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

[Sean LeBlanc]

On 02-05 07:01, Randy Arabie wrote:
> On Tuesday,  4 February 2003 at 22:32:03 -0700, Alex Young <ayoung at email.com> wrote:

<snip>

> > Whether or not you believe that Iraq has the power or the intent to cause 
> > damage to the US, I believe the only reasonable course of action is to make 
> > Peaceful nations have (at least recently,) historically existed longer than 
> > the war-making states. 
> 
> Peaceful does not equal pacifism.  I can't recall a single pacifist nation,
> now or in history.  I'd like to hear about any, if there are or were.
> 
> Even peacful nations have means for self-defence (ie Switzerland).
> Thus, while peace and nutrality is Switzerlands first objective, they
> acknowledge that violence sometimes is required to stop an aggressor.

Wasn't Tibet fairly close to pacifism in practice? They had some sort of
rag-tag militia, IIRC, but most folks just fled, correct?

...of course, one could say it's a good reason *not* to practice pacifism.
If your neighbor decides to have a "Great Leap Forward", your country is
screwed.

-- 
Sean LeBlanc:seanleblanc at americanisp.net  
http://users.americanisp.net/~seanleblanc/
Get MLAC at: http://sourceforge.net/projects/mlac/
Opportunity always knocks at the least opportune time.