
>Other than being opposed to war, I happen to believe the current action is not well thought through & is likely to cause more suffering throughout the world & could lead (in the short term, at least) to an increase in terrorism. The then director of the CIA, Robert Gates, & National Security Advisor, Zbigniew Brezinski, have both admitted to aiding the Mujahadeen in July 1979 in order to draw Russia into "the Afghan trap" - Brezinski wrote a memo to Carter stating "We now have the opportunity of giving to the USSR its Vietnam war". I may be wrong, & hope that I am, but I can see this becoming Americas 2nd Vietnam.

Remember, these folks who precipitated these events have some 2-4oo millions of dollars. I wonder why they didn't invest that in Afghanistan infrastructure and provide real help as opposed to strapping bombs on kids and sending them off to die? Why haven't the leaders strapped some bombs to themselves? They're hypocrites.

>
>If you can direct me to similar articles which shed a positive light on the current action, I would be most interested.
>
>I'm sorry if my views offend you, but I do believe that all views should be aired.

Even mine? <g>