[CLUE-Talk] Sure its 'Not About Oil' was: Why Iraq? Why now?

[Jeffery Cann]

Randy,

Thanks for your response.  I realize that my opposition to violence is 
unpopular.  I do not mean to offend anyone and I will try my best to clarify 
my point.

As far as what I would have done about Hitler, I cannot give you a good answer 
and I don't think it's a fair question.  Most folks who are against pacifism 
seem to bring up this argument.  I know little of the deeper facts regarding 
Hitler's rise to power, so I have no response on hypothetical changes to 
history other than I oppose war or violence as a means to end a conflict, so 
I am sure I would have opposed Hitler and WWII.

The question for us to answer is:

Why must we continue with violence to resolve conflicts?

To summarize my point:
1) I highly value the sanctity of human life - based on religious beliefs.
2) Violence or wars to resolve conflicts is against my beliefs - it violates 
this sanctity.
3) Collateral damage, as you called it in order to prevent more / future 
deaths is not justified.  Even the term 'collateral damage' is terrible - it 
disregards the importance of human life.  What happens when one of our family 
members happens to be one of the collaterally damaged?  How would their death 
be right in the name of peace?

Finally, regarding your final statement - "And, it has been paid for in 
blood by the men and women of the US Armed Forces." -  Does this payment, this 
horrible and tragic death of people in past wars, now justify more deaths in 
future wars?  Please elaborate.  My question to you is:

"Why do we kill people, who kill people to show that killing people is bad?"

I believe that our propensity to view violence as a means to end conflict is 
entirely the problem with our society.  The fact that military personnel 
_have_ died to resolve conflicts (or in some cases not resolve them) is 
horrible and tragic.  The fact that so many have died (and will continue to 
die) because of war / violence indicates how little we value our fellow 
humans.

When wars or violence occurs, the parties are saying to each other:  "We care 
so little about you that we would rather you die at our hands than to work 
out some other course of action."

In my observation of personal conflicts, rarely do you start at the "let's go 
to war phase".  A disagreement occurs and left unresolved will escalate past 
some mythical point of no return.  I believe that if folks were committed to 
justice and held fellow humans (even those we disagree with) in the highest 
regard we would never get to the point of violence.  Let me restate:  Justice 
short-circuits violence for conflict resolution.

Given the tremendous capabilities and potential that lies within all of us, I 
am dismayed that so few of us even strive for, much less achieve justice and 
peace.  I know I personally fail often to work for justice in all aspects of 
my life.

What would happen if we all committed to justice?  
If we did not tolerate injustice by our fellow humans and our governments?  
How much more peaceful would our world be?  
How much safer would you and I feel each day?  
How sooner could we face up to brutal thugs like Hitler or Saddam, instead of 
waiting until 'we have no other choice but war'?

For more information about non-violence, I'll recommend the following:  
writings by Muhatma Ghandi,  Martin Luther King, Jr. and the New Testament of 
the Bible - specifically Jesus' teachings about peace.  Their thoughts led me 
to my  beliefs on peace and justice 13 years ago.  I still hold fast to them 
today.

Jeff