As you say, it's not always black and white. I do not think the reason you state is why militaries exist, including the US Armed Forces. Violence, in whatever form, is crazy. But it happens, and in many forms. The military is an indiscriminate tool to be used at the behest of its handyman -- for better or for worse. Is a beheading any worse morally than targeting a terrorist leader knowing full well that the effects will produce civilian casualties? So really what is bias when violence and death are, in the end, all the same? Just some questions.Originally Posted by yamiyugikun
Perhaps. IMO, the Taliban is the response to a more deeply rooted problem in Afghanistan's political-economic structure. What's particularly interesting is the Taliban's near-exclusive relationship with the Pashtuns, which invites the question of whether the Taliban is (another) ethnic armed group disguising itself as a religious movement.Originally Posted by yamiyugikun
The reason why Code Pink is "extreme" isn't because of their views or their conduct -- it's because it's a signal of impotence to continuously clamor for a thing while never attaining it. They only degrade themselves in the eyes of others because they never win (or appear to win). The 'unarmed prophet' spoken of by Machiavelli. Nobody respects a nobody.
Bookmarks