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

[Randy Arabie]

On Tuesday,  4 February 2003 at 23:36:43 -0700, Jeffery Cann <fabian at jefferycann.com> wrote:
> 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?"

We don't.  We go to war to stop tragedies.  Tragedies like Hitler.  You
may ask why I keeping bringing that up.  Because it is the clearest
example of a justifiable war.

Until someone can tell me how pacifism could have ended WWII I will not
consider it a viable philosophy.  Until everyone in the world respects
life equally, it will not work.

So how do we get there?  Perhaps by spreading democracy.  That seems to
be working in Europe, and even much of the former Soviet Union.  As that
essay (see Jed's link earlier in this thread) pointed out, no democratic
nations has ever attacked another.  Why?  Because democracy is found on
a number of principles that preclude it.  Those "unalienable rights"
referred to in the Declaration of Independance.

Hitler didn't believe in such drivel.  Neither does the leader of Korea,
or China, or Saudi Arabia for that matter.  In fact, much of the world
still doesn't.  Until it does, those that do must concede that voilence
may in fact be a necessary means to stop aggression.

> 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.

Wouldn't it be tragic if no one had stopped Hitler, and thus there were no 
more Jews?  Or gays, gypsies...

Should we have just stood by and watched the ethnic cleansing in Bosnia?
I think our voilence there has done more good than harm.  I don't think
pacifism could have resolved that conflict.

> 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."

No.  I the case of Bosina we said, "We cannot allow this tragedy to
continue.  And, in fact, we care so much about the innocents being slain
that we are willing to risk the lives of our soldiers to stop you.

> 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.

Justice and peace for all can only be achieved when both parties agree
to some fundamental principles.

How do we get everyone to do so?  Until then, how do those that do defend 
themselves against those who don't?

> What would happen if we all committed to justice?  

We could all be pacifists.

> If we did not tolerate injustice by our fellow humans and our governments?  

We don't, hence our actions in Bosnia and WWII.

> How much more peaceful would our world be?  

Quite peaceful, if we all agreed on the same priciples.

> How much safer would you and I feel each day?  

If the entire world were pacifists...Safer, of course.

> How sooner could we face up to brutal thugs like Hitler or Saddam, instead of 
> waiting until 'we have no other choice but war'?

Hitler was a leader in the party that was elected into power.  I'm not
sure how we could have prevented that.  Once in power, how do you stop
someone unwilling to leave peacefully?

Saddam seized power in a coupe and proceeded to purge all dissenters
from the country.  Once in power, how do you stop someone unwilling to
leave peacefully?
 
> 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.
-- 
Allons Rouler!
        
Randy
http://www.arabie.org/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 232 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://cluedenver.org/pipermail/clue-talk/attachments/20030205/701e64ea/attachment.bin