Hi Horse:
>The use of force of whatever form which results in the indiscriminate
>death of innocent men, women and children is not justifiable by any means.
Bombing of Germany, Italy and Japan in WW II was not justifiable? In
war innocent civilians get killed. It's sad, but true. What you seem to be
saying is that war is not justifiable by any means under any
circumstances. Is that what you're saying?
>This applies equally to the hundreds of thousands of innocents
>starving to death in Iraq because of Western sanctions . . .
Food sanctioned? I don't think so. Iraq has money from oil to buy all the
food it needs. Saddam gassed his own people. Why would you expect
him to feed them?
> On 14 Sep 2001 at 13:41, Platt Holden wrote:
>
> > I interpret the MOQ view to be that those who are terrorists and those
> > countries who support and/or tolerate terrorists have the moral
> > standing of germs and like germs must be deliberately and ruthlessly
> > annihilated by all means at our disposal. In the last century we did
> > precisely that to the terrorists of Germany, Italy and Japan. Now it is up
> > to a new generation to do that to Afghanistan, Iraq, Palestine and all
> > other countries who harbor and support the new breed of international
> > criminals. Once again, civilization itself is at stake.
>
> So can we assume that this applies to those countries that supported the IRA, or
> the Contra's or the Indonesian government or the Tamil Tigers? Because if it does
> then that would include the U.S.A, England, Australia, and India at the very least.
> Does it also include those countries that train and arm terrorists and insurgents?
> Again the list could go on to cover probably most countries in the world, only a few
> of which get a mention in your list. If we're going to apply the MoQ in this way we
> should at least apply the rules equally and without bias.
>
> So do we continue with the killing or do we stop now while it's still possible?
> Civilization itself IS at stake.
Oops. Sorry. I assumed you drew a distinction between countries like
America, England, Australia, India, Israel and other constitutional
democracies vs. Iraq, Iran, Palestine, Afghanistan, etc. To repeat:
"Third, there were moral codes that established the supremacy of the
intellectual order over the social order--democracy, trial by jury,
freedom of speech, freedom of the press." (LILA, Chap. 13)
I also assumed one defines "civilization" by the degree to which those
moral codes were followed. You apparently take a broader view to
include any group who believes in the rightness of their cause, such as
Islamic zealots who have repeatedly shown their willingness to get to
heaven--a heaven where 70 virgins await each matyr--by committing
murder even as they commit suicide. I do not consider such groups
civilized at all. They need to be exterminated.
I'm sure you don't put British soldiers who fought in World War II on the
same moral plane as suicide bombers. There's a difference, and
Pirsig makes it crystal clear exactly what that difference is.
Millions have died to ensure that the moral codes that established the
supremacy of the intellectual order would survive. I pray this generation
is up to the task.
Platt
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:01:30 BST