From: Platt Holden (pholden@sc.rr.com)
Date: Thu Oct 31 2002 - 15:43:22 GMT
Hi Buff, Jonathan:
Your thesis that it was a war crime for the Russians to use gas to save
600 of 700 hostages doesn't hold up under principles of the MoQ.
Chap. 24 of Lila clearly spells out the MoQ position. The terrorists
represent biological values seeking to undermine social values. As
Pirsig explained:
"Where biological values are undermining social values, intellectuals
must identify social behavior, no matter what its ethnic connection, and
support it all the way without restraint. Intellectuals must find biological
behavior, no matter what its ethnic connection, and limit or destroy
destructive biological patterns with complete moral ruthlessness, the
way a doctor destroys germs, before those biological patterns destroy
civilization itself."
The Russians acted rightly, killing the terrorists "with complete moral
ruthlessness." That some of the hostages were also killed
unintentionally was an unfortunate byproduct of the attack. In war
against biological crime, innocent civilians are often at risk.
Finally, it appears your concern about the use of gas as violating
international laws supersedes your concern for acts of terrorism violating
the same laws. A nation's right to self-defense, especially against
terrorists, transcends any international law that weakens such defense.
So when Jonathan said, "Reason says that this was no war crime" he
was right.
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 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 10:38:08 GMT